BattleMaster Community

BattleMaster => Locals => Dwilight => Topic started by: dustole on October 09, 2011, 09:56:35 PM

Title: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on October 09, 2011, 09:56:35 PM
It is nice to see some debate and discussion in the church.  It had been eerily quite for a while.  I was waiting to see what the next big thing of contention would be.

I am curious to see what the next Consul elections will bring.  With the founding of our charter and making the Regency an elected position it will be quite fun!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 09, 2011, 10:01:00 PM
SA? That's soooo yesterday.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kain on October 09, 2011, 10:49:21 PM
SA? That's soooo yesterday.  8)

It was sooo the day before yesterday, then it slept yesterday and now it is soooo today ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Adriddae on October 09, 2011, 11:06:02 PM
Creed is the new Garret.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 09, 2011, 11:53:33 PM
It was sooo the day before yesterday, then it slept yesterday and now it is soooo today ;)

Nah, you're thinking about Riombara/Enweil.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on October 10, 2011, 12:11:51 AM
*yawn*

So what's going on in the Maroccidens?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 10, 2011, 12:16:14 AM
*yawn*

So what's going on in the Maroccidens?

Now THAT's hot stuff!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Peri on October 10, 2011, 10:35:42 AM
I wonder whether who was complaining about hte lack of messages in SA is now happy. I am not :p
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kain on October 10, 2011, 12:03:04 PM
I wonder whether who was complaining about hte lack of messages in SA is now happy. I am not :p

I am happy :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on October 10, 2011, 11:32:50 PM
Yeah I am now probably the most hated person in Sanguis Astroism. You guys should see some of the letters people sent me lol. Well I am having a blast. I hope you guys are all having fun to. Though it is getting hard to keep up with all the people sending me comments lol just so many.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on October 10, 2011, 11:36:26 PM
Oh and guys almost forgot just make sure to keep your eyes open I have some big big things planed lol.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on October 11, 2011, 01:09:33 AM
Your trial will likely come soon.  I've been trying to stop it, but so far to no avail.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on October 11, 2011, 01:24:18 AM
Ah it would be a shame if I get excommunicated from the church but that is battle master for you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 11, 2011, 01:34:10 AM
Yeah I am now probably the most hated person in Sanguis Astroism. You guys should see some of the letters people sent me lol. Well I am having a blast. I hope you guys are all having fun to. Though it is getting hard to keep up with all the people sending me comments lol just so many.

What earned you the honour?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on October 11, 2011, 01:39:59 AM
lol if you could read some of the nice letters of people showing their love my my character you would understand.  Though being the most hated of all time I do not claim that I just state that as of right now creed is not very liked by most.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 11, 2011, 01:43:12 AM
lol if you could read some of the nice letters of people showing their love my my character you would understand.  Though being the most hated of all time I do not claim that I just state that as of right now creed is not very liked by most.

So... does that mean SA will crusade against the Lurias?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on October 11, 2011, 01:58:09 AM
So... does that mean SA will crusade against the Lurias?
Nah... Creed is leading the "Why can't we all just get along and love everyone?" faction. The people that think that if we just try to get to know the other religions, we can cooperate with them in a big brotherly lovefest of goodwill.

Or something like that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 11, 2011, 01:59:05 AM
Nah... Creed is leading the "Why can't we all just get along and love everyone?" faction. The people that think that if we just try to get to know the other religions, we can cooperate with them in a big brotherly lovefest of goodwill.

Or something like that.

Been a while since the last crusade...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on October 11, 2011, 03:43:26 AM
LOL Indirik guess my character does not have yours support. Though I think a lot of people are getting a misunderstand what I am going for. My character is a warrior and as thus I love war more then most. So I am not going for the "Why can't we all just get along and love everyone?" faction as you say.

Just commenting that there was no reason that we needed to call crusades on some of the realms we did.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on October 11, 2011, 03:47:03 AM
There was always a reason for the crusades that were called. If for nothing more than "We need something to do". Besides, being friends with everyone is so boring... And what fun is having a really big hammer if you never hit anything with it?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kain on October 11, 2011, 03:51:42 AM
LOL Indirik guess my character does not have yours support. Though I think a lot of people are getting a misunderstand what I am going for. My character is a warrior and as thus I love war more then most. So I am not going for the "Why can't we all just get along and love everyone?" faction as you say.

Just commenting that there was no reason that we needed to call crusades on some of the realms we did.

He does sound like the hippie of the SA crowd, just so you're aware :p
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on October 11, 2011, 04:05:42 AM
LOL ah well then I guess I will have to make some changes then I did not want peace with everyone I actually have a plan I am working on to cause war. Thanks though for helping me out.

Creed does not want to be a hippie of SA!

Though I will tell you one thing I blew up the message boards in SA  lol. Did not think it was going to get that big.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on October 11, 2011, 04:21:36 AM
12 hours, 94 new messages. Looks like the SA channel is back to its usual tricks...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on October 11, 2011, 05:17:48 AM
LOL ah well then I guess I will have to make some changes then I did not want peace with everyone I actually have a plan I am working on to cause war. Thanks though for helping me out.

Creed does not want to be a hippie of SA!

Though I will tell you one thing I blew up the message boards in SA  lol. Did not think it was going to get that big.

You start a debate in SA at your own risk. They almost always blow up. Especially when you put the words 'Prophet' and 'infallible' in the same sentence. It also probably doesn't help that you started coming up with new theology. Yep, you are almost certainly going to end up as the defendant in the first Magistratum trial we've had since... Allison's second trial? Maybe Garret's? I can't really remember which one came first...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on October 11, 2011, 05:48:04 AM
It all comes down to what Constantine says.  The Luminaries aren't unanimous for it.  The Consuls aren't unanimous for it and 2 of the 3 Lights support it.  So by the rules of the Magistratum it comes down to Constantine.   He could just sit back and do nothing, voting neither way and let it die in 6 days.   Yes, no or nothing, I am curious to see what becomes of it all.  I have  a chance to tweak the Magistratum process when I'm not the one being targeted.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on October 11, 2011, 05:49:51 AM
So many messages! I never expected so many letters in a day. Now I understand why people wanted to be demoted lol.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on October 11, 2011, 05:58:33 AM
It all comes down to what Constantine says.  The Luminaries aren't unanimous for it.  The Consuls aren't unanimous for it and 2 of the 3 Lights support it.  So by the rules of the Magistratum it comes down to Constantine.   He could just sit back and do nothing, voting neither way and let it die in 6 days.   Yes, no or nothing, I am curious to see what becomes of it all.  I have  a chance to tweak the Magistratum process when I'm not the one being targeted.

There's only ever been one trial in our history that didn't involve you, so you certainly haven't had many opportunities, have you?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on October 11, 2011, 06:34:41 AM
Oh you all forget my trial... :(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on October 11, 2011, 02:45:23 PM
Glaumring had a trial?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on October 11, 2011, 05:15:51 PM
Yeah when i was new to tge church and knew nothing about it i claimed to worship the maddening star only. Not knowing you couldnt seperate them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on October 12, 2011, 02:38:50 AM
Yeah when i was new to tge church and knew nothing about it i claimed to worship the maddening star only. Not knowing you couldnt seperate them.

Did you actually have a trial, or just get threatened with one? I don't really recall this at all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on October 12, 2011, 03:15:23 AM
There was a secret trial of elders or something, they even sent me a letter which I cannot find as of now or perhaps I didn't save it but here is the roleplay that resulted from it.

The letter arrived as if pulled by the very wind and was left in Glaumrings hand, he studied it for a moment, and his heart sank, it was from Corsanctum...

he peeled the seal and read through the letter, upon finishing it he slowly placed it in his cloak. His men were gathered around for they were on patrol in Storms end , they saw Glaumrings face.

"I have been found not guilty...." He said to everyone around him.

His men shouted and cheered, everyone was filled with relief and whatever dark clouds that roiled around them were now gone. Fittingly , as if planned by fate, standing in a place called Storms end , truly the stars guided every thing  for this was no coincidence...Nothing was coincidence, it was all ordained. Everything that had happened was like clockwork like the very fluctuation of the heavens.

"When we return to Storms keep there will be a river of wine flowing down  the torrents breath all the way to Holy Corsanctum! And we shall mark this day as a festival forevermore... Festival of the Storms end"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on October 12, 2011, 03:37:29 AM
There was a secret trial of elders or something, they even sent me a letter which I cannot find as of now or perhaps I didn't save it but here is the roleplay that resulted from it.

The letter arrived as if pulled by the very wind and was left in Glaumrings hand, he studied it for a moment, and his heart sank, it was from Corsanctum...

he peeled the seal and read through the letter, upon finishing it he slowly placed it in his cloak. His men were gathered around for they were on patrol in Storms end , they saw Glaumrings face.

"I have been found not guilty...." He said to everyone around him.

His men shouted and cheered, everyone was filled with relief and whatever dark clouds that roiled around them were now gone. Fittingly , as if planned by fate, standing in a place called Storms end , truly the stars guided every thing  for this was no coincidence...Nothing was coincidence, it was all ordained. Everything that had happened was like clockwork like the very fluctuation of the heavens.

"When we return to Storms keep there will be a river of wine flowing down  the torrents breath all the way to Holy Corsanctum! And we shall mark this day as a festival forevermore... Festival of the Storms end"


Of course "Secret"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on October 24, 2011, 05:56:56 AM
Golden Farrow!!!!!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on October 24, 2011, 06:01:52 AM
*Geronus queues up the Imperial March from Star Wars on his iPod.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on October 24, 2011, 05:21:05 PM
*ewok music can be heard emanating from Asylon from the walls of Golden Farrow
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on October 24, 2011, 10:13:00 PM
Everyone knows that the ending to that movie was just propaganda spread by the Rebellion to spread discord throughout the galaxy, bringing death to untold billions.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on October 24, 2011, 11:38:51 PM
Ee-cha-wah-wah!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on October 25, 2011, 12:33:58 AM
Allison's new realm name is crazy!. She is trying to build Allison's wonderland or something? Kabrinskia? Really?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on October 25, 2011, 12:49:04 AM
:D   I like the idea of that name.   It massages her egotistical side and hints at a bit of tyranny.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Adriddae on October 25, 2011, 01:19:16 AM
Allison's new realm name is crazy!. She is trying to build Allison's wonderland or something? Kabrinskia? Really?

Allison in Wonderland?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on October 25, 2011, 02:03:15 AM
Wonderland was my vote. I don't think Dustin bought it, though.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on October 25, 2011, 03:27:51 AM
Iratustella      Is a mash of latin words essentially meaning Wrath of the Stars!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on October 27, 2011, 07:43:34 PM
Looks like Terran is trying to pull a fast one over Demyansk. Curiouser and curiouser...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on October 27, 2011, 08:27:00 PM
This is why every continent needs a Hireshmont. :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on October 27, 2011, 09:18:45 PM
Well, somehow I think SA has a lot to lose from this situation. First because Terran is far away, further away than Caerwyn is, so Astroist armies would have to travel more, stay in the field less, and stay out longer. Second because Terran, on defense, would have support from the 'moot, which would quite strengthen its position. Third, because it would make SA as a religion very badly seen in the Maroccidens, losing foothold in there, should it fight the 'moot.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on October 27, 2011, 09:22:43 PM
Hireshmont? What is that?

About the travel time, it isn't much of a problem anymore. We control the half of the inner sea. Things are now much quicker since we have gained control over Golden Ferrow. We do not need to attack Terran really. Terran can't do much to stop us from taking those regions they are claiming to be their own.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on October 27, 2011, 09:56:02 PM
In all honesty, it never occurred to me when I was planning Terran's expansion northwards several weeks ago that Demyansk would be claimed by anyone else. Partly I thought the colony was not going to happen for a long time, and partly because I mostly wasn't thinking about the colony much at all. I was thinking almost entirely about D'Hara's food supply, and it happens to be a rural within Terran's relatively easy reach. My only real thought about the colony was that, when it happened (in my mind in several RL months), Terran would have fully developed the region and, though Allison might want it, it wouldn't be as clear cut. At worst, if it looked like Astrum planned on really enforcing the claim, I had considered making it a "gift," so as to buy a bit of Allison's friendship. :P

IC-wise what Hireshmont may be doing I won't say. But, OOCly, I now feel like an idiot, because it really never occurred to me that anyone else would claim Demyansk... and though apparently everyone BESIDES Terran's Senate knew this, nobody told Hireshmont.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on October 27, 2011, 10:07:03 PM
IC-wise what Hireshmont may be doing I won't say. But, OOCly, I now feel like an idiot, because it really never occurred to me that anyone else would claim Demyansk... and though apparently everyone BESIDES Terran's Senate knew this, nobody told Hireshmont.

The hilarious part is that Labell probably /should/ have known this... And certainly could have found out with minimal effort.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on October 27, 2011, 10:12:11 PM
Well, somehow I think SA has a lot to lose from this situation. First because Terran is far away, further away than Caerwyn is, so Astroist armies would have to travel more, stay in the field less, and stay out longer. Second because Terran, on defense, would have support from the 'moot, which would quite strengthen its position. Third, because it would make SA as a religion very badly seen in the Maroccidens, losing foothold in there, should it fight the 'moot.

Why SA? This is a secular dispute between Terran and Caerwyn's successor. Astrum is merely championing the rights of the realm that will soon replace Caerwyn.

SA doesn't have much presence in the Moot anyway. I think we have one temple in D'Hara and only one in Terran, since a certain Chief Magistrate had one of his vassals close down the other one we had back when he was Senator of Chesny. Not likely to help him in this situation, actually, if anyone recalls that fact.  ;D

Edit: I take it back, we have three in Terran! Count me surprised. Of course only one of those regions actually sports any followers, I assume because its the one Senator Labell currently rules. In general, the only following we have in Terran is wherever he happens to be ruling at any given time. At least that's historically been the case.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telrunya on October 27, 2011, 10:24:39 PM
I believe the island of Port Nebel except for Qubel Lighthouse has SA Temples, with two SA Lords. Of course D'Hara also has Priest Constantine Meneldur as part of her Nobility. I believe that counts for something at least :) For the rest, I don't think much active converting is going on in D'Hara with Nobles.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on October 27, 2011, 10:40:23 PM
IC-wise what Hireshmont may be doing I won't say. But, OOCly, I now feel like an idiot, because it really never occurred to me that anyone else would claim Demyansk... and though apparently everyone BESIDES Terran's Senate knew this, nobody told Hireshmont.
I hate it when that happens!

Your letters are quite fun, though.

Out of curiosity, why did you seek Asylon as a partner in a treaty granting Terran domain over three regions that had absolutely nothing at all to do with Asylon? Was it just because Asylon was signatory to the original treaty? Because, really, that's the part of it that seems the silliest of all, and is probably pisses Brance off more than anything else. "Hey Astrum, we're taking these three regions. And it's all cool, because Asylon says so!"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telrunya on October 27, 2011, 10:42:22 PM
Everyone knows Asylon is the one that controls all the SA Theocracies behind the scenes, sjeesh!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on October 27, 2011, 10:58:09 PM
Everyone knows Asylon is the one that controls all the SA Theocracies behind the scenes, sjeesh!

Uhh really? I never knew that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on October 27, 2011, 11:35:29 PM
Everyone knows Asylon is the one that controls all the SA Theocracies behind the scenes, sjeesh!

You've been talking to Glaumring too much  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 28, 2011, 12:54:59 AM
I hate it when that happens!

Your letters are quite fun, though.

Out of curiosity, why did you seek Asylon as a partner in a treaty granting Terran domain over three regions that had absolutely nothing at all to do with Asylon? Was it just because Asylon was signatory to the original treaty? Because, really, that's the part of it that seems the silliest of all, and is probably pisses Brance off more than anything else. "Hey Astrum, we're taking these three regions. And it's all cool, because Asylon says so!"

That was my reaction when I heard of the treaty, and I didn't even know what Astrum's claims were. but I did think to myself "Uh, why are they claiming ex-Caerwyn lands without consulting the people that defeated them?".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on October 28, 2011, 01:11:14 AM
That was my reaction when I heard of the treaty, and I didn't even know what Astrum's claims were. but I did think to myself "Uh, why are they claiming ex-Caerwyn lands without consulting the people that defeated them?".

To build up a backed and ratified claim to use as a negotiation with the "real" claim holder. This was quite common, get other parties to recognise your claim in order to challenge other claims. It was helpful if those that recognised your claim also had a legitimate claim, but not needed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on October 28, 2011, 03:10:12 AM
My prediction is that there will be a hardcore faction of SA fundamentalists and a moderate core... There will be a war between these forces to decide the fate of Dwilight... Glaumring will win that war and become a living god worshiped by all and recognized as the second coming of the astral prophet ordained by the very Bloodstars and brought to earth to save all your souls and forgive your sins...  8)

He will be persecuted for his beliefs... Be tortured, and then hung on a red pentagram and die... Rising on the 3rd day...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on October 28, 2011, 04:52:26 AM
My prediction is that there will be a hardcore faction of SA fundamentalists and a moderate core... There will be a war between these forces to decide the fate of Dwilight... Glaumring will win that war and become a living god worshiped by all and recognized as the second coming of the astral prophet ordained by the very Bloodstars and brought to earth to save all your souls and forgive your sins...  8)

He will be persecuted for his beliefs... Be tortured, and then hung on a red pentagram and die... Rising on the 3rd day...

I think I already heard three people with the exact same miracle lol
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 28, 2011, 08:02:28 AM
To build up a backed and ratified claim to use as a negotiation with the "real" claim holder. This was quite common, get other parties to recognise your claim in order to challenge other claims. It was helpful if those that recognised your claim also had a legitimate claim, but not needed.

That would apply to regions that were never colonized or claimed by anyone. For example, D'Hara claiming to Desert of Silouhettes, and making deals with people to have them all recognize this to put pressure on everyone else to not contest the claim.

Denmyask, though? It seemed pretty obvious the Astrum colony would want it. And Asylon saying "sure, you can have it" doesn't really mean squat as they obviously don't hold any authority over it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on October 28, 2011, 08:22:31 AM
Out of curiosity, why did you seek Asylon as a partner in a treaty granting Terran domain over three regions that had absolutely nothing at all to do with Asylon? Was it just because Asylon was signatory to the original treaty? Because, really, that's the part of it that seems the silliest of all, and is probably pisses Brance off more than anything else. "Hey Astrum, we're taking these three regions. And it's all cool, because Asylon says so!"

Many reasons:
1. Legal Claims of Central Occidens
Asylon was a signatory. Seemed like a good idea to talk to'em. Moreover, the Legal Claims state that claims can be transferred. Numerous Caerwynians joined Asylon, and the "government in exile" in Madina seemed fine with annexation. Only Itau could oppose, and Terran decided to nullify their claim. So we regarded Asylon as the implicit claim-holders: again, because it just didn't occur to me that there was any immediate question of Golden Farrow being colonized.

2. Asylon's Expanse
When I started plotting Terran's northward expansion, Asylon held Farrowfield. We weren't sure of Asylon's capability to hold any of these lands, but that's how things stood. As Asylon could make a real claim to inheriting Caerwyn's claims, and as they pragmatically had a big influx of nobles and their borders practically encircled Terran, they seemed like the logical people to approach. It doesn't look that way now that they've lost a few regions and there's an Astrum flag on the map. But it sure looked that way two or three weeks ago.

3. Diplomacy
Never miss a chance to make a friend. Hash out an agreement that grants us both claims we never had any intention of violating? Wonderful! It means we have a conversation and learn how to work with one another. Hireshmont is big into personal diplomacy, largely because I enjoy it as a player.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on October 28, 2011, 12:39:35 PM
That would apply to regions that were never colonized or claimed by anyone. For example, D'Hara claiming to Desert of Silouhettes, and making deals with people to have them all recognize this to put pressure on everyone else to not contest the claim.

Denmyask, though? It seemed pretty obvious the Astrum colony would want it. And Asylon saying "sure, you can have it" doesn't really mean squat as they obviously don't hold any authority over it.

Previous occupation of the region is just a greater reason to seek OTHERS to ratify your own claim in order to challenge the logical claim of the successor realm.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 28, 2011, 01:48:02 PM
Previous occupation of the region is just a greater reason to seek OTHERS to ratify your own claim in order to challenge the logical claim of the successor realm.

That wasn't their goal, though. Vellos said so: he just overlooked it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on October 28, 2011, 05:26:33 PM
Many reasons:
1. Legal Claims of Central Occidens
Asylon was a signatory.
That seemed like the most logical reason. I wouldn't have considered Asylon a claim holder on that land, though.

Quote
2. Asylon's Expanse
When I started plotting Terran's northward expansion, Asylon held Farrowfield. We weren't sure of Asylon's capability to hold any of these lands, but that's how things stood. As Asylon could make a real claim to inheriting Caerwyn's claims, and as they pragmatically had a big influx of nobles and their borders practically encircled Terran, they seemed like the logical people to approach. It doesn't look that way now that they've lost a few regions and there's an Astrum flag on the map. But it sure looked that way two or three weeks ago.
If all you did was look at flags on a map, then sure, you could think that was the situation. But if you took a good look at the real situation "on the ground", so to speak, it was anything but that. We knew that Asylon would never hold all that land. Didn't ever have a prayer at holding it. And Asylon already knew that Astrum claimed all that land for the new colony.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on October 28, 2011, 09:09:14 PM
Astrum said, the reality is that our flag flew over many of those lands. We allowed some of the lands to faulter of goodwill to Astrum. Any lands that caerwyn claimed but never flew flag over we didnt respect anyways. The middle regions are messy, the new colony is in a messy area. Asylon has ceded certain lands to Terran and Astrum.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on October 29, 2011, 12:22:08 AM
Does Asylon even have any claim over any land except the west side of Via? I mean only reason they gained any land above Via was because Caerwyn surrendered to Asylon. Doubt they can be counted as gaining a claim.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on October 29, 2011, 02:27:02 AM
Depends on how you view the claim. The prior lords and nobles can surely be said to have a personal claim. And the realm can choose to press that claim on their behalf.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Galvez on October 31, 2011, 11:53:20 AM
It does not matter who has claim to what. For a new realm to succeed in Golden Farrow it shouldn't desire a war with Asylon and the 'Moot. And therefore give Terran and Asylon what they want.  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on October 31, 2011, 12:52:00 PM
Given the historical track record of any realm declaring war and attacking SA theocracies, I'd think you would want to avoid that at all costs, unless you have a death wish.

But I'm not sure how you think the situation would devolve into war with Asylon, of all realms. Since Asylon is not asking for anything at all, I fail to see how they could not get what they want. Even the treaty with Terran that Asylon signed last week gives them nothing beyond a mutual defense treaty of negligible value.

And besides all that, this is Allison moving into Golden Farrow. Do you really think she won't start up trouble with someone?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Galvez on October 31, 2011, 01:25:31 PM
So in fact you are saying, destroy Allison's realm now, or else she will come to destroy us.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on October 31, 2011, 01:33:12 PM
You're welcome to give it a try. It could be a fun diversion for a day or two.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on October 31, 2011, 01:47:32 PM
So in fact you are saying, destroy Allison's realm now, or else she will come to destroy us.

Resistance IS futile. Come on, you know that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lorgan on October 31, 2011, 04:03:11 PM
It's unsettling how Dwilight's history resembles a bad action film scene where the hero finds himself surrounded by a dozen crooks who are somehow well-mannered enough to only charge at him one after another.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on October 31, 2011, 04:05:25 PM
Since Asylon is not asking for anything at all

Neither is Terran.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Galvez on October 31, 2011, 04:51:59 PM
You're welcome to give it a try. It could be a fun diversion for a day or two.
Resistance IS futile. Come on, you know that.
The Astroists are a little overconfident, aren't they?  :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on October 31, 2011, 06:58:32 PM
The Astroists are a little overconfident, aren't they?  :D

A history of utterly annihilating one's enemies will do that  ;)

The whole business with Caerwyn has us united and in a very bellicose mood. Moderates and peaceniks of all stripes have more or less gone into hiding or been converted into hawks, at least temporarily. This is probably the worst possible time in the history of Dwilight to start trouble with SA, no joke.

The bear is not asleep, it is very awake and very angry, and freshly returned from a very satisfying mauling. So satisfying in fact that it's really considering abandoning rooting for grubs and honey and taking up mauling on a full-time basis, as a sort of professional killer bear. After all it reflects, nature seems to have given it a whole lot of pointy claws and teeth and a large amount of muscle with which to employ them, so perhaps this is what it intended for bears all along, and all those grubs and honey were really just distractions from its true purpose, which is apparently to maul innocent campers, especially ones seen in possession of pointy sticks the sort with which it was recently poked by a couple of particularly overconfident campers, much to their eventual dismay.

Campers beware: Avoid the bear. And avoid picking up pointy sticks. The bear will eventually realize that it can't make a living mauling things, and then it will go back to periodically hibernating and rooting for grubs and honey. But until that time, it would be most unwise for any camper to approach the bear, especially while in possession of a pointy stick.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on October 31, 2011, 07:00:53 PM
The bear will eventually realize that it can't make a living mauling things, and then it will go back to periodically hibernating and rooting for grubs and honey.

Are you 100% certain it can't? That does look like a very satisfying living.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on October 31, 2011, 07:05:10 PM
As long as pests do not bother the beast...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on October 31, 2011, 07:17:33 PM
Well, Hireshmont just called Brance a panicky liar unable to manage his own realm in front of the rulers of several realms.

Poke?

I know Astroism can beat the Moot in a war. Hireshmont generally knows that (though if Aurvandil and Madina would lay off it and come help, and if the Lurias would stay out, we'd have a real chance). But Hireshmont and Brance have pushed each other into very uncomfortable positions.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telrunya on October 31, 2011, 07:20:57 PM
Bad Hireshmont! Don't poke the big guy! Silly Federations! How two Realms that pretty much agree on borders still manage to irritate each other that much over the issue, I do not know! :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Galvez on October 31, 2011, 08:01:46 PM
Campers beware: Avoid the bear.
Who is saying that Hireshmont is a camper. I see him more like a hunter. And he is looking for a new trophy on the wall.

Bad Hireshmont! Don't poke the big guy! Silly Federations! How two Realms that pretty much agree on borders still manage to irritate each other that much over the issue, I do not know! :P
Probably the same way as Julius and Vallyn can. When you are both defending different interests it might seem as irritating each other for the neutral observer.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on October 31, 2011, 08:46:42 PM
Who is saying that Hireshmont is a camper. I see him more like a hunter. And he is looking for a new trophy on the wall.

I fail to see how anything good can come of this from Terran's perspective. What on earth could Terran stand to gain in this situation through conflict, military or political? They've somehow managed over the course of a few days to badly damage Terran's relations with the Theocracies, which is really saying something... Terran had a fair amount of goodwill built up with us.

Probably the same way as Julius and Vallyn can. When you are both defending different interests it might seem as irritating each other for the neutral observer.

Too much posturing, not enough conciliating. We started off with a chip on our shoulder. Terran decided to take a tough line with us right off the bat. Predictably, things went downhill from there.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on October 31, 2011, 09:22:25 PM
It might be a coincidence, but what neighbor did the Theocracies ever had to maintain reasonable non-vassal relations with them?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on October 31, 2011, 09:48:04 PM
It might be a coincidence, but what neighbor did the Theocracies ever had to maintain reasonable non-vassal relations with them?

We got along fine with Caerwyn for years. We would still be getting along fine with them if they hadn't decided to stab us in the back. Same with Averoth actually. After a rocky start we were perfectly content to leave them alone until they decided to start meddling in our affairs
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 01, 2011, 01:21:41 AM
The only realm that was ever in a vassal relationship to another SA realm was Aquilegia. And I believe that was only after a rebellion lead by carpet-bagger nobles. (I'm not 100% clear on that, I was already gone from Morek when it happened.) Other than that, I don't think we've ever tried to enthrall any realm.

There have been realms that have been hemmed in by SA-following realms, such as RE and LE, and even Averoth. But none of those were held in vassalage to SA. They were mostly ignored until they decided to grab the pokey sticks.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 01, 2011, 01:23:41 AM
Neither is Terran.
Funny how three realms con't come to a simple border treaty, despite the fact that none of them claim to be asking for anything at all, and just keep pissing each other off. ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on November 01, 2011, 09:26:50 AM
The only realm that was ever in a vassal relationship to another SA realm was Aquilegia. And I believe that was only after a rebellion lead by carpet-bagger nobles. (I'm not 100% clear on that, I was already gone from Morek when it happened.) Other than that, I don't think we've ever tried to enthrall any realm.

Aquilegia was founded by Morek colonists. Rebels eventually took power, Xinhai didn't like that. There was a war, and it was eventually settled for vassal relationship instead of complete destruction.

This didn't work out too well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on November 01, 2011, 01:45:52 PM
Aquilegia was founded by Morek colonists. Rebels eventually took power, Xinhai didn't like that. There was a war, and it was eventually settled for vassal relationship instead of complete destruction.

This didn't work out too well.

Mainly because that eventually came into power had no life and made so many multi's that he had at least half the nobles of the entire realm of Aquilegia.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on November 01, 2011, 01:56:07 PM
Mainly because that eventually came into power had no life and made so many multi's that he had at least half the nobles of the entire realm of Aquilegia.

Didn't that occur before the war ended?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 01, 2011, 02:37:29 PM
It happened during the war, but the revelation of it, and the resulting disappearance of 20+ nobles, finally killed the realm.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 01, 2011, 11:17:18 PM
I fail to see how anything good can come of this from Terran's perspective. What on earth could Terran stand to gain in this situation through conflict, military or political? They've somehow managed over the course of a few days to badly damage Terran's relations with the Theocracies, which is really saying something... Terran had a fair amount of goodwill built up with us.

That's a modern speaking.

You assume "Terran" has a perspective. It doesn't. Numerous Terran nobles have perspectives. As it would happen, one of them is a former duke who built a large power base for himself, slowly building up a reputation for competent domestic management, and deft handling of issues, foreign and domestic. If Hireshmont doesn't get what he wants in this affair, it'll be the first time he's ever lost: at anything, ever. He isn't used to losing.

Plus, there's a huge culture gap. For Hireshmont, not commenting on the exact details of a treaty is pure animalistic barbarism. As far as he concerned, we are separated from the monsters by our ability to write complex legal documents. Thus, Brance's arguments are pissing him off.... because Hireshmont has always argued in Terran for friendly ties with Astroist and a very moderate stance towards Astroism, based on the fact that they were decent, civilized realms, sharing the goal of pacifying the wilds... but this conflict is causing an existential crisis for Hireshmont as he wonders if Astroists are actually humans, because they seem incapable of negotiating a treaty, which means, obviously, they're not actually humans.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on November 02, 2011, 01:06:19 AM
I really like that Allison can sit back and not get involved in this Astrum/Terran conflict.  Its gotta be earning me some points with Astrum.  Plus this gives me someone in the area to not like.  I was worried that the only realm I would have to pick a fight with would be D'hara...  now I have a reason to pester Terran sometime in the future.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Adriddae on November 02, 2011, 01:07:46 AM
I wonder whats up with Allison. I haven't heard anything about her in weeks! Whats going on!?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 02, 2011, 01:09:01 AM
Plus this gives me someone in the area to not like.
You're welcome.  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on November 02, 2011, 02:14:00 AM
I wonder whats up with Allison. I haven't heard anything about her in weeks! Whats going on!?


Organizing a new realm is harder than I thought it would be.  Not having a way to message "everyone" loyal to me is hard.  I have to keep track of what everyone is doing and they tend to blend in with the nobles of Astrum.  Finding food to make sure Golden Farrow stayed fed until we could get some rurals was tough too.  The short version is that I don't have time to cause trouble because I am too busy with other stuff.  Plus I'm being deliberately "good" while a guest in Astrum.  They took the brunt of my meddling when I helped persuade Caerwyn to attack them and then they let me move there and take over Golden Farrow.  Allison can't always be a bitch.  She's gotta be good from time to time to balance out all the crazy ass !@#$ she does.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 02, 2011, 03:40:40 AM
If Hireshmont doesn't get what he wants in this affair, it'll be the first time he's ever lost: at anything, ever. He isn't used to losing.
Meh, everyone has to lose every now and then.

Quote
Plus, there's a huge culture gap.
Oh, definitely.

Quote
For Hireshmont, not commenting on the exact details of a treaty is pure animalistic barbarism.
But as Brance demonstrated, Hireshmont never actually proposed a treaty. He stated the goals he would like achieve during the treaty negotiation. i.e. "We would like to come up with a treaty that covers the following points", not "We would like to propose the following treaty". A subtle, perhaps, but substantial difference. Even the wording of the points provided was completely unlike anything I've ever seen in a treaty, and bore no resemblance at all to the treaty Terran signed with Asylon.  Then when Hireshmont actually did send it as a true proposal, the first sentence of his message was "You lie.", and then he continued to attempt to embarrass and insult Brance. At that point, Brance had no intention of even discussing the matter with the rude Terrans.

Quote
As far as he concerned, we are separated from the monsters by our ability to write complex legal documents. Thus, Brance's arguments are pissing him off.... because Hireshmont has always argued in Terran for friendly ties with Astroist and a very moderate stance towards Astroism, based on the fact that they were decent, civilized realms, sharing the goal of pacifying the wilds... but this conflict is causing an existential crisis for Hireshmont as he wonders if Astroists are actually humans, because they seem incapable of negotiating a treaty, which means, obviously, they're not actually humans.
Brance is mad at Hireshmont because, from Brance's viewpoint, Terran stuck its nose in where it didn't belong, claiming lands it had no business claiming, and declaring that the whole thing was "a done deal, and please kindly refrain from taking our land, thankyouverymuch!" Then when "negotiations" started, Terran approached with a proposal where, essentially, everything in it was non-negotiable, and refused Brance's request that all the disputed territories remained untaken, whereas Hireshmont declared that Terran would take one region, and Astrum would take none. There was, literally, no room at all in the agreement for which Brance could negotiate.

From there, it only got worse and worse. I'm pretty sure that everything Brance and Hireshmont said to each other pissed the other one off. The whole thing was quite interesting. I'm sure that at some time in the future, this whole mess will come back and haunt everyone.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on November 02, 2011, 04:04:17 AM
I think those letters from Terran is pissing off everyone in the realm council of Astrum. No one is defending Terran on that. Terran will have to get their lands by force.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on November 02, 2011, 04:48:39 AM
I'm sure that at some time in the future, this whole mess will come back and haunt everyone.

Then better Terran starts burning Farrowfield and Golden Farrow before it becomes a threat.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on November 02, 2011, 04:53:00 AM
LOL who is burning who? I think you got the two mixed up :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on November 02, 2011, 04:53:07 AM
Brance is mad at Hireshmont because, from Brance's viewpoint, Terran stuck its nose in where it didn't belong, claiming lands it had no business claiming, and declaring that the whole thing was "a done deal, and please kindly refrain from taking our land, thankyouverymuch!" Then when "negotiations" started, Terran approached with a proposal where, essentially, everything in it was non-negotiable, and refused Brance's request that all the disputed territories remained untaken, whereas Hireshmont declared that Terran would take one region, and Astrum would take none. There was, literally, no room at all in the agreement for which Brance could negotiate.

This is so interesting because this is pretty much exactly how the whole Terran Senate feel's about Astrum on this issue. They see Astrum as stranger to the area, a much stronger one, who has come and "stuck its nose in where it didn't belong, claiming lands it had no business claiming" and because everyone in Terran knows Astrum is much stronger there is a very gut-wrenching feeling that Astrum is trying to threaten and bully Terran. And now, since it seems Brance simply refuses to even talk about the actual negotiations of land claims, the Senate feels as if Brance is trying to humiliate their Chief Magistrate and purposefully damage Terran's reputation, no doubt as an excuse to yet bully Terran even more.

Furthermore, Kale (one of Terran's oldest members and the de-facto leader of the northern parts of Terran) feels as if an attack by the murderous barbarian hordes of the north is imminent and is stressing about it.


This has all been a very entertaining and interesting issue to watch.  ;D



Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 02, 2011, 04:54:10 AM
@Zakilevo: Ditto to you.

Everyone in Astroism thinks Terran is being rude.

Everyone among Terran's allies thinks Brance is being rude.

@Indirik:
The idea that Hireshmont didn't propose a treaty is just silly. If he had written up a formal document that said the same thing, he'd be lambasted as not giving Astrum a chance to contribute to it as well. And besides: it's not like Brance ever proposed anything. And it's now been a few days since Hireshmont did propose a formal treaty. Quite a simple one. Mostly using small words. Covering only very specific issues. Recognizing the regions Astrum claimed before this fiasco.

Moreover, you did negotiate on these points, so I'm not sure how you think there was no room for negotiation when, clearly, negotiate is exactly what you did. Terran set four conditions for an agreement. The colony rejected at least one of them. Terran is still actively seeking an agreement. How peculiar.

You can phrase it as Terran taking one and Astrum taking none. Or you can phrase it as Terran abstaining from 1 and Astrum abstaining from 1. Terran could have taken Faithhill and Lavendrow (we had 2 separate armies available on hand for deployment), but obviously forbears now, because we said we wouldn't do that. Caerwyn could not realistically have taken two of the regions by now.

You can't honestly say that one of those perspectives is fundamentally and objectively a more true way of viewing the situation. We pick based on what is politically convenient.

@JPierreD: Terran will not start a war as long as Hireshmont governs. Just not gonna' happen.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Phellan on November 02, 2011, 05:05:54 AM
Ooo

I can't wait till Terran, D'Hara, and Barca go fighting up north to leave Madina alone with Aurvandil.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on November 02, 2011, 05:20:26 AM
Ooo

I can't wait till Terran, D'Hara, and Barca go fighting up north to leave Madina alone with Aurvandil.

If war did come, I do not think we'de be doing much "going up north" as much as "defending down south."  :(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Galvez on November 02, 2011, 07:39:02 AM
@JPierreD: Terran will not start a war as long as Hireshmont governs. Just not gonna' happen.
You want to get rid of Allison as well.

Ooo

I can't wait till Terran, D'Hara, and Barca go fighting up north to leave Madina alone with Aurvandil.
We are already leaving you alone with Aurvandil. 'Moot armies going north wouldn't change anything about the situation in the south.

If war did come, I do not think we'de be doing much "going up north" as much as "defending down south."  :(
We involve Asylon as well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Carna on November 02, 2011, 08:16:17 AM
Well yeah, presumably Terran's treaty with Asylon is the reason that Terran won't be iniating any open hostilities. A D'Haran infiltrator here or there...

And c'mon, who doesn't want rid of Allison? She's psychotic. I say that as a compliment. Sort of. If Barca was sitting next to Golden Farrow (y'know, rather than next to the Zuma), I think Julius might want rid of Allison too. Not exactly a stable border Terran can rely on.

It won't come to war though. The north would probably crush the Federation, but just as much the new colony would have far more difficulty kicking off. I may be wrong, but I suspect the outcome of this will simply be a tense border between one side and the other and a dip in real relations. Ideally, things will settle down so more lands can be colonized thanks to the new estate system before we agree that the north can have Askilion and everything above that and the southwest can have Giask and Shinnen duchies. It makes sense. No one genuinely likes the Lurians anyway.

:)

Finn.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 02, 2011, 02:00:06 PM
This is so interesting because this is pretty much exactly how the whole Terran Senate feel's about Astrum on this issue.
No doubt. I would too, if I were Terran. And Brance understands that. Which is why Hireshmont's seemingly deliberate hostility and provocation is so frustrating.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 02, 2011, 02:03:56 PM
Terran will have to get their lands by force.
Doubtful. Brance has already told Hireshmont that the claims are a trivial matter, over which he had no real objection. (Or something to that effect, I forget the exact words.) Brance has been objecting to the process that Terran has taken, and Hireshmont's seeming unwillingness to cooperate. Plus the fact that Hireshmont repeatedly delivers insults in almost every message he sends.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 02, 2011, 02:13:51 PM
The idea that Hireshmont didn't propose a treaty is just silly.
But, oddly enough, that's exactly how I read it. The language used in the "terms" was completely unlike anything I've ever seen from a treaty, and completely unlike the treaty that Asylon and Terran had just signed. Plus I expected a much longer process. The fact that Hireshmont would have come out of proposed a complete treaty in a first message just seemed ... wrong.

Quote
If he had written up a formal document that said the same thing, he'd be lambasted as not giving Astrum a chance to contribute to it as well.


Quote
And besides: it's not like Brance ever proposed anything.
Brance hasn't ever gotten to the point of actual negotiations on the treaty. And now he probably won't. "You're lying. Now sign this treaty!" isn't something he is likely to respond to favorably.

Quote
We pick based on what is politically convenient.
Of course we do.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Adriddae on November 02, 2011, 04:09:07 PM

And c'mon, who doesn't want rid of Allison? She's psychotic. I say that as a compliment. Sort of. If Barca was sitting next to Golden Farrow (y'know, rather than next to the Zuma), I think Julius might want rid of Allison too. Not exactly a stable border Terran can rely on.


You'd be surprised by how many people would want to keep Allison. I think this is because she gets things done. Or at least people think she gets things done. If she has a goal, she would do anything to get it. Luckily, her goals usually revolve around expanding Sanguis Astroism's influence.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Carna on November 02, 2011, 04:12:35 PM
Hehe, yeah, I was talking south of the divide, so to speak. I do get the appeal of Allison. Charismatic leader who doesn't just sit around. Dwilight's good for that, especially by comparison of elsewhere. Jenred in FEI being an exception.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bedwyr on November 02, 2011, 07:58:32 PM
Hehe, yeah, I was talking south of the divide, so to speak. I do get the appeal of Allison. Charismatic leader who doesn't just sit around. Dwilight's good for that, especially by comparison of elsewhere. Jenred in FEI being an exception.

Can I state again how much I love Jenred being used as an example, especially for something like this?  Makes my day.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ramiel on November 02, 2011, 11:34:27 PM
Pfft, Luria is better than the rest of the continent - far more fun!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Carna on November 03, 2011, 06:11:26 AM
Pfft, Luria is better than the rest of the continent - far more fun!

If rebelling is your cup of tea, I suppose you're right.  ::)

Me? I think the southwest is far more interesting. I'd go into why, but all you really need to do is read a topic or two in here and it should become clear. Fun.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on November 03, 2011, 06:16:47 AM
If rebelling is your cup of tea, I suppose you're right.  ::)

Me? I think the southwest is far more interesting. I'd go into why, but all you really need to do is read a topic or two in here and it should become clear. Fun.

There is more then just rebelling, there is DEFENDING AGAINST REBELLIONS as well. Actually the threat of rebellion is mostly a Luria Nova thing now, Pian En Luries is far to busy laying the ground work for more realms.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 03, 2011, 06:59:49 PM
You'd be surprised by how many people would want to keep Allison.

Exhibit A: Hireshmont
He knows nothing about Allison IC other than two small interactions, both of which were quite polite. Hireshmont right now has a perception of Brance as an unyielding, impolite Astroist radical determined to humiliate the Véinsørmoot, and Allison as more of a moderate, reasonable bureaucratic-sort.

I the player know this is insane. Hireshmont the Chief Magistrate does not.

Plus the fact that Hireshmont repeatedly delivers insults in almost every message he sends.

And here we see our characters' difference: Brance feels insulted, and so refuses to negotiate. Hireshmont feels insulted, and channels his rage by negotiating at an even more frenzied pace and breadth. Why? Because his reputation in the Moot and the Senate depends upon his being a reliable diplomat.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on November 03, 2011, 07:34:52 PM
Allison as more of a moderate, reasonable bureaucratic-sort.

You owe me a new keyboard.  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 03, 2011, 08:47:35 PM
Oh, I know how preposterous that characterization is, OOC. But Hireshmont has no idea.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 03, 2011, 09:12:20 PM
He knows nothing about Allison IC other than two small interactions, both of which were quite polite. Hireshmont right now has a perception of Brance as an unyielding, impolite Astroist radical determined to humiliate the Véinsørmoot, and Allison as more of a moderate, reasonable bureaucratic-sort.
Crap... we got our roles in the "good cop/bad cop" routine backward.

Quote
I the player know this is insane. Hireshmont the Chief Magistrate does not.
Allison has been quite well-behaved lately. Which is really out of character for her, especially since Maddening is currently Bright and Superior. Maybe the fact that Austere and Auspicious are also bright as well is having a moderating influence. Although she did decline to agree to the border treaty, she did not outright declare that she would kill Terran for taking Lavendrow. :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on November 04, 2011, 12:41:14 AM
No, it's not that the Maddening is being moderated that's having this effect, but that she's gone so far into insanity that no words or actions could properly act out what she is thinking.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on November 04, 2011, 01:52:29 AM
No, it's not that the Maddening is being moderated that's having this effect, but that she's gone so far into insanity that no words or actions could properly act out what she is thinking.

Here I was thinking that she simply has become so crazy that she has passed right through the insane spectrum into something resembling normal.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 04, 2011, 02:08:20 AM
It does kind of seem that way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on November 04, 2011, 05:38:18 AM
Ugh,  It is taking a lot of work getting this realm all pulled together.  It is amazing how much time it takes just to get all the food purchased.  I need to get some more rural regions.  :D   

I have some crazy plans, but right now they are more mid to long term.  I have some semi nefarious plans for SA and the Regency and Elderships of the church.  But in the short term it is taking a lot of time build a realm from the ground up.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Carna on November 04, 2011, 06:34:07 AM
I get that. Standing on Rettleville's walls looking out at a couple of monster hordes and thinking that it'd be really nice if Terran could show up with some food and/or troops right about now. Doubt its quite the same in GF, but we're also still in the stage of getting constitutions and laws and stuff done. Identity.

I like that the nefarious plans are for SA rather than the Moot. Not like there's anything yet to stop SA spread along the southwest. The southeast, on the other hand, are massively against you guys. Just sayin'...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on November 04, 2011, 07:44:54 AM
The southeast, on the other hand, are massively against you guys. Just sayin'...

Against you too. Just sayin'...  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Galvez on November 04, 2011, 10:16:49 AM
The Lurians are much like the SA theocracies. Just ignore them and soon enough they will fight among themselves.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Shenron on November 04, 2011, 10:38:07 AM
The Lurians are much like the SA theocracies. Just ignore them and soon enough they will fight among themselves.

Problem is they might not ignore you  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Adriddae on November 04, 2011, 04:21:33 PM
Problem is they might not ignore you  :P

Who, the Luries or the Astriosts?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Galvez on November 04, 2011, 04:59:48 PM
Perhaps both...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Shenron on November 04, 2011, 05:24:31 PM
Perhaps both...

Spot on!  ;D Basically anybody (please pardon my vulgarity) with a big enough dick to !@#$ you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Adriddae on November 04, 2011, 05:59:02 PM
But... Who have the Luries fought that hasn't been themselves?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Carna on November 04, 2011, 06:01:02 PM
The Grand Duchy. Great achievements there, as anyone who can read a map knows.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Shenron on November 04, 2011, 07:06:57 PM
The Grand Duchy. Great achievements there, as anyone who can read a map knows.

Hey don't encourage them :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Adriddae on November 04, 2011, 08:04:07 PM
The Grand Duchy. Great achievements there, as anyone who can read a map knows.

I thought it was the other way around. Fissoa intervened when the Luries had their civil war.  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on November 05, 2011, 12:35:20 AM
Here I was thinking that she simply has become so crazy that she has passed right through the insane spectrum into something resembling normal.

Having dealt with Allison IC for quite a long time, I can say that she goes through periods of lucidity and responsible behavior every now and then. I remember a moment when Rowan decided to suddenly start agitating against the amount of influence the eastern realms had in the SA heirarchy after a rogue Elder kicked Vasilif Ysgarren and several other rather prestigious Astrumite nobles out of the Warders guild. Uncharacteristically, Allison was the voice of reason. It was like we swapped roles for a few days...

Typically this only happens when Allison has independent authority. She gets a lot more dangerous when she doesn't have any responsibilities to hold her back. I will be *very* interested to see how she evolves as the ruler of a nascent realm.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on November 05, 2011, 12:54:54 AM
Maybe once the dev team add schism, we can split into the western SA and eastern SA :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on November 05, 2011, 01:11:45 AM
Maybe once the dev team add schism, we can split into the western SA and eastern SA :D

It's almost happened more than once you know, schism mechanics or no. Brance considered it. So did Rowan.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on November 05, 2011, 01:17:39 AM
It might happen one day if the other side push things too TOO FAR.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 05, 2011, 02:28:28 AM
Maybe once we hit one million followers, we will celebrate by splitting into three separate faiths. By then each of the splinter faiths will still be bigger than any non-SA denomination.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on November 05, 2011, 03:57:06 AM
each faith can follow one of the three stars :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Galvez on November 07, 2011, 11:32:27 PM
Turin Erickson, King in Exile of Iashalur, Duke of Gaston???
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on November 07, 2011, 11:50:41 PM
Turin Erickson, King in Exile of Iashalur, Duke of Gaston???

What's going on!!!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on November 08, 2011, 01:29:16 AM
A NEW THEOCRACY! THAT IS WHAT IS GOING ON!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on November 08, 2011, 01:40:09 AM
The fruition of a *very* long held plan.

The secession of Gaston has been planned for ages, almost since the fall of Niselur a couple years ago. Not too long after that, I had a neat idea. The Niselurians were all talking about going into exile and re-founding their realm some day, so I offered them a means to do that. Come to Astrum, I said, and found your realm in Gaston. You can build up your infrastructure and populations under our protection, then secede when you are ready. Then after that you can with our help work your way back to Darfix. This seemed much more doable than trying to recolonize a totally devastated Darfix in the midst of hordes of rampaging monsters, far from any human support.

We got a lot in return. The Exiles have been serving as knights and lords in Astrum for probably close to two years IRL, which has been a huge help to us. It took a long time to build up Gaston, and the war with Caerwyn and Averoth set us back immensely when it broke out, but the New Estate system helped a lot with reclaiming it (and more) and fortunately most of the regions we lost to monsters during the war still had good population density when we took them back.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on November 08, 2011, 02:39:48 AM
Except Chrysantalys. The city has no people left and turned into a breeding ground.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on November 08, 2011, 03:14:28 AM
Maybe once we hit one million followers, we will celebrate by splitting into three separate faiths. By then each of the splinter faiths will still be bigger than any non-SA denomination.

Darfix alone would double the peasants under the SA banner  :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on November 08, 2011, 04:10:15 AM
Darfix alone would double the peasants under the SA banner  :)

not really.  SA has 750,000+ followers as it is now.  After Golden Farrow and the surrounding area gets temples and followers we will be around 850k.  Maybe even more.  Darfix is good for another 150-200k but ittt would not double SA.  Not even close.  Even still, Darfix would bring  a huge chunk of peasant followers to the church
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on November 08, 2011, 04:54:44 AM
not really.  SA has 750,000+ followers as it is now.  After Golden Farrow and the surrounding area gets temples and followers we will be around 850k.  Maybe even more.  Darfix is good for another 150-200k but ittt would not double SA.  Not even close.  Even still, Darfix would bring  a huge chunk of peasant followers to the church

I know. However, as an Iashalurian, i am allowed to exxagerate about the spelendour of what my realm will be.   ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on November 08, 2011, 05:26:14 AM
You might never even reach the full potential of the city. That city will eat a lot and I doubt you can feed it during winter.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on November 08, 2011, 06:48:11 AM
not really.  SA has 750,000+ followers as it is now.  After Golden Farrow and the surrounding area gets temples and followers we will be around 850k.  Maybe even more.  Darfix is good for another 150-200k but ittt would not double SA.  Not even close.  Even still, Darfix would bring  a huge chunk of peasant followers to the church

150.600
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on November 08, 2011, 07:47:32 AM
Even if the city actually reaches that size, getting all of them to follow SA will be quite a challenge.  We've been working on Springdale (currently the largest center of the faith) for years, and haven't ever managed to get 100% conversion . . . the city is currently about 75k people, with 4 shrines and a level 11 temple (which can provide for 71k followers), and despite pretty constant preaching, there's been very little progress for a few months.  Maybe 3k in three months or so.  In the last week it's been staying about at 52k, every time I get more it seems to go back down the next day.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on November 08, 2011, 11:15:45 AM
Even if the city actually reaches that size, getting all of them to follow SA will be quite a challenge.  We've been working on Springdale (currently the largest center of the faith) for years, and haven't ever managed to get 100% conversion . . . the city is currently about 75k people, with 4 shrines and a level 11 temple (which can provide for 71k followers), and despite pretty constant preaching, there's been very little progress for a few months.  Maybe 3k in three months or so.  In the last week it's been staying about at 52k, every time I get more it seems to go back down the next day.

I can't seem to find the thread right now, but my understanding was the way Tom coded things cities are harder to convert, or more accurately the larger the population the harder it is for 100% conversions. As I recall this is to reflect that the larger the gathering of people the more "cosmopolitan" they are and the more likely that many conflicting and minor cults and philosophies will exists. I think it was the same thread were we were debating if building temples actually made it harder to convert populations.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 08, 2011, 03:39:01 PM
That city will eat a lot and I doubt you can feed it during winter.

It's surrounded by rurals for miles and miles in every direction you can go, with no other nearby cities.

If all those rurals can be taken, the realm holding Darfix should be self-sufficient.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 08, 2011, 03:45:45 PM
It better be. It's not like anyone else can afford to feed it if it can't feed itself.

I haven't bothered to actually count up all the numbers of the regions around it, but I don't have any reason to suspect Vellos is not correct. As always, though, the key will be to keep the monsters down.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on November 08, 2011, 07:53:33 PM
Hey, if you actually take and hold all those rurals, you will. That's no easy task though...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on November 22, 2011, 04:22:30 AM
well well, I didn't realize I was this popular. I seem to be getting a large amount of support for the position of consul.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on November 23, 2011, 01:04:40 AM
It does help that you have a few people behind the scenes working for you.      ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on November 23, 2011, 02:14:48 AM
I planned on running myself until I got thrown out of SA :( but its ok I got some things in the works that is going to be interesting for the church.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on November 23, 2011, 02:18:31 AM
I planned on running myself until I got thrown out of SA :( but its ok I got some things in the works that is going to be interesting for the church.

The conversion of Luria Nova?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on November 23, 2011, 02:29:44 AM
The conversion of Luria Nova?

Oh no something much bigger then that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on November 23, 2011, 02:32:08 AM
Oh no something much bigger then that.

The conversion of Luria Nova AND Madina? And the Zuma too?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on November 23, 2011, 02:35:14 AM
The conversion of Luria Nova AND Madina? And the Zuma too?

 Lol no nothing to do with conversion of any realms or the Zuma. I want that in the future but not now.

Speaking of the Zuma can they be killed or does no one know?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on November 23, 2011, 02:38:56 AM
Oh no something much bigger then that.

Sounds interesting- I'm guessing it will be related to Creed's rather "heretical" beliefs?

I do hope so, with Constantine soon to be out of the Elders for the first time in years a good theological controversy which he feels strongly about will be a fun way of making up for the usual Elder bickering  :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on November 23, 2011, 02:48:38 AM
Lol no nothing to do with conversion of any realms or the Zuma. I want that in the future but not now.

Speaking of the Zuma can they be killed or does no one know?

Can their regions be RTO'ed?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on November 23, 2011, 03:01:34 AM
Can their regions be RTO'ed?

You should totally try. If the daimon is militia, they'll join you and defend you from the other Zuma!

 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on November 23, 2011, 03:25:38 AM
It does help that you have a few people behind the scenes working for you.      ;)

Yes, that too.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on November 23, 2011, 06:30:49 PM
Can their regions be RTO'ed?

Not with the Zuma forces present--and they have sufficient forces to prevent any such attempt, not to mention that they would probably destroy you for simply converting the peasants in the first place.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on November 23, 2011, 07:57:27 PM
Not with the Zuma forces present--and they have sufficient forces to prevent any such attempt, not to mention that they would probably destroy you for simply converting the peasants in the first place.

Depends on how many of these troops are mobile and how many are militia.

I also have no idea if the code considers CS or number of men.

They also is, however I believe, special code for Netherworld regions.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telrunya on November 23, 2011, 08:20:52 PM
Trust me, they have quite some mobile forces around :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 23, 2011, 09:32:13 PM
Trust me, they have quite some mobile forces around :P

Yes, yes they do. My ballpark based on their movements suggests 10k-ish mobile on a regular basis.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on November 24, 2011, 04:26:37 AM
They keep at least 10K in every reason--more than enough to put down the 300 peasants that each region has.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 24, 2011, 04:54:39 AM
They keep at least 10K in every reason--more than enough to put down the 300 peasants that each region has.

10k mobile, or 10k militia? I was just counting mobile.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on November 24, 2011, 05:11:29 AM
Interesting, it was a while ago that I last travelled through Zuma Territory, back before D'Hara had a Prime Minister, but back then they certainly didn't keep a force in every region, let alone 10k.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vaylon Kenadell on November 24, 2011, 10:08:46 AM
I have seen things. Things that would make you not even joke about invading Zuma lands if you knew what I knew.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ramiel on November 24, 2011, 11:40:25 AM
I have seen things. Things that would make you not even joke about invading Zuma lands if you knew what I knew.

you make them sound like creepy stalkers :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on November 24, 2011, 03:44:19 PM
All this talk about invading the Zuma is largely a moot point anyway (no pun intended). They exist for a reason. I doubt that reason is to be a punching bag. In much the same way that Tom made it effectively impossible to take back Jobo's Mouth from the daimons at the end of the Third Invasion on BT, I have a feeling that, in the unlikely event that it looked like the players might actually have a shot at taking down the Zuma, Tom would intervene and prevent it. Not overtly maybe, but let's just say that I doubt we'd ever see the bottom of their reinforcement pool...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on November 24, 2011, 04:38:19 PM
All this talk about invading the Zuma is largely a moot point anyway (no pun intended). They exist for a reason. I doubt that reason is to be a punching bag. In much the same way that Tom made it effectively impossible to take back Jobo's Mouth from the daimons at the end of the Third Invasion on BT, I have a feeling that, in the unlikely event that it looked like the players might actually have a shot at taking down the Zuma, Tom would intervene and prevent it. Not overtly maybe, but let's just say that I doubt we'd ever see the bottom of their reinforcement pool...

No if Tom did that would be lame. Maybe have them driven out of their lands and tom can make like a little island for them to be driven back to but to make it impossible to destroy them would make the whole game just dumb. Everything realm, and people and Zuma should be able to be conquered. Can he make it extremely hard yes but not impossible but we will never know until a Bloc of realms gather the courage to try a war with the Zuma and hey if all those realms get destroyed just would open new space to place new realms and we can have fun with that. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 24, 2011, 05:54:28 PM
No if Tom did that would be lame. Maybe have them driven out of their lands and tom can make like a little island for them to be driven back to but to make it impossible to destroy them would make the whole game just dumb. Everything realm, and people and Zuma should be able to be conquered. Can he make it extremely hard yes but not impossible but we will never know until a Bloc of realms gather the courage to try a war with the Zuma and hey if all those realms get destroyed just would open new space to place new realms and we can have fun with that.

You obviously don't know Tom. And haven't played on Beluaterra enough.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on November 24, 2011, 07:03:21 PM
Why fight a meat grinder?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on November 24, 2011, 07:59:57 PM
You obviously don't know Tom. And haven't played on Beluaterra enough.

I quit Beluaterra a long time ago it was dumb you could do nothing monsters just were to powerful and every time after an invasion realms where to busy rebuilding to be able to attack each other.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 24, 2011, 10:01:38 PM
I quit Beluaterra a long time ago it was dumb you could do nothing monsters just were to powerful and every time after an invasion realms where to busy rebuilding to be able to attack each other.

Hah.

There's your problem then.

You don't understand the magnitude of the issue.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on November 24, 2011, 10:03:47 PM
I think the whole point of the invasion was making people work together.

But sadly, that is when human nature kicks in and people fight each other even more.

People can never work together even during a crisis.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vaylon Kenadell on November 25, 2011, 01:15:03 AM
I think the whole point of the invasion was making people work together.

But sadly, that is when the human nature kicks in and people fight each other even more.

People can never work together even during a crisis.

Kinda makes you wonder, eh? Who's the real demon?  ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on November 25, 2011, 01:53:04 AM
Kinda makes you wonder, eh? Who's the real demon?  ::)

Delvin Anaris, of course.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on November 25, 2011, 03:09:57 AM
Delvin Anaris, of course.

lol
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 25, 2011, 07:03:49 AM
Delvin Anaris, of course.

Glad someone else noticed too.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on December 21, 2011, 07:27:31 PM
So...

How 'bout them Zuma, eh? I'm very curious to see how SA and the theocratic governments react to this most recent development. An SA crusade against the Zuma would be hilarious.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on December 21, 2011, 07:36:12 PM
not happening. We are leaning toward ignoring Garret. We already know Garret holds no power in Zuma. He is all talk :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on December 21, 2011, 07:39:02 PM
The Zuma will have to give us a better reason than what we've seen. So far all we have seen is Garret mouthing off in a ridiculously transparent attempt to goad SA/Zuma into a war so he can get personal revenge on SA for casting him out as a heretic. Brance refuses to have any dealings with Garret. If the Zuma want to talk, they will have to send a different ambassador.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Darksun on December 21, 2011, 07:39:21 PM
not happening. We are leaning toward ignoring Garret. We already know Garret holds no power in Zuma. He is all talk :P

That and he is seen as a heretic by the Church. Not to be trusted.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on December 21, 2011, 07:42:54 PM
We already know Garret holds no power in Zuma.
I hadn't heard anyone claim that. It is pretty clear, though, that Garret is attempting to use the Zuma as leverage in a personal vendetta. Brance will tick by his principles and refuse to deal with the heretic. He could be way off base with this though. If it turns out that he really does speak for the Zuma on this, at least the part about Turin, then things could get very interesting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vanKaya on December 21, 2011, 08:58:42 PM
I dont think its wise to put on the blinders and hope that Garrett is just spewing misinformation. When he speaks for the Zuma unofficially I zone him out, but this seemed quite official.

Take it from Terran, even if the Zuma pretty much KNOW you're innocent, they'll still go in and muck up a region or two. If they know you're guilty.........
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on December 21, 2011, 09:31:06 PM
I hadn't heard anyone claim that. It is pretty clear, though, that Garret is attempting to use the Zuma as leverage in a personal vendetta. Brance will tick by his principles and refuse to deal with the heretic. He could be way off base with this though. If it turns out that he really does speak for the Zuma on this, at least the part about Turin, then things could get very interesting.

lol buddy, don't flatter yourself, kay. I'll proclaim this officially in this OOC forum where even the GM can verify: I, neither as a player, nor Garret as a character (Even though technically you can't really know ICly anyway), have no grudge against Sanguis Astroism or anyone involved. In fact, personally I'd prefer the Church not get involved. Too much paperwork for no gain.

So Indirik, give it a rest. Not everyone has such a long-lasting memory, or cares so deeply about things that happen in this game to warrant having some "vendetta". Anaris can also testify as to my lack of long-term memory. I already forgot who exactly matters in SA anyway.

But in short: Indirik, I am a jerk sometimes. You can also be one. Don't let the fact that I am a jerk give you justification for being one yourself.

Take it easy now, old timer.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on December 21, 2011, 09:38:26 PM
lol buddy, don't flatter yourself, kay. I'll proclaim this officially in this OOC forum where even the GM can verify: I, neither as a player, nor Garret as a character (Even though technically you can't really know ICly anyway), have no grudge against Sanguis Astroism or anyone involved. In fact, personally I'd prefer the Church not get involved. Too much paperwork for no gain.

So Indirik, give it a rest. Not everyone has such a long-lasting memory, or cares so deeply about things that happen in this game to warrant having some "vendetta". Anaris can also testify as to my lack of long-term memory. I already forgot who exactly matters in SA anyway.

But in short: Indirik, I am a jerk sometimes. You can also be one. Don't let the fact that I am a jerk give you justification for being one yourself.

Take it easy now, old timer.

I think people who read your never posting again thread can back your words LOL
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bedwyr on December 21, 2011, 09:44:07 PM
So...

How 'bout them Zuma, eh? I'm very curious to see how SA and the theocratic governments react to this most recent development. An SA crusade against the Zuma would be hilarious.

(cackles maniacally, and hopes no one discovers his true plan to set SA and the Zuma at odds while making it look like an SA plot to set the Moot and the Zuma at odds)

(also wishes he could really accomplish things like that)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on December 21, 2011, 10:01:40 PM
(cackles maniacally, and hopes no one discovers his true plan to set SA and the Zuma at odds while making it look like an SA plot to set the Moot and the Zuma at odds)

(also wishes he could really accomplish things like that)

You had me for a split second there!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on December 21, 2011, 10:21:29 PM
Sorry, Artemesia, I forgot to add this to my message:
Quote
Disclaimer: The viewpoints expressed in this message are the IC viewpoints of the character Brance Indirik. Any similarity to the views or opinions of any player or real human being is purely coincidence, with no relations, implied or otherwise, to the players, developers, or groupies of this game, forum, or web site.

Brance does have a long memory. But that's part of what I like about BattleMaster. Actions that you take matter to your character and your family, even years and years later. You forge a history for your character and your family. You don't get the instant equality of a respawn to fall back on. And that's just really cool.

And, really, get real. You sent a message to all rulers on Dwilight that specifically and directly challenged all theocracies of SA to bow before your might, and told everyone not in SA that this didn't apply to them. And then you try and say that you hope that the church doesn't get involved?  ::)

When he speaks for the Zuma unofficially I zone him out, but this seemed quite official.
As soon as Brance challenged Garret, Garret immediately backed off on his entire manifesto, with the exception of some vague claim about Turin. The entire demand went out the window with an "Ooops, sorry, my bad, that was all my personal stuff. Feel free to ignore it all." To my character that hardly seems to indicate that this is an official Zuma proclamation.

But even if it was, who cares? (Again, speaking from my character's IC viewpoint.) These Zuma are nothing to Brance. What have they ever done that's noteworthy? They roflstomped on Barca? Please... It's not like that's exactly a bragworthy accomplishment, is it? And who do the Zuma have fronting for them? The convicted heretic Garret Artemesia, who has been outcast from Sanguis Astroism. Suddenly, out of the blue, the convicted heretic makes proclamations that directly challenge Sanguis Astroism. And we're all just supposed to roll over and go belly-up like D'Hara did?

Quote from: someone in the Veinsormoot
"When the Zuma make demands ... we do what they say and don't ask too many questions."

And yes, that is a real message that my character received IC, deliberately creatively quoted (but only a little), because that's how Brance reads it. And Brance has (as far as he's concerned) the entire might of the richest, most powerful military machine on the entire freakin' continent backing him up. So yeah he is a little cocky. And he has good reason to be. Siege of Storm's Keep, anyone? Siege of Valkyrja? Destruction of Everguard? Destruction of Caerwyn? Defeat of the Raivan Empire?

Brance is going to react in a manner that makes sense for him to act IC, based on what he knows. And what he knows is that Garret is a heretic and a braggart. That's why he flat out refuses to deal with Garret. If the Zuma have something to say to Brance, they can send someone with honor. Someone who can be trusted. Rolling over and giving his belly to the Zuma, who are thousands of miles away, just because of some heretic's unsubstantiated claims? Pfffffft.... That would make no sense at all. (And yes, Brance does have access to quite a bit of information that most people don't, so he knows a good bit more about what's going on that you might think someone in Astrum would know. What can I say? People like to tell him things...)

And note that this is Brance's IC opinion. OOC, as a player, I know that what Brance is doing could all come back and bite him in the ass. Maybe it will turn out that this really is the Zuma's doing, and not just Garret's personal vendetta. And maybe the Zuma will decide to march an army up to Iashalur to check things out for themselves. In which case Brance will probably have to be at the head of the army that meets them on the field. But, hey, even if we get destroyed, we'll have fun doing it.

As a player, I think that what Garret is doing is pretty damn cool. The mouthpiece of the Zuma on Dwilight? Who wouldn't want to do that? And the potential that Garret is using his powers as Zuma ambassador to enact a little personal vengeance against the largest and most powerful religion the game has ever seen? Isn't that what every player would dream about doing? I bet that there's about 200 players that would love to take over Garret's role. If not more.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on December 21, 2011, 10:50:54 PM
I find it odd that people would be in the slightest bit envious of my position. It is, for the most part, a thankless, gloryless job. You try your best to do stuff that no one else will ever know about (At least, not by the vast majority of players). You try anything, and there will definitely be misconceptions, regardless of actual character traits.

Yeah, Garret has history with SA. There's already been in-game messages about it. On an OOC forum, specifics are a bit dicey. Have I done similar things? Possibly. So...does that mean you want to stoop to my level if that is the case?

Anyway, I have nothing else to say about this. Good day y'all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on December 21, 2011, 10:51:36 PM
So...

How 'bout them Zuma, eh? I'm very curious to see how SA and the theocratic governments react to this most recent development. An SA crusade against the Zuma would be hilarious.

Well Garret's managed to get half the Elders into "prepare for war" mode so it'll be interesting to see how this turns out. The fact that such lofty demands were made against the Church itself and not just at Allison or Turn means that if the Zuma do march to war against either realm they'll have a crusade on their hands (unless they actually have some very convincing evidence, which I highly doubt).

Of course lets hope it'll all resolve according to peaceful means....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vaylon Kenadell on December 21, 2011, 10:59:07 PM
Siege of Valkyrja?

I remember that battle (http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Siege_of_Valkyrja). That was quite a sight. But where does Brance's confidence come from in relation to those battles, given what he knows about the Zuma?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on December 22, 2011, 02:50:54 AM
But where does Brance's confidence come from in relation to those battles, given what he knows about the Zuma?
Well that's part of the idea: Brance doesn't know much about the Zuma. And, really, who does know much about the Zuma? Not very many people on Dwilight have ever fought against them. We've all probably seen the occasional huge battle report. But those are doubtless just wild stories the bards tell, right? But who has actually even seen a dwilight daimon, let alone faced them in battle?

So why should he be afraid of them? They haven't done anything very impressive. But Brance has been part of what is probably the two largest fortress sieges that Dwilight has ever seen, on the winning side. His side has been victorious in every war they've taken part in. So, why should he expect the Zuma to be any different?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on December 22, 2011, 03:20:55 AM
(cackles maniacally, and hopes no one discovers his true plan to set SA and the Zuma at odds while making it look like an SA plot to set the Moot and the Zuma at odds)

(also wishes he could really accomplish things like that)

Is it bad that this was one of the main theories before Garret just whipped this whole surprise out?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on December 22, 2011, 04:08:38 AM
But who has actually even seen a dwilight daimon, let alone faced them in battle?

Most of Terran and Barca.

And probably many in D'Hara.

Daimons have literally sat on our borders for years.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on December 22, 2011, 04:16:04 AM
Most of Terran and Barca.

And probably many in D'Hara.

Daimons have literally sat on our borders for years.

My Lurian character watched them march on Terran back in the days of the Dragon Queen. If that situation was anything to go by, then very few people have opposed them with a force substantial enough to draw conclusions from.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on December 22, 2011, 04:21:33 AM
Well that's part of the idea: Brance doesn't know much about the Zuma. And, really, who does know much about the Zuma? Not very many people on Dwilight have ever fought against them. We've all probably seen the occasional huge battle report. But those are doubtless just wild stories the bards tell, right? But who has actually even seen a dwilight daimon, let alone faced them in battle?

So why should he be afraid of them? They haven't done anything very impressive. But Brance has been part of what is probably the two largest fortress sieges that Dwilight has ever seen, on the winning side. His side has been victorious in every war they've taken part in. So, why should he expect the Zuma to be any different?

Hireshmont II has personally fought them, and wandered around their lands on numerous occasions, and held personal meetings with Haktoo in the fiery pits of Volcano Nightscree.

D'Hara, Barca, and Terran have all seen 10k+ armies in their lands at one time or another; most recently we've seen those size armies in 3-4 regions at a time.

Only one person on the continent, to my knowledge, has been personally involved in multiple Zuma crises, fought the Zuma multiple times, and regularly gets a response from Haktoo other than "You have to come to Nightscree to talk to me." His name is Hireshmont, and he just messaged the Astroist rulers offering to answer any questions they may have about the Zuma.

So if Brance has any curiosities, he kind of just got handed the way to fulfill them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on December 22, 2011, 04:31:25 AM
So if Brance has any curiosities, he kind of just got handed the way to fulfill them.
I will have to see if it makes any sense for him to ask.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on December 22, 2011, 04:39:23 AM
I will have to see if it makes any sense for him to ask.

Considering how well Terran and Barca have handled the current crisis (from the point of view of the east) I'm not sure I would go soliciting much information from any supposed "expert" from either realm.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on December 22, 2011, 04:59:37 AM
Considering how well Terran and Barca have handled the current crisis (from the point of view of the east) I'm not sure I would go soliciting much information from any supposed "expert" from either realm.

Uhh... because they did everything they could with the Zuma to ensure the Zuma didn't destroy them all for something they were completely innocent of?

How else would anyone have handled it?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on December 22, 2011, 05:08:17 AM
Uhh... because they did everything they could with the Zuma to ensure the Zuma didn't destroy them all for something they were completely innocent of?

How else would anyone have handled it?

Like I said, from the eastern prospective. Over here it appeared that Terran and their allies were rather reluctant to meet the requests, but also took their own sweat time in trying to negotiate at all. Correct perspective? Probably not but that is how it is. Similar to how D'Hara was convinced that SA was ultra militant and ready to invade on any pretext during the era of the Dragon Queen.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on December 22, 2011, 06:27:45 AM
Like I said, from the eastern prospective. Over here it appeared that Terran and their allies were rather reluctant to meet the requests, but also took their own sweat time in trying to negotiate at all. Correct perspective? Probably not but that is how it is. Similar to how D'Hara was convinced that SA was ultra militant and ready to invade on any pretext during the era of the Dragon Queen.

That's the perspective in the east?

Out of curiosity, what gives/gave them that impression exactly?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on December 22, 2011, 06:46:31 AM
That's the perspective in the east?

Out of curiosity, what gives/gave them that impression exactly?

The normal, the dribs and drabs of messages we get, general speculation within the realm. The same sort of stuff that leads to inaccurate impressions in real life. Oh and the fact that several of us have in the past been in realms in the west and distinctly remember the Zuma being a mere blip on the radar unless you sought trouble with them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on December 22, 2011, 06:46:45 AM
. . . he just messaged the Astroist rulers offering to answer any questions they may have about the Zuma.

*is sad that Elsebeth wasn't included on that list*


Elsebeth gets a little uppity anytime Libero's faith in the Stars is questioned . . . though of course there are some good historical reasons people do it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vaylon Kenadell on December 22, 2011, 07:02:54 AM
And, really, who does know much about the Zuma? Not very many people on Dwilight have ever fought against them. We've all probably seen the occasional huge battle report. But those are doubtless just wild stories the bards tell, right? But who has actually even seen a dwilight daimon, let alone faced them in battle?

My character has seen Daimons and knows a little bit about them. It wouldn't be in-character for him to talk about it, however -- more's the pity, because I'm dying to.

But Brance has been part of what is probably the two largest fortress sieges that Dwilight has ever seen, on the winning side. His side has been victorious in every war they've taken part in. So, why should he expect the Zuma to be any different?

There are 126 nobles in the six major SA-affiliated realms. Now of course not all of them are warriors, but just out of curiosity, how much CS do you think those six realms could raise per noble on average? Again, just out of curiosity.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bedwyr on December 22, 2011, 07:04:44 AM
Is it bad that this was one of the main theories before Garret just whipped this whole surprise out?

I'd have been surprised if it weren't.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on December 22, 2011, 02:10:02 PM
There are 126 nobles in the six major SA-affiliated realms. Now of course not all of them are warriors, but just out of curiosity, how much CS do you think those six realms could raise per noble on average? Again, just out of curiosity.
For any randomly selected group of characters of sufficient size, a 500CS average is not unreasonable. 600 CS or more is certainly possible with some effort. Anything more, and you're starting to push the limits of what you can do with "average" and "randomly selected". If you hand picked a purpose-built force, then 750 CS or more is easily possible with sufficient funding. But then you have a smaller pool, and your total CS probably won't go up too much, if any.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on December 22, 2011, 02:15:05 PM
Uhh... because they did everything they could with the Zuma to ensure the Zuma didn't destroy them all for something they were completely innocent of?
They weren't innocent. If you were innocent, then they wouldn't have attacked, would they? You must have done something to provoke them, even if we don't know what it was.

Also, Brance finds it curious, and rather odd, that Terran is the one making the big push to acquire the items that the Zuma want, with D'Hara also doing a little. It doesn't seem to us like Barca is doing anything at all to help themselves.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on December 22, 2011, 03:02:13 PM
So if Brance has any curiosities, he kind of just got handed the way to fulfill them.
Having reviewed the situation, I can say that it is unlikely that Brance will be asking Terran for their expertise on the matter. But the situation could change.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on December 22, 2011, 08:28:06 PM
Having reviewed the situation, I can say that it is unlikely that Brance will be asking Terran for their expertise on the matter. But the situation could change.

Meh.

Then don't whine about it on the forum. Because you literally just had the most knowledgeable and experienced person in Dwilight concerning the daimons offer Brance a blank slate of anything he wanted to know... and he ignored it. You can still claim Brance doesn't know about or understand the daimons, but don't claim he couldn't reasonably know about or understand the daimons.

The normal, the dribs and drabs of messages we get, general speculation within the realm. The same sort of stuff that leads to inaccurate impressions in real life. Oh and the fact that several of us have in the past been in realms in the west and distinctly remember the Zuma being a mere blip on the radar unless you sought trouble with them.

Once we've got some benefit of hindsight, Hireshmont is going to write a formal "Here's what happened" type of thing. He is aware, through various ways, that this is the opinion of the eastern realms, and most perturbed about it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on December 22, 2011, 09:00:51 PM
Then don't whine about it on the forum. Because you literally just had the most knowledgeable and experienced person in Dwilight concerning the daimons offer Brance a blank slate of anything he wanted to know... and he ignored it. You can still claim Brance doesn't know about or understand the daimons, but don't claim he couldn't reasonably know about or understand the daimons.
Whine about it? Excuse me? I don't think I was whining about anything. I was explaining Brance's viewpoint of how thing were going, and why he was doing what he was doing. There is a very good reason that he is not interested in asking Hireshmont about the Zuma. And it is /not/ a general disinterest.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on December 22, 2011, 09:24:55 PM
They weren't innocent. If you were innocent, then they wouldn't have attacked, would they? You must have done something to provoke them, even if we don't know what it was.

Also, Brance finds it curious, and rather odd, that Terran is the one making the big push to acquire the items that the Zuma want, with D'Hara also doing a little. It doesn't seem to us like Barca is doing anything at all to help themselves.

A little? D'hara is providing half the items. Barca is crippled by being unable to cash bonds or do anything in their capital city.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on December 22, 2011, 09:33:53 PM
Also, Brance finds it curious, and rather odd, that Terran is the one making the big push to acquire the items that the Zuma want, with D'Hara also doing a little. It doesn't seem to us like Barca is doing anything at all to help themselves.

It's because Terran is the responsible member of the Véinsørmoot.

D'Hara is doing a pretty good job also.

And Barca is like the annoying little brother that always seems to be pulling the other two into conflicts and messes.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vanKaya on December 22, 2011, 10:28:55 PM
It's because Terran is the responsible member of the Véinsørmoot.

D'Hara is doing a pretty good job also.

And Barca is like the annoying little brother that always seems to be pulling the other two into conflicts and messes.


From what I've observed, D'hara is doing much more on the unique items front than Terran is. Probably mostly because D'hara has more contacts abroad due to their trade situation.

But during Barca's founding Terran contributed way more of their military than D'hara did.

All in all though, I feel like the Veinsormoot is very balance in terms of who does what.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on December 23, 2011, 12:18:40 AM
From what I've observed, D'hara is doing much more on the unique items front than Terran is. Probably mostly because D'hara has more contacts abroad due to their trade situation.

But during Barca's founding Terran contributed way more of their military than D'hara did.

All in all though, I feel like the Veinsormoot is very balance in terms of who does what.

I agree.

That was mostly Kale's viewpoint  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on December 23, 2011, 02:06:25 AM
From what I've observed, D'hara is doing much more on the unique items front than Terran is. Probably mostly because D'hara has more contacts abroad due to their trade situation.

But during Barca's founding Terran contributed way more of their military than D'hara did.

All in all though, I feel like the Veinsormoot is very balance in terms of who does what.

Indeed; D'Hara is doing way, way more than Terran is.

They weren't innocent. If you were innocent, then they wouldn't have attacked, would they? You must have done something to provoke them, even if we don't know what it was.

Also, Brance finds it curious, and rather odd, that Terran is the one making the big push to acquire the items that the Zuma want, with D'Hara also doing a little. It doesn't seem to us like Barca is doing anything at all to help themselves.


You have to remember that Hireshmont, when he is sending messages to a multi-national audience, isn't always operating as Chief Magistrate. More often than not, especially as it regards Zuma affairs, he is operating as Mootgram: the chairman of the pseudo-governing entity of Barca, Terran, and D'Hara. He's a unitary representative for all three realms in many areas. No decision making capacities in that regard, but certainly the power to represent and explain decisions already made.

So when you see "Hireshmont II Vellos" asking for items for Barca, or explaining Zuma policy, it can largely be read as "Véinørmoot" or "Barca, D'Hara, and Terran." On that issue. Not on everything, but on the Zuma we're pretty united, and, when we do have divisions, they get addressed pretty quickly.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on December 23, 2011, 10:15:43 AM
Indeed; D'Hara is doing way, way more than Terran is.

You have to remember that Hireshmont, when he is sending messages to a multi-national audience, isn't always operating as Chief Magistrate. More often than not, especially as it regards Zuma affairs, he is operating as Mootgram: the chairman of the pseudo-governing entity of Barca, Terran, and D'Hara. He's a unitary representative for all three realms in many areas. No decision making capacities in that regard, but certainly the power to represent and explain decisions already made.

So when you see "Hireshmont II Vellos" asking for items for Barca, or explaining Zuma policy, it can largely be read as "Véinørmoot" or "Barca, D'Hara, and Terran." On that issue. Not on everything, but on the Zuma we're pretty united, and, when we do have divisions, they get addressed pretty quickly.

Our characters might remember that, if the Moot wasn't so keen on being secretive. My character only learnt the moot even exists a few weeks ago, and still has no idea what it does.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telrunya on December 23, 2011, 11:00:27 AM
I think it's less about being secretive and more about expecting everyone else to know / figure out without our effort ;) (Which probably isn't a justified thought)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on December 23, 2011, 05:28:47 PM
Our characters might remember that, if the Moot wasn't so keen on being secretive. My character only learnt the moot even exists a few weeks ago, and still has no idea what it does.

We're like the European Union.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Shizzle on December 23, 2011, 05:37:48 PM
We're like the European Union.

So who's Greece? And Belgium? :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on December 23, 2011, 10:37:49 PM
Our characters might remember that, if the Moot wasn't so keen on being secretive. My character only learnt the moot even exists a few weeks ago, and still has no idea what it does.

Secretive? We're not secretive at all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vanKaya on December 24, 2011, 12:56:32 AM
Our characters might remember that, if the Moot wasn't so keen on being secretive. My character only learnt the moot even exists a few weeks ago, and still has no idea what it does.

To be fair, there is very little interaction going on between the 'Moot and the Lurias on a player to player basis (as far as I know). I have noticed a lot of Lurian players that complain that the 'Moot is secretive, or, more accurately, that we do not advertise our purpose. I think this is a hypocritical position to take since the only reason players of the 'Moot have any semblance of a notion as to what the Lurian "alliance" (or whatever you would call it) is, comes from the fact that all those realms were friendly colonies of PeL. Thus, with a little intuition, a 'Moot player can look at the Lurian kingdoms (i.e. PeL, LN and Solaria), look at their diplomatic relations with each other and safely conclude that this is a bloc of cooperative nations. Our understanding of the Lurias does not extend any further than that.

What surprises me is when high ups in the Lurian Kingdoms cannot put two and two together and use their keen sense of deduction to realize that the realms of Barca, D'hara and Terran are federated and as such they are simply another power-bloc that is based on cultural and geographical similarities, much like the Lurias (and much like SA). They don't even have to know that the alliance is referred to as the Veinsormoot to understand the fundamental nature of the alliance.

I understand that the name Veinsormoot (which is gibberish if I understand correctly) can be confusing at first, however, there is a very clear and well organized wiki page describing the nature and mandate of the 'Moot. The Wiki is IC knowledge, much like a library, and to think that a Duke in the Lurias or even a Lord, would be so caught up in their own affairs that they would refuse to take the initiative and learn at least the mere basics of their neighbors, and potential rivals, is very, very un-SMA.



Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on December 24, 2011, 02:10:05 AM

What surprises me is when high ups in the Lurian Kingdoms cannot put two and two together and use their keen sense of deduction to realize that the realms of Barca, D'hara and Terran are federated and as such they are simply another power-bloc that is based on cultural and geographical similarities, much like the Lurias (and much like SA). They don't even have to know that the alliance is referred to as the Veinsormoot to understand the fundamental nature of the alliance.


What surprises me is that you think that knowing that Barca D'Hara and Terran are a federated Power Block instantly reveals the purpose of the Moot. We know of the relations between the three realms, we don't necessarily know what the Moot is for.

To be fair, there is very little interaction going on between the 'Moot and the Lurias on a player to player basis (as far as I know). I have noticed a lot of Lurian players that complain that the 'Moot is secretive, or, more accurately, that we do not advertise our purpose. I think this is a hypocritical position to take since the only reason players of the 'Moot have any semblance of a notion as to what the Lurian "alliance" (or whatever you would call it) is, comes from the fact that all those realms were friendly colonies of PeL. Thus, with a little intuition, a 'Moot player can look at the Lurian kingdoms (i.e. PeL, LN and Solaria), look at their diplomatic relations with each other and safely conclude that this is a bloc of cooperative nations. Our understanding of the Lurias does not extend any further than that.


Like has been said numerious times, IC we don't care that much if we know about the moot. We do get tired of the attitude that some have in these forums that we should be taking the Moot seriously, or somehow know IC how the Moot relates to the federation. Of course we as the players know what the Moot is for, but our characters may have much less knowledge. We don't run around expecting other nations to know anything about the Halls of Luria for example.


I understand that the name Veinsormoot (which is gibberish if I understand correctly) can be confusing at first, however, there is a very clear and well organized wiki page describing the nature and mandate of the 'Moot. The Wiki is IC knowledge, much like a library, and to think that a Duke in the Lurias or even a Lord, would be so caught up in their own affairs that they would refuse to take the initiative and learn at least the mere basics of their neighbors, and potential rivals, is very, very un-SMA.


The wiki can be considered IG knowledge, but it is unreasonable to expect every character to have read every available "book" from the wiki. Luria does have a Royal Archivist, I'm sure when she has had the time to review documents about the Moot and have them added to our libraries we will all be better informed.

Besides it is quite in keeping with SMA to underestimate your opponents and just assume that your forces are naturally superior. History hardly suggests that all high ranking nobles bothered to learn anything of real merit about the opposing forces, beyond basic military intelligence.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bedwyr on December 24, 2011, 02:25:41 AM
To be fair, there is very little interaction going on between the 'Moot and the Lurias on a player to player basis (as far as I know). I have noticed a lot of Lurian players that complain that the 'Moot is secretive, or, more accurately, that we do not advertise our purpose. I think this is a hypocritical position to take since the only reason players of the 'Moot have any semblance of a notion as to what the Lurian "alliance" (or whatever you would call it) is, comes from the fact that all those realms were friendly colonies of PeL. Thus, with a little intuition, a 'Moot player can look at the Lurian kingdoms (i.e. PeL, LN and Solaria), look at their diplomatic relations with each other and safely conclude that this is a bloc of cooperative nations. Our understanding of the Lurias does not extend any further than that.

What surprises me is when high ups in the Lurian Kingdoms cannot put two and two together and use their keen sense of deduction to realize that the realms of Barca, D'hara and Terran are federated and as such they are simply another power-bloc that is based on cultural and geographical similarities, much like the Lurias (and much like SA). They don't even have to know that the alliance is referred to as the Veinsormoot to understand the fundamental nature of the alliance.

You're assuming two things.  1. That anyone in Luria expects anyone outside of Luria to know what's going on in Luria, and 2. That most Lurians care at all about what is going on beyond Luria.  Neither assumption is accurate.  Koli and a few others are attempting to change both of those things, but that's for purely religious reasons.

Quote
I understand that the name Veinsormoot (which is gibberish if I understand correctly) can be confusing at first, however, there is a very clear and well organized wiki page describing the nature and mandate of the 'Moot. The Wiki is IC knowledge, much like a library, and to think that a Duke in the Lurias or even a Lord, would be so caught up in their own affairs that they would refuse to take the initiative and learn at least the mere basics of their neighbors, and potential rivals, is very, very un-SMA.

You're kidding, right?  Do you think lords in the Christian Kingdoms knew anything about how the Muslim world was organized?  There were heads of state in the seventeenth century, much less earlier, who didn't know the first thing about non-Christian lands.

Luria is the single most isolated and isolationist place I've even seen in Battlemaster.  Getting Lurians to care about Fissoa is difficult.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on December 24, 2011, 03:03:35 AM
There were heads of state in the seventeenth century, much less earlier, who didn't know the first thing about non-Christian lands.

Or sometimes even 20th, or 21st....



Frankly I love the fact that every region of Dwilight is so different and they all have super vague ideas of what the other areas are like and normally huge misconceptions and assumptions of what those people are like. It's awesome. You don't see it anywhere else really in Battlemaster. Sure, many realms have unique cultures, but nothing like it is on Dwilight. This is probably one of the most SMA things about Dwilight--the narrow-minded and ignorant and often arrogant attitude taken towards other regions and cultures. They're weirdos, they're barbarians, they're nut-cases who follow some funky religion. In all actually we know next to nothing about these people, and because of that we don't like them, or are scared of them, or think they're lesser than us. And that is awesome. That seems like a Serious Medieval Atmosphere.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on December 24, 2011, 03:11:33 AM
You're kidding, right?  Do you think lords in the Christian Kingdoms knew anything about how the Muslim world was organized?  There were heads of state in the seventeenth century, much less earlier, who didn't know the first thing about non-Christian lands.

Some did, some didn't. I imagine that Muslim leaders in Cairo, Damascus, or Baghdad had a reasonable idea how Christian leaders in Constantinople, Rome, or Bulgaria operated. That's a comparable distance to Lurias/Moot. Except the Moot is, in some cases, actually even closer; maybe more comparable to Sicily or Beneventum related to North Africa, especially in D'Hara's case.

Whatever the case, however, it sounds like it's time for Hireshmont to go on another trip...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on December 24, 2011, 03:14:16 AM
Some did, some didn't. I imagine that Muslim leaders in Cairo, Damascus, or Baghdad had a reasonable idea how Christian leaders in Constantinople, Rome, or Bulgaria operated. That's a comparable distance to Lurias/Moot. Except the Moot is, in some cases, actually even closer; maybe more comparable to Sicily or Beneventum related to North Africa, especially in D'Hara's case.

To see a layover map of Dwilight and Europe, just for distance comparisons would be a lot of fun/interesting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on December 24, 2011, 03:46:49 AM
To see a layover map of Dwilight and Europe, just for distance comparisons would be a lot of fun/interesting.

Yeah; it's tricky though, because Dwilight's longest dimension is on a different axis, and distance is sometimes less about "as the crow flies" and more about the ratio of roads and navigable seas to mountains and pirates.

But a layover map would still be conceptually useful.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on December 24, 2011, 03:57:45 AM
Yeah; it's tricky though, because Dwilight's longest dimension is on a different axis, and distance is sometimes less about "as the crow flies" and more about the ratio of roads and navigable seas to mountains and pirates.

But a layover map would still be conceptually useful.

Yeah, of course it would all be "roughly" but it would be cool.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vanKaya on December 24, 2011, 04:29:16 AM
You're assuming two things.  1. That anyone in Luria expects anyone outside of Luria to know what's going on in Luria, and 2. That most Lurians care at all about what is going on beyond Luria.  Neither assumption is accurate.  Koli and a few others are attempting to change both of those things, but that's for purely religious reasons.

You're kidding, right?  Do you think lords in the Christian Kingdoms knew anything about how the Muslim world was organized?  There were heads of state in the seventeenth century, much less earlier, who didn't know the first thing about non-Christian lands.

Luria is the single most isolated and isolationist place I've even seen in Battlemaster.  Getting Lurians to care about Fissoa is difficult.

Look, every morning my character wakes up, and, as a member of the social and political elite (as all of us are), his scribe presents to him pertinent information on a variety of issues. One of those pieces of information is a scroll which outlines the known diplomatic relations of all the continent's realms. By this information, and essentially this information alone, he is able to piece together that the realms of Luria Nova, PeL and Solaria are in an alliance. I don't know the details of this alliance but it's safe to assume it involves mutual defense and cooperation to some degree. Boom, my character understands the fundamental basics of the Lurian political situation. I don't know about the Halls of Luria just like the Lurians can't be expected to know that our alliance is called the Veinsormoot, but come on? You had NO idea of the alliance thats right smack in front of you?

The impression I get of the Lurian nobility is that they are willfully and purposefully ignorant.

"Herrr my scribes showed me a chart showing that Terran, D'hara and Barca are Federated. What does that mean, derrrrrrr"

(no offense, just trying to make a point. Seriously, do not be offended. Please.)

And its not SMA to be unaware of the political situation around you. Alliances around this time were a large part built around deterring attacks and most alliances were very public knowledge. Luria claiming it doesn't know about D'hara's alliance with Terran and Barca is like France not being aware of the Anglo-Portuguese alliance, it's absurd.

I'm not saying Luria should care at all about the alliance beside them, but it is unrealistic to say that they wouldn't at least be aware of it's existence.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on December 24, 2011, 04:48:05 AM
Look, every morning my character wakes up, and, as a member of the social and political elite (as all of us are), his scribe presents to him pertinent information on a variety of issues. One of those pieces of information is a scroll which outlines the known diplomatic relations of all the continent's realms. By this information, and essentially this information alone, he is able to piece together that the realms of Luria Nova, PeL and Solaria are in an alliance. I don't know the details of this alliance but it's safe to assume it involves mutual defense and cooperation to some degree. Boom, my character understands the fundamental basics of the Lurian political situation. I don't know about the Halls of Luria just like the Lurians can't be expected to know that our alliance is called the Veinsormoot, but come on? You had NO idea of the alliance thats right smack in front of you?

The impression I get of the Lurian nobility is that they are willfully and purposefully ignorant.

"Herrr my scribes showed me a chart showing that Terran, D'hara and Barca are Federated. What does that mean, derrrrrrr"

(no offense, just trying to make a point. Seriously, do not be offended. Please.)

And its not SMA to be unaware of the political situation around you. Alliances around this time were a large part built around deterring attacks and most alliances were very public knowledge. Luria claiming it doesn't know about D'hara's alliance with Terran and Barca is like France not being aware of the Anglo-Portuguese alliance, it's absurd.

I'm not saying Luria should care at all about the alliance beside them, but it is unrealistic to say that they wouldn't at least be aware of it's existence.

We never said we didn't know about the Federation, that was your position. We did say our characters have no idea what the goals and purpose of the Moot are, though most of us have become aware of its existence due mostly to the Zuma incident.

I don't know why you harp on about Lurians not knowing about D'Hara's alliance. It is probably the only thing that prevented an invasion of D'Hara a few months back.

Quote
And its not SMA to be unaware of the political situation around you. Alliances around this time were a large part built around deterring attacks and most alliances were very public knowledge. Luria claiming it doesn't know about D'hara's alliance with Terran and Barca is like France not being aware of the Anglo-Portuguese alliance, it's absurd.

Actually they were just as much about offense as defense. As such often the first you knew about a new alliance, was when a co-ordinated attack appeared. I'm sure you can think of MANY reasons two medieval realms would have wished to keep an alliance secret, or to keep the true extent or details of the alliance hidden.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on December 24, 2011, 05:11:18 AM
...Terran, D'hara and Barca are Federated.
Wait... they are? Huh.... when did that happen?

While as a player I think that the Veinsormoot is an interesting idea. IC my character has heard the name a few times, but doesn't really care. It's not like the Veinsormoot ever really publicize their existence. Or attempt to inform other realms as to what it does, or stands for. Come to think of it, I wonder if any sovereign rulers will consent to actually deal with the Veinsormoot as a political organization.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on December 24, 2011, 05:44:35 AM
What I don't get is all this...antagonism towards the 'moot. It's on par with the hatred of SA, except that the Moot hasn't gangbanged any realms into nonexistence to justify that hatred. Yes, yes, those attacks were all perfectly justified, those realms just refused to back down, etc. Whatever. They were gangbanged by multiple SA realms, and the Moot has never done anything like that.

So...why do people continually whine and complain that they don't know the purpose of the Moot? Either find out, or ignore it.

Please stop complaining, over and over again, that the easily accessible information from the wiki wasn't shouted at your character in a roleplay. I'm tired of hearing about it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on December 24, 2011, 06:08:04 AM
Wait... they are? Huh.... when did that happen?

Quite some time ago.

While as a player I think that the Veinsormoot is an interesting idea. IC my character has heard the name a few times, but doesn't really care. It's not like the Veinsormoot ever really publicize their existence. Or attempt to inform other realms as to what it does, or stands for. Come to think of it, I wonder if any sovereign rulers will consent to actually deal with the Veinsormoot as a political organization.

This seems very strange, and seems to be a misrepresentation of what I KNOW your character has received.
1. Hireshmont has gone on diplomatic tours to SA lands on 3 separate occasions, every time publicizing the Moot
2. Hireshmont has personally sent Brance (sadly it was apparently too long ago to be in my sent messages archives IG) a fairly long explanation of what the Moot is
3. When the Treaty of the Maroccidens was signed, Hireshmont (though I forget if he was ruler then; Vigilans might have been ruler) sent a letter to all the rulers introducing himself and briefly notifying them of the federation and its contents
4. In practically every diplomatic incident involving any of the 3 Moot realms, Hireshmont has given fairly long-winded explanations of what the Moot is to rulers and dignitaries of other realms
5. Hireshmont has personally invited representatives of Kabrinskia and Astrum to join the Moot which, as he explained it, was a governing body for Barca, D'Hara, and Terran. He invited rulers and ambassadors specifically. What, did Brance think it was a tea party he was being invited to?

And, regarding "sovereign" rulers (as if the Moot isn't a sovereign entity)... yes, they will. At various times, multiple rulers of Asylon and Madina, the ruler of Aurvandil, and a ruler of Fissoa have directly understood themselves to be engaged in diplomacy with the Véinsørmoot as an entity. Realistically, Luria Nova, Pian en Luries, Kabrinskia, and Astrum have all been involved in direct diplomacy with the Moot, but it was not so clearly stated, nor recognized as such by the rulers of said realms.

or ignore it.

I think their contention is that they intend to ignore it, but we keep bringing it up.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bedwyr on December 24, 2011, 07:04:11 AM
Look, every morning my character wakes up, and, as a member of the social and political elite (as all of us are), his scribe presents to him pertinent information on a variety of issues. One of those pieces of information is a scroll which outlines the known diplomatic relations of all the continent's realms. By this information, and essentially this information alone, he is able to piece together that the realms of Luria Nova, PeL and Solaria are in an alliance. I don't know the details of this alliance but it's safe to assume it involves mutual defense and cooperation to some degree. Boom, my character understands the fundamental basics of the Lurian political situation. I don't know about the Halls of Luria just like the Lurians can't be expected to know that our alliance is called the Veinsormoot, but come on? You had NO idea of the alliance thats right smack in front of you?

Lurian leaders are aware of the Veinsormoot.  Koli is fully aware of the three main realms, that Hireshmont is some sort of spokeperson for a decentralized but fairly unified federation, that Asylon is somewhat associated, that Aurvandil has some relationship with Barca, and that there are disagreements within the 'Moot about Madina and Aurvandil.  Other Lurian leaders are at least aware of the alliance chains, and some of them are certainly aware that the Veinsormoot exists.  But no one, Koli included, has the faintest idea what the point of the 'Moot is, if there is one besides a more formalized alliance.

Your depiction of the Lurian political situation is considerably less certain.  Pian en Luries is allied with Luria Nova, Solaria, and Fissoa, but Solaria isn't allied with Luria Nova or Fissoa, and Luria Nova isn't allied to Fissoa or Solaria.  Luria, at this point, is a polite fiction that certain people are attempting to make more real.

As for learning more about it, Koli is currently on a trip (he has to detour back because the Duchess of Askileon unexpectedly disappeared, but he'll be returning to it shortly) with several purposes, one of which is to learn more about other realms.  It's taken him the entire time since the Duchal Revolution to feel comfortable in leaving Luria, and both IC and OOC I'm not at all certain that wasn't a mistake, as Luria Nova is still incredibly unsettled.  There have almost been three civil wars that I'm aware of since then, and there are still talks about another Lurian internal war.

The 'Moot is really far away in the sense of "effective military action" because there's no chance in hell that any force it might field could actually hurt Luria, so when there are continued civil war dangers, people worry more about that, talk about Fissoa, or the wild lands to the north.  The only reason it's on the horizon at all except for religious reasons is that it makes potential hostilities with D'hara more interesting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bedwyr on December 24, 2011, 07:05:28 AM
What I don't get is all this...antagonism towards the 'moot. It's on par with the hatred of SA, except that the Moot hasn't gangbanged any realms into nonexistence to justify that hatred. Yes, yes, those attacks were all perfectly justified, those realms just refused to back down, etc. Whatever. They were gangbanged by multiple SA realms, and the Moot has never done anything like that.

So...why do people continually whine and complain that they don't know the purpose of the Moot? Either find out, or ignore it.

Please stop complaining, over and over again, that the easily accessible information from the wiki wasn't shouted at your character in a roleplay. I'm tired of hearing about it.

As has been explained many times: It's not that we don't know about it.  It's that people in the 'Moot expect that everyone else should. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on December 24, 2011, 07:45:11 AM
As has been explained many times: It's not that we don't know about it.  It's that people in the 'Moot expect that everyone else should.

I think that idealistically we hope that people will at least give a once-through just-the-highlights read to the various treaties on the Wiki, and the million-and-a-half times we've made various announcements through many channels of our existence.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on December 24, 2011, 08:39:33 AM
I think that idealistically we hope that people will at least give a once-through just-the-highlights read to the various treaties on the Wiki, and the million-and-a-half times we've made various announcements through many channels of our existence.

The problem with the wiki is, although it can be regarded as IC info, it is not a mandatory reference. I know quite a few players that never bother to look at it at all. For Dwilight I don't just peruse the wiki for info, I have quite a few guidelines that dictate what parts of the wiki Juan is legitimately going to have access to. I don't brook with the idea that everything on the wiki is going to be found in every library across the island, but that is just a personal preference.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on December 24, 2011, 04:03:15 PM
do people continually whine and complain that they don't know the purpose of the Moot? Either find out, or ignore it.
Why do people whine and complain that no one takes the Veinsormoot seriously when they don't do anything IC to promote it as a political entity?

I think Brance has only heard of it from one person, Hireshmont. You'd think that if it was important to the member states that foreign powers be aware of the Veinsormoot and deal with it, that they would promote it. Beyond that, though, it is the obligation of the members of an organization to promote themselves if they want people to know about it. You can't just put the info on the wiki and expect people to rush over and read all about it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lorgan on December 24, 2011, 04:49:40 PM
Why would foreign leaders recognize the existence of the Moot when all they achieve by that is promoting the union of possibly hostile realms. Only when that union becomes clear through actions aimed against those foreign powers will they have a reason to recognize it, and even then they will find it highly preferable to negotiate with the Moot's members separately.

So if you want the Moot to be recognized around the continent as a supra-national body, promote it by actions, not by words. This united stance (afaik) in dealing with the Zuma is a good start, but still the overwhelming majority of the nobles of Dwilight don't really care about the Zuma and just see those realms that do care band together against a common enemy. Nothing too surprising or out of the ordinary.

Only when other realms notice that they can't get through to barca, terran or d'hara without going through the Moot will they start caring about their relations with that guild. Until then it's just a means of communication between allies in our eyes. Like the Church is for SA and the Halls of Luria are for the Luria's. Nothing more, nothing less.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on December 24, 2011, 05:15:46 PM
Why would foreign leaders recognize the existence of the Moot when all they achieve by that is promoting the union of possibly hostile realms. Only when that union becomes clear through actions aimed against those foreign powers will they have a reason to recognize it, and even then they will find it highly preferable to negotiate with the Moot's members separately.

So if you want the Moot to be recognized around the continent as a supra-national body, promote it by actions, not by words. This united stance (afaik) in dealing with the Zuma is a good start, but still the overwhelming majority of the nobles of Dwilight don't really care about the Zuma and just see those realms that do care band together against a common enemy. Nothing too surprising or out of the ordinary.

Only when other realms notice that they can't get through to barca, terran or d'hara without going through the Moot will they start caring about their relations with that guild. Until then it's just a means of communication between allies in our eyes. Like the Church is for SA and the Halls of Luria are for the Luria's. Nothing more, nothing less.

Entirely plausible; I expect that, even. But that wasn't the point. The issue was people saying that they didn't know anything about the Moot. If they know but just don't respect it, I can understand that.

Why do people whine and complain that no one takes the Veinsormoot seriously when they don't do anything IC to promote it as a political entity?

Did you not read my post where I explained that we do promote it politically IC, and I know for a fact that you have received detailed information multiple times?

I think Hireshmont has only heard of Astrum from one person, Brance. You'd think that if it was important to the member nobles that foreign powers be aware of Astrum and deal with it, that they would promote it. Beyond that, though, it is the obligation of the members of an organization to promote themselves if they want people to know about it.

Ah, yes; Astrum. I've only heard about it from Brance, its ruler, so it isn't important and I obviously can't be expected to know anything about it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on December 24, 2011, 06:04:06 PM
Why do people whine and complain that no one takes the Veinsormoot seriously when they don't do anything IC to promote it as a political entity?

I think Brance has only heard of it from one person, Hireshmont. You'd think that if it was important to the member states that foreign powers be aware of the Veinsormoot and deal with it, that they would promote it. Beyond that, though, it is the obligation of the members of an organization to promote themselves if they want people to know about it. You can't just put the info on the wiki and expect people to rush over and read all about it.

Should I post a message in every region I pass through, extolling the virtues of not only the Moot, but Verdis Elementum, the Dwilight Trade Company, and the Libidizedd Trading Company?

Why do you need to know our motivation? I (and Gornak) don't expect anyone to care about the Moot, most of the time. But when you encounter the Moot in a meaningful way, you/your character should then learn all they can about it, or at least enough to deal with the current situation, whatever that is.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on December 24, 2011, 06:35:27 PM
Nevermind them they are just trying to be cool dood winners of Battlemaster... I know what the moot is and thats all that matters in this life. 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bedwyr on December 24, 2011, 07:26:07 PM
I think that idealistically we hope that people will at least give a once-through just-the-highlights read to the various treaties on the Wiki, and the million-and-a-half times we've made various announcements through many channels of our existence.

And the people who are involved with foreign affairs in Luria have.  As soon as Koli found out about it after one of the incidents with D'hara, he pulled info on it from every library he could, and shared it with the Lurians who were involved with foreign affairs.

The idea that everyone down to region lords in Luria is involved in foreign affairs is the part I find ludicrous.  The Rulers and Ambassadors know.  Some of the rest of the Councils do.  At a guess only one of the current Dukes does, and that's only barely and tangentially.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on December 24, 2011, 08:17:57 PM
Why do you need to know our motivation? I (and Gornak) don't expect anyone to care about the Moot, most of the time. But when you encounter the Moot in a meaningful way, you/your character should then learn all they can about it, or at least enough to deal with the current situation, whatever that is.
I have never encountered the Veinsormoot in-game in a meaningful way. Hireshmont has mentioned the name once or twice. But so what? I've never had to sign a treaty with the Veinsormoot. I've never had to negotiate a trade agreement with the Veinsormoot. I've never negotiated borders with the Veinsormoot. Yet I do all these things with the various realms that comprise the Veinsormoot. Never once has one of them said "I can't sign that treaty/agreement, you'll have to negotiate with the Veinsormoot."

So, what incentive do I have to deal with the Veinsormoot, or learn anything about it? The members don't promote (except for the occasional mention of the name from Hireshmont). I've never been told to go deal with them. And my dealings with the individual member states have not in any way been impacted, so far as I can tell, by the fact that they are members of this guild. So, considering that I can get everything done that I need to get done without ever having to deal with this Veinsormoot in any way, what incentive do I have to invest the time and effort in learning about it and how to deal with it? As Lorgan even said, the Veinsormoot is actually detrimental to my purposes, as it forces me to deal with the realms as a whole. Which I don't really have to, because the members will deal with me individually.

IMO, if you want people to deal with the Veinsormoot, and make it into something more than just a simple guild, you need to make it easy for them to deal with the guild, and make it to their advantage. Because right now, there is absolutely no incentive to or advantage in dealing with them. I don't know how you're going to do this. Game mechanics don't support it for guilds.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on December 24, 2011, 09:04:51 PM
I have never encountered the Veinsormoot in-game in a meaningful way. Hireshmont has mentioned the name once or twice. But so what? I've never had to sign a treaty with the Veinsormoot. I've never had to negotiate a trade agreement with the Veinsormoot. I've never negotiated borders with the Veinsormoot. Yet I do all these things with the various realms that comprise the Veinsormoot. Never once has one of them said "I can't sign that treaty/agreement, you'll have to negotiate with the Veinsormoot."

So what you're saying is, "No, I don't actually read my messages."

I didn't mention it once or twice. We had about a 3-4 page back and forth about the Moot. You don't seem to recall that, which is strange to me.

Also, you haven't signed a treaty with the Moot, true. To my knowledge you haven't signed a treaty with any realm in the Moot. Nor have you negotiated borders with any realm in the Moot. My memory of it seems to be that Hireshmont and Brance both left rather in a huff.

However, Hireshmont did say at the beginning, before things really got heated, that Hireshmont wouldn't sign an agreement until he had run it by the Moot. Apparently you forgot that as well. Admittedly, I did send quite a few rather long messages.

So, what incentive do I have to deal with the Veinsormoot, or learn anything about it?

The incentive of, if Brance does, he maybe won't continue collectively pissing off all of humanity south of Golden Farrow?

The members don't promote (except for the occasional mention of the name from Hireshmont).

See "sarcastic remark about Astrum." Astrum doesn't promote except for Brance. I can't remember the last time an Astrumite ambassador wandered down here to do or say anything. I know that a Moot representative was in Astrum and Iashalur less than two weeks ago. How 'bout dem applies?

I've never been told to go deal with them.

Yes you have, you just don't remember. And, even then, it'd be a moot point (no pun intended) since most of your interactions were with Hireshmont, who is Mootgram anyways, and compulsive about keeping the Elders informed about everything. Working with Hireshmont is working with the Moot, because he checks everything through the Moot anyways. Though I suppose that isn't necessary something Brance would know; though maybe it should have clued you in that many of our messages included the rulers of D'Hara and Barca, and Hireshmont referenced very close coordination with D'Hara quite a few times.

And my dealings with the individual member states have not in any way been impacted, so far as I can tell, by the fact that they are members of this guild.

Which goes to show that you can't tell very far, because your relations with Terran, at least, have been very greatly affected by Terran's membership in a supranational government, and by Brance (and Allison's) decision to reject participation in it.

So, considering that I can get everything done that I need to get done without ever having to deal with this Veinsormoot in any way, what incentive do I have to invest the time and effort in learning about it and how to deal with it?

Again, because not doing so has already led to the title "Vasilif" being a derogatory term in Terran. I believe I've seen it punned as "Vassalif" a few times. Maybe Brance doesn't care about diplomacy in other realms; in which case he has nothing to gain.

As Lorgan even said, the Veinsormoot is actually detrimental to my purposes, as it forces me to deal with the realms as a whole. Which I don't really have to, because the members will deal with me individually.

The first sentence is reasonable enough; Brance can just make the decision not to work with the Moot. Fine. But, to reiterate, that is not what we were originally talking about. We were talking about the issue of knowing about the Moot, and you claimed that Brance had never really had any encounters with the Moot and so couldn't be expected to know about it. The second sentence is false; to my knowledge, no Moot realm has engaged in any truly substantive independent diplomacy with Astrum. I know D'Hara chats with Astrum occasionally, but I don't think they have any treaties or formal agreements with Astrum. If they do, they must be pretty secret.

IMO, if you want people to deal with the Veinsormoot, and make it into something more than just a simple guild, you need to make it easy for them to deal with the guild, and make it to their advantage.

We're not really struggling to get people to recognize the Moot. Madina, Aurvandil, and the Caerwynian contingent all have formal delegates sent to the Moot (not a specific realm); same is the case for Asylon. The Lurias could have such a thing if they wanted it; I suspect they'll get around to it eventually. Morek has a delegate in the Moot, and has had direct diplomacy with the Moot. Astrum is kind of the odd-man-out. The only significant foreigner, to my knowledge, that has "purely" bilateral relations with a Moot realm is probably Corsanctum with D'Hara.

Because right now, there is absolutely no incentive to or advantage in dealing with them. I don't know how you're going to do this. Game mechanics don't support it for guilds.

Yes there is.

Don't deal with it and you'll find it hard to make any diplomatic progress in the south. That simple. Maybe that doesn't bother you; fine. But if you want to get anything done anywhere in the Maroccidens, or related to it, without issues coming to violence or threats of violence, you go through the Moot. That's not a prescriptive thing, btw, it's descriptive. Historically, in the Maroccidens, you are either in the Moot, or relate directly through formal delegations with the Moot, or you are at war with/actively sabotaged by the Moot. "Peacefully but pointedly ignore" has not yet happened.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on December 25, 2011, 04:05:49 AM
The Moot is moot? o.O

Actually OOCly I can see how some pieces might fit together really interestingly, given the posts by that Cross fellow (He's in Morek btw). Y'all remember that stuff he said about poking the Zuma with a stick? Of course, some dude like Indirik will probably immediately deny it or whatever (It's predictable behavior). Don't sweat dudes: It ain't going in-game cuz I don't have any letters proving that stuff. Some dude's probably going to try to get on my case about that, lol. Uh, yeah...I am kept in line, more or less, but haters gonna hate, amirite ppl lol.

But historically speaking, Brance (And kinda Indirik sometim...most of the time...) has been pretty arrogant and I suppose the word is...high handed? You know, when it feels like the dude's thinking he's sitting atop a horse talking down to you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on December 25, 2011, 05:47:08 AM
I didn't mention it once or twice. We had about a 3-4 page back and forth about the Moot. You don't seem to recall that, which is strange to me.
We did send several messages back and forth, but they did not focus on the Veinsormoot. It was a very peripheral issue to the border treaty negotiations. I know you discussed it with Allison. Perhaps you're thinking of that.

Quote
Also, you haven't signed a treaty with the Moot, true. To my knowledge you haven't signed a treaty with any realm in the Moot. Nor have you negotiated borders with any realm in the Moot. My memory of it seems to be that Hireshmont and Brance both left rather in a huff.
Yeah, we started, it just never finished. But that negotiation was not with the Veinsormoot. It was between Astrum and Terran. Not Astrum and the Veinsormoot.

Quote
The incentive of, if Brance does, he maybe won't continue collectively pissing off all of humanity south of Golden Farrow?
What's the fun of not making any enemies? Maybe as soon as he finds someone down there worth not pissing off, his opinions will change. But so far, he hasn't been very impressed with most of what he's seen.

Quote
See "sarcastic remark about Astrum." Astrum doesn't promote except for Brance.
Astrum isn't here on the forums complaining about how no one takes them seriously, and how no one understands them, and who they are, etc.

Astrum also isn't a guild. Astrum is a realm. A power structure specifically designed into, and enshrined in the game, around which all game mechanics are built. Anyone can look anywhere and see just about all the information on realms they want to see. Guilds... not so much. So if you want your guild to be visible and influential on that level, then it is incumbent on you to do whatever it takes to make that happen.

Quote
I know that a Moot representative was in Astrum and Iashalur less than two weeks ago. How 'bout dem applies?
A noble from Terran requested passage through Astrum. Which I granted. If he was intended to represent the Veinsormoot to Astrum, he did a piss poor job. The only contact he had with me was to ask if he could pass through. Which he did, without attempting any further contact, or identifying himself as related to the Veinsormoot in any way. Is this what you consider to be representing and promoting the Veinsormoot?

Quote
Yes you have, you just don't remember. And, even then, it'd be a moot point (no pun intended) since most of your interactions were with Hireshmont, who is Mootgram anyways, and compulsive about keeping the Elders informed about everything. Working with Hireshmont is working with the Moot, because he checks everything through the Moot anyways.
It doesn't matter what happens internally to the Veinsormoot, if you don't make clear what is happening to those outside the Veinsormoot. Our characters don't know that's what he does.

I understand that you think that you have been promoting the Veinsormoot. But maybe people aren't seeing your efforts in the way they are intending them. Or maybe you're not being specific enough. Or maybe your attempts to promote have been mixed in with other messages that have overridden the points about the Veinsormoot. Like Hireshmont's offer to provide information about the Zuma. That message also included not-so-veiled threats of Zuma invasions, and how Hireshmont was in good with Haktoo, and how Astrum had better sever all ties with Kabrinskia or else the Zuma would probably invade. No, that's not what you said directly. But that's how several people read the message. So any attempt you may have wanted to present of being helpful was completely lost in the indirect and not-so-indirect threats you presented in your letters.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on December 25, 2011, 05:50:37 AM
But historically speaking, Brance (And kinda Indirik sometim...most of the time...) has been pretty arrogant and I suppose the word is...high handed? You know, when it feels like the dude's thinking he's sitting atop a horse talking down to you.
He has been the ruler of the largest, wealthiest, most populous, and most powerful realm on Dwilight. Why wouldn't he be a bit arrogant and heavy-handed? He's convinced he's doing the right things, for the right reasons. And he's a bit of a religion zealot.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on December 25, 2011, 01:03:48 PM
He has been the ruler of the largest, wealthiest, most populous, and most powerful realm on Dwilight. Why wouldn't he be a bit arrogant and heavy-handed? He's convinced he's doing the right things, for the right reasons. And he's a bit of a religion zealot.

If that's the case, you'd have to add "foolish" to his characteristics because clearly then he hasn't heard about the consequences of pride and its timing in relation to the fall.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on December 26, 2011, 05:16:41 PM
If that's the case, you'd have to add "foolish" to his characteristics because clearly then he hasn't heard about the consequences of pride and its timing in relation to the fall.
Pride cometh after the fall, when you get back up and kick the ass of the person that tripped you, and pound his ugly little face into the dirt.  :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on December 27, 2011, 06:17:30 PM
I understand that you think that you have been promoting the Veinsormoot. But maybe people aren't seeing your efforts in the way they are intending them. Or maybe you're not being specific enough. Or maybe your attempts to promote have been mixed in with other messages that have overridden the points about the Veinsormoot. Like Hireshmont's offer to provide information about the Zuma. That message also included not-so-veiled threats of Zuma invasions, and how Hireshmont was in good with Haktoo, and how Astrum had better sever all ties with Kabrinskia or else the Zuma would probably invade. No, that's not what you said directly. But that's how several people read the message. So any attempt you may have wanted to present of being helpful was completely lost in the indirect and not-so-indirect threats you presented in your letters.

Which is OOCly hilarious to me, because Hireshmont was not intending to be threatening at all. That was his way of trying to extend the olive branch and be apologetic.  Which I as a player knew probably wouldn't work, but he as a character has been quite confused over Brance's apparent offendedness, especially given the other SA rulers have had a very different response.  But that's IC knowledge.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on December 27, 2011, 09:50:59 PM
Which is OOCly hilarious to me, because Hireshmont was not intending to be threatening at all. That was his way of trying to extend the olive branch and be apologetic.
We definitely have different ways of looking at things. But maybe it's also because of our different knowledge of the actual situation. I'm not the only one that saw the message as Hireshmont bragging about him now being in good with Haktoo, and how Kabrinskia and Iashalur were in imminent danger of being invaded by the Zuma, and that we had better abandon all ties with them, or be invaded too. No, this wasn't what was said directly. But to several of us, this was the obvious conclusion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on December 27, 2011, 10:10:21 PM
We definitely have different ways of looking at things. But maybe it's also because of our different knowledge of the actual situation. I'm not the only one that saw the message as Hireshmont bragging about him now being in good with Haktoo, and how Kabrinskia and Iashalur were in imminent danger of being invaded by the Zuma, and that we had better abandon all ties with them, or be invaded too. No, this wasn't what was said directly. But to several of us, this was the obvious conclusion.

Being completely abstracted from the situation and impartial, I can confirm that this is exactly how I read the letter.  Behold, the limitations of text as a means of effective and complete communication.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on December 27, 2011, 10:16:54 PM
We definitely have different ways of looking at things. But maybe it's also because of our different knowledge of the actual situation. I'm not the only one that saw the message as Hireshmont bragging about him now being in good with Haktoo, and how Kabrinskia and Iashalur were in imminent danger of being invaded by the Zuma, and that we had better abandon all ties with them, or be invaded too. No, this wasn't what was said directly. But to several of us, this was the obvious conclusion.

Yes, there's something about Hireshmont's approach to relations with Astrum that just never seems to go over right. I remember when Brance was sharing Hireshmont's letters concerning Demyansk. I have gathered OOC that Hireshmont thought himself to be eminently reasonable in that discussion, but it was not received that way in Astrum at all. The Council was practically up in arms from the very first letter.  Relations, such as they are, seem to have continued in that vein since, with neither side understanding the other's point of view in the slightest. There's something about Hireshmont's attitude or style of communication that just drives Astrum's Council crazy and serves to obscure his intent.

Astrum is a very insular realm in many ways. We mostly ignore our heathen neighbors, and always have, with the exception of our decision to attack Everguard. Averoth could have stayed where it was forever for all we cared. Same with Caerwyn. I imagine we will take the same tack with Terran and Asylon. As long as they tacitly acknowledge and avoid interfering with our interests, I doubt we'll ever have much to say to either of them. Of course, you never know what Allison's going to do, and since Kabrinskia will probably be one of our interests, for better or for worse, there's always the possibility that we get involved in some kind of trouble that Allison stirs up.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bedwyr on December 28, 2011, 07:06:19 AM
Being completely abstracted from the situation and impartial, I can confirm that this is exactly how I read the letter.  Behold, the limitations of text as a means of effective and complete communication.

Heh, I think that's also Manifest Path suspicion of the Daimon-accomodating Westerners at work too.  I know Koli takes everything the Moot realms say with a hefty helping of salt specifically because of that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 15, 2012, 05:09:36 PM
A little bit of political infighting going on in SA.  Some of you Elders are just poor losers!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 15, 2012, 07:19:22 PM
Yes, calling Gustav a puppet of Allison, how would you ever get that idea?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 15, 2012, 11:01:56 PM
*Allison cracks her whip*

"Dance puppet, dance!"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 16, 2012, 03:26:30 AM
Although I did give very sound reasoning for why my character voted the way he did.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 16, 2012, 02:00:46 PM
Vote?

Heretic is curious. Obviously heretic can't use this in-game so meh. ...In-game heretic doesn't care anyway since other people are apparently more than happy to try to say bad stuff about SA without Garret saying anything, lol?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on January 16, 2012, 03:36:56 PM
Vote?

Heretic is curious. Obviously heretic can't use this in-game so meh. ...In-game heretic doesn't care anyway since other people are apparently more than happy to try to say bad stuff about SA without Garret saying anything, lol?

We vote about the way we vote. Each side has a favorite voting manner which would make it easier for their side to win. No none is happy about the manner in which the vote about the manner in which to vote is held.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 16, 2012, 03:42:24 PM
We vote about the way we vote. Each side has a favorite voting manner which would make it easier for their side to win. No none is happy about the manner in which the vote about the manner in which to vote is held.

+1


I know what is going on and I had to read this twice for it to make sense!  Well worded.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on January 16, 2012, 03:48:15 PM
In-game heretic doesn't care anyway since other people are apparently more than happy to try to say bad stuff about SA without Garret saying anything, lol?

Oh, and I have so many bad stuff about non-SA people that I'm just itching to send to you......
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 16, 2012, 03:51:36 PM
Meh, the whole way in which voting was implemented is just a train wreck. I can't believe the way that voting for Regent, of all things, was implemented.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on January 19, 2012, 07:21:48 PM
Ew, this has been going on a while and I'm sad I didn't jump in sooner! With that said, some points:

1) I, personally, love playing a character that's coldly antagonistic towards SA (Halleria). Ever since Springdale (Empire), when it was divided through SA politicizing, to Thulsoma, to Summerdale (which eventually fell under the SA shadow), to Averoth, Caerwyn, and now Asylon. It's been a very fun time, and now Allison has a realm right next to my duchy. Muahahaha.

2) About the issue with Lavendrow and Demyansk --- the thing is, Caerwyn didn't completely fall to Astrum/SA. Itau seceded, Golden Farrow was lost, but Via survived and pledged allegiance to Asylon, thereby carrying whatever remained to the latter realm (regions, claims). It's somewhat similar to the real-world issue on Sabah, Malaysia - the region, which was leased to the British East company (who then included it in the creation of Malaysia), is owned by the Sulu royal family, who are Filipino citizens. Claims supersede nationality/allegiance, but what to do about that, of course, depends wholly on the individual parties.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on January 19, 2012, 11:05:04 PM
Ew, this has been going on a while and I'm sad I didn't jump in sooner! With that said, some points:

1) I, personally, love playing a character that's coldly antagonistic towards SA (Halleria). Ever since Springdale (Empire), when it was divided through SA politicizing, to Thulsoma, to Summerdale (which eventually fell under the SA shadow), to Averoth, Caerwyn, and now Asylon. It's been a very fun time, and now Allison has a realm right next to my duchy. Muahahaha.

2) About the issue with Lavendrow and Demyansk --- the thing is, Caerwyn didn't completely fall to Astrum/SA. Itau seceded, Golden Farrow was lost, but Via survived and pledged allegiance to Asylon, thereby carrying whatever remained to the latter realm (regions, claims). It's somewhat similar to the real-world issue on Sabah, Malaysia - the region, which was leased to the British East company (who then included it in the creation of Malaysia), is owned by the Sulu royal family, who are Filipino citizens. Claims supersede nationality/allegiance, but what to do about that, of course, depends wholly on the individual parties.

Legally speaking you probably have a point. However, Astrum doesn't see it that way, and making this argument would require Asylon to be willing to back up such a claim. I would be surprised if they were. They've already benefited immensely from this turn of events (although having Allison as a new neighbor may come back to haunt them), so it's really not in their interest to sour relations with Astrum and Kabrinskia over a couple of regions that they were willing to sign away to Terran in the first place.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on January 19, 2012, 11:15:24 PM
Legally speaking you probably have a point. However, Astrum doesn't see it that way, and making this argument would require Asylon to be willing to back up such a claim. I would be surprised if they were. They've already benefited immensely from this turn of events (although having Allison as a new neighbor may come back to haunt them), so it's really not in their interest to sour relations with Astrum and Kabrinskia over a couple of regions that they were willing to sign away to Terran in the first place.

Any claim by ex-caerwyns would require the other local realms to acknowledge them. So really it all depends on if Caerwyn becomes a distant irrelevant memory to the remaining realms. Now I'm all the way over in the East, but from what I see most realms have moved on and Caerwyn is largely fogotten.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 20, 2012, 03:00:05 AM
The treaty under which a lot of those claims were laid out does not allow Caerwyn nobles to take claims like that. It also did not allow Itaulond to lay claim, as Caerwyn never ceded claim to them. The only way that any realm could make a claim to the land was by making up a new way to do it. At least insofar as any pre-existing document goes. Astrum claimed right of conquest, Terran claimed that the lands were never occupied by Caerwyn, so Astrum could not have been said to have conquered them, and claimed them as "they're close to us, so they're ours". Asylon never really tried to claim farther than the Via duchy by possession, and no one cared to dispute the claim to Via.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 20, 2012, 03:22:36 AM
Lets just be happy that Halleria doesn't make the policy regarding Asylons claims, the borders have been settled, we have been magnanimous in our efforts to assure peace in the region. Let also not forget that Asylon has about just as many nobles now as Astrum and a growing economy that is an emerging power in the Messociddens and a strong alliance with Terran. I would say that the image that Astrum has of Asylon being a mere backwater should change, your information is out of date . I know that your leaders have long looked down their noses at what I/we have done for Asylon. It is no matter, we have done it without your help almost every step of the way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on January 20, 2012, 03:33:49 AM
Things are rather becoming boring again. Hope we get another war to fight soon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 20, 2012, 03:47:25 AM
Lets just be happy that Halleria doesn't make the policy regarding Asylons claims, the borders have been settled, we have been magnanimous in our efforts to assure peace in the region. Let also not forget that Asylon has about just as many nobles now as Astrum and a growing economy that is an emerging power in the Messociddens and a strong alliance with Terran. I would say that the image that Astrum has of Asylon being a mere backwater should change, your information is out of date . I know that your leaders have long looked down their noses at what I/we have done for Asylon. It is no matter, we have done it without your help almost every step of the way.
Wee! Free-floating hostility!

Seriously, where the heck did that rant come from? I don't see as how anything I said there about Asylon was negative or disparaging.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on January 20, 2012, 03:54:18 AM
Wee! Free-floating hostility!

Seriously, where the heck did that rant come from? I don't see as how anything I said there about Asylon was negative or disparaging.

Small {insert here} syndrome maybe.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on January 20, 2012, 04:03:24 AM
Small {insert here} syndrome maybe.

What am I supposed to insert?

A passcode?

Why is it small?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 20, 2012, 04:19:42 AM
Wee! Free-floating hostility!

Seriously, where the heck did that rant come from? I don't see as how anything I said there about Asylon was negative or disparaging.

 Indirik, over the last few months you have been dropping the 'Future conflict between Asylon and Kabrinskia' mentions ever so often in your messages every time Asylon comes up or is mentioned in a Kabrinskia thread. I don't have any ill will towards Astrum/Kabrinskia nor any free floating hostility, I just find dealing with the leadership of Astrum to be a bit on the 'difficult' side. bah make this shorter because I am not actually angry about anything involving Astrum etc. Take it how you want.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 20, 2012, 04:29:58 AM
Indirik, over the last few months you have been dropping the 'Future conflict between Asylon and Kabrinskia' mentions ever so often in your messages every time Asylon comes up or is mentioned in a Kabrinskia thread. I don't have any ill will towards Astrum/Kabrinskia nor any free floating hostility, I just find dealing with the leadership of Astrum to be a bit on the arrogant side
I will freely admit that Brance tends to be arrogant and aloof in his dealings with people. Nor does he answer most letters very quickly.

Quote
Oh and I sent you an IG message a week or so ago and have yet to get a reply
Letter from Glaumring Apasurain (2 days, 21 hours ago)

Not quite a week.

Quote
Can I have the passcode to the cabal?
No. We're a very tight group.

Wait... Which cabal do you want to be a part of? There are quite a few.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 20, 2012, 04:32:42 AM
I will freely admit that Brance tends to be arrogant and aloof in his dealings with people. Nor does he answer most letters very quickly.
Letter from Glaumring Apasurain (2 days, 21 hours ago)

Not quite a week.
No. We're a very tight group.

Wait... Which cabal do you want to be a part of? There are quite a few.

Sorry, went and edited my last post because I came off a bit full on, anyways. You have explained your reasoning etc, I understand.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 03, 2012, 01:37:25 AM
Yawn


I'm bored.  Lets go pick a fight somewhere.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Graeth on February 03, 2012, 01:53:54 AM
Yawn


I'm bored.  Lets go pick a fight somewhere.

There should be a big one coming soon enough...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 03, 2012, 05:12:08 AM
Yawn


I'm bored.  Lets go pick a fight somewhere.

I thought you were the one afraid of the Zuma?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 03, 2012, 05:21:42 AM
Yawn


I'm bored.  Lets go pick a fight somewhere.

Coming from you, that's a terrifying threat.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 03, 2012, 05:34:48 AM
I thought you were the one afraid of the Zuma?

There is a difference to being afraid and picking a fight that you are unprepared for. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 03, 2012, 05:40:20 AM
There is a difference to being afraid and picking a fight that you are unprepared for.

Well, prepare then, prepare!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 03, 2012, 06:36:45 AM
Aye, prepare...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Jhaelen Irsei on February 03, 2012, 11:00:01 AM
Yawn


I'm bored.  Lets go pick a fight somewhere.

Don't you have a brand new realm to take care of? And a couple of not-so-happy-to-see-you neighbours?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 03, 2012, 02:53:01 PM
And a couple of not-so-happy-to-see-you neighbours?

What?  EVERYBODY loves Allison! 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 03, 2012, 03:02:12 PM
I'm bored.  Lets go pick a fight somewhere.
You know that's not how it works, dustole. We need to wait until someone stands up and  puts on the red shirt.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 03, 2012, 11:27:38 PM
You know that's not how it works, dustole. We need to wait until someone stands up and  puts on the red shirt.

However, we can print truckloads of red shirts and distribute them at cut prices on all trade routes, to completely corner the shirt market.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 04, 2012, 08:18:40 AM
Besides, at least half the time they weren't wearing a red shirt until dustole snuck up behind them and doused them in red paint...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 04, 2012, 08:59:54 AM
I have to wonder where the mooks fit into all this...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on February 04, 2012, 09:59:53 PM
Yawn


I'm bored.  Lets go pick a fight somewhere.

That's what happens for living in the boring north. In the Lurias fights pick you!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 04, 2012, 10:07:43 PM
You will never get bored in the south :) Actually can't get bored since there will always be a place to fight.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 07, 2012, 07:18:53 PM
You know why SA is boring and why the North is boring is because when someone tries to get something started. The horde that is the SA followers just jump on their back and destroys it before it even has a chance to take off.

If people where a little more willing to step out of their characters bubble the north and SA would be way more interesting.

Though I am working on something to liven up the North and SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 07, 2012, 07:56:02 PM
You know why SA is boring and why the North is boring is because when someone tries to get something started. The horde that is the SA followers just jump on their back and destroys it before it even has a chance to take off.

Start naming things that SA has crushed, where that thing did not willingly put on the red shirt and grab the pokey stick.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 07, 2012, 08:13:30 PM
He's talking about his own character who is trying to subvert Morek form the inside. It's a bold attempt... that is not likely to succeed in my opinion, but he is welcome to try. It does liven things up.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 07, 2012, 08:40:44 PM
"Morek crushes me every time I do something" is a lot different than "SA crushes everything".

Plenty of people inside SA have done all kinds of things to liven it up. Look at all the stuff that Allison has pulled. She keeps getting bounced up and down the hierarchy like crazy. She was even kicked out, then brought back in, and is an elder with a huge following. And look at Garrett. He challenged a lot of the preconceptions that many members of SA had. With a bit more careful handling, Garret could have accomplished some major changes in SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 07, 2012, 08:53:05 PM
You all  miss understand.  While yes it gets annoying sometimes when things are not working out they way you want but that's ok if a throw out enough plans and schemes one will eventually work haha.

No I was talking about what this north and SA has become. The North now is just a large Bloc of allied realms with as things stand no chance at any conflict, I just want to see the Bloc broken up a little and have some interesting conflicts.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 07, 2012, 08:58:27 PM
No I was talking about what this north and SA has become. The North now is just a large Bloc of allied realms with as things stand no chance at any conflict, I just want to see the Bloc broken up a little and have some interesting conflicts.

But we want to gobble up the south first!  :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 07, 2012, 11:13:00 PM
Tell you what, for a large gold donation we can send some Lurians north. If they can't get some wars going then no one can. Purchase this month and we can provide 2 ex queens for the price of one.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 08, 2012, 01:15:41 AM
Tell you what, for a large gold donation we can send some Lurians north. If they can't get some wars going then no one can. Purchase this month and we can provide 2 ex queens for the price of one.

I'd be willing to pay Lurians to taunt SA or the Zuma...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 08, 2012, 02:50:32 AM
I'd be willing to pay Lurians to taunt SA or the Zuma...

What do you mean. That is just what we do while waiting for which ever Lurian realm we are currently arguing with to reply. When we are REALLY bored we try to make it look like another Lurian realm has issues with the Zuma or SA. I think its just gotten to the point that both parties ignore us.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on February 08, 2012, 03:02:26 AM
Tell you what, for a large gold donation we can send some Lurians north. If they can't get some wars going then no one can. Purchase this month and we can provide 2 ex queens for the price of one.

Yet you're going to make him pay for shipping? What a terrible deal!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 08, 2012, 03:07:05 AM
Yet you're going to make him pay for shipping? What a terrible deal!

You think that is bad, I wasn't going to include their wardrobes either. Can you imagine the expense of fitting them out with the requisite gowns?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 08, 2012, 03:13:08 AM
Maybe SA and the 'Moot should fight it out for a round or two... 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 08, 2012, 03:18:41 AM
Maybe SA and the 'Moot should fight it out for a round or two...

I heard the Moot thinks SA are all girls and the Stars are just burning collections of gas. PS they said Allison is a crappy dresser.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on February 08, 2012, 04:41:03 AM
They also said her ass always looks fat in that dress.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 08, 2012, 05:03:12 AM
Really? I never knew Allison was fat! She sounds too active.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 08, 2012, 05:24:43 AM
Yes Allison always struck me more as the skinny bitch type. Maybe even attractive, except for that hole in her head...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 08, 2012, 05:38:28 AM
Yes Allison always struck me more as the skinny bitch type. Maybe even attractive, except for that hole in her head...

That is why the fat arse attracts so much attention.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 08, 2012, 05:41:33 AM
Well many medieval noble women were fat anyway. You don't see skinny ones that often in the portraits of the time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 08, 2012, 06:45:08 AM
Maybe SA and the 'Moot should fight it out for a round or two...

We handle Kabrinskia no problem.

If Astrum decides to get all up in our business, things may go south (literally and metaphorically) quite quickly. But Kabrinskia couldn't do much to us, especially now that Asylon isn't a total cluster!@#$, militarily speaking.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 08, 2012, 07:09:38 AM
We handle Kabrinskia no problem.

If Astrum decides to get all up in our business, things may go south (literally and metaphorically) quite quickly. But Kabrinskia couldn't do much to us, especially now that Asylon isn't a total cluster!@#$, militarily speaking.

Yeah, notice he said SA, not a single realm.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 08, 2012, 08:40:58 AM
We handle Kabrinskia no problem.

If Astrum decides to get all up in our business, things may go south (literally and metaphorically) quite quickly. But Kabrinskia couldn't do much to us, especially now that Asylon isn't a total cluster!@#$, militarily speaking.

Hey now, we are an up and coming cluster!@#$.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 08, 2012, 03:43:43 PM
Yeah, notice he said SA, not a single realm.

Oh I know.

I just don't see the Moot starting a fight with SA as an institution. It's more likely mass conversions will begin in the Moot than sudden religious hostilities.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 08, 2012, 06:02:45 PM
Oh I know.

I just don't see the Moot starting a fight with SA as an institution. It's more likely mass conversions will begin in the Moot than sudden religious hostilities.

Allison is bored. You should therefore regard yourselves as being in mortal danger by dint of proximity.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 09, 2012, 07:19:09 PM
7 v 4 would be silly, especially considering the 4 have another very huge 1 sitting on the other side.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 09, 2012, 11:37:22 PM
7 v 4 would be silly, especially considering the 4 have another very huge 1 sitting on the other side.

No 7 v 4 would simply be strategically astute.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 10, 2012, 10:27:49 AM
Not that it would matter, heh. SA will find any reason to fight someone.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 10, 2012, 01:55:38 PM
Not just any reason. We've had good reasons to fight all of our wars so far.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 10, 2012, 11:19:27 PM
So what is happening in the halls of Sanguis Astroism these days?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 11, 2012, 03:40:30 AM
I haven't heard anything in literally months.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on February 11, 2012, 04:07:07 AM
What? A schism, I hear? ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 11, 2012, 04:24:58 AM
Not just any reason. We've had good reasons to fight all of our wars so far.

Yes, good reasons, but some look suspiciously manufactured ;) Like Virovene, or sending in priests to Storms Keep to incite a revolt against Thulsoma, then blaming Thulsoma for the war.

Regardless, it's fun to be antagonistic towards SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 11, 2012, 04:25:13 AM
What? A schism, I hear? ;)
We already have a guild house for Occidental Astroism. Time to make a temple out of that! YEAH! Go to hell Oriental Astroism!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 11, 2012, 04:26:12 AM
Yes, good reasons, but some look suspiciously manufactured ;) Like Virovene, or sending in priests to Storms Keep to incite a revolt against Thulsoma, then blaming Thulsoma for the war.

Regardless, it's fun to be antagonistic towards SA.

Good reasons to convince followers of SA 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 11, 2012, 04:25:08 PM
We had other reasons for going after Thulsoma, notably that it was at one point one of our theocracies until Haruka moved in and suddenly proclaimed it to be the long lost Saxon homeland...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 11, 2012, 05:08:25 PM
yay for ripping real life religion into a BM religion...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 12, 2012, 03:06:45 AM
I cringed everytime I heard 'Saxon'... It really should have been dealt with by the Gm's it was just so horrid. If it was even a peaceful wonderful realm it should have been destroyed just for being 'saxon'.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 12, 2012, 03:55:34 AM
I cringed everytime I heard 'Saxon'... It really should have been dealt with by the Gm's it was just so horrid. If it was even a peaceful wonderful realm it should have been destroyed just for being 'saxon'.

What reason would the titans or Tom have to destroy it simply for having a "saxon"culture? (not GM's mind they fill a different role)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 12, 2012, 05:41:53 AM
If Haruka had the chance to start a realm instead of Thusoma she probably would have called it 'England'.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 12, 2012, 06:54:50 PM
If she does, then report it. Titans don't act on rumours of what someone would have done, if they had had the chance to do it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 15, 2012, 04:08:02 PM
Hmm... I wonder what will come of my Death Duel request with Creed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 15, 2012, 04:30:14 PM
It will likely be ignored.  :)   most death duels seem to go un answered.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 15, 2012, 05:29:34 PM
It would be really nice for the duel to occur. Would make for some great RP no matter what happened.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 15, 2012, 07:38:56 PM
The only people who offer death duels usually have maxed out trained characters, most people can't afford that or have young characters that wouldn't be able to last in a duel. I have not sen two high level trained duelists go at it before, but I have seen a lot of trained duelists challenge untrained.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Calanar on February 15, 2012, 07:49:55 PM
A few years ago when I was starting out, we still had duel to first blood. I saw a duel to the death on FEI between someone with a sword skill of 70-ish and another with about 65-ish. The 65 won. My oldest character lost his mentor to that duel.

There was also the Atamara Dueling Association. With my sword skill at like 20% I challenged people from 40%-70% to first blood... That was a loooong time ago though.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 15, 2012, 08:13:24 PM
The only people who offer death duels usually have maxed out trained characters, most people can't afford that or have young characters that wouldn't be able to last in a duel. I have not sen two high level trained duelists go at it before, but I have seen a lot of trained duelists challenge untrained.

Not necessarily true. My character has demanded a duel to the death, but I know for sure his swordfighting is lower if not much lower than his opponent. Depending upon the level of offense given, I believe a death duel should be demanded no matter whether or not your chances of winning are good or not. At least if we want to RP correctly.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 15, 2012, 08:23:54 PM
I definitely do not have maxed out skills. My character probably has somewhere around 40% swordsman skill, 50% at most.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 15, 2012, 09:56:15 PM
The only people who offer death duels usually have maxed out trained characters, most people can't afford that or have young characters that wouldn't be able to last in a duel. I have not sen two high level trained duelists go at it before, but I have seen a lot of trained duelists challenge untrained.

Sure, if they suck at RP. Duels in general go unanswered and you know why? Because a lot of people assume that only good sword fighters offer duels. Smarter players make use of that to their advantage by offering duels, knowing their is a 80% chance that the action will frighten off the other player.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 15, 2012, 10:08:05 PM
Sure, if they suck at RP. Duels in general go unanswered and you know why? Because a lot of people assume that only good sword fighters offer duels. Smarter players make use of that to their advantage by offering duels, knowing their is a 80% chance that the action will frighten off the other player.

That's a hell of a risky strategy. I can see it working fine right up until you mess with the wrong character. Best to limit the number of times you gamble on this.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 15, 2012, 10:13:20 PM
That's a hell of a risky strategy. I can see it working fine right up until you mess with the wrong character. Best to limit the number of times you gamble on this.

Then you die, then you make a new character. Not that big of deal. But so far, in the three years I've been doing this, I've never been called out, not once.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 15, 2012, 10:42:06 PM
Then you die, then you make a new character. Not that big of deal. But so far, in the three years I've been doing this, I've never been called out, not once.

I'll keep that in mind if one of my characters ever gets challenged to a death duel by a De-Legro  ;)

As for dying I'm not really a fan most of the time. I had a legendary hero once, which was pretty dramatic and cool from the RP perspective the way it went down, but I lost a character with enormous amounts of influence and power, and darn it if I wasn't done enjoying that yet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 15, 2012, 11:09:14 PM
I'll keep that in mind if one of my characters ever gets challenged to a death duel by a De-Legro  ;)

As for dying I'm not really a fan most of the time. I had a legendary hero once, which was pretty dramatic and cool from the RP perspective the way it went down, but I lost a character with enormous amounts of influence and power, and darn it if I wasn't done enjoying that yet.

Just remember that one of my characters actually IS decent with the blade :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 15, 2012, 11:51:53 PM
You just have to be a real man like Duregal. He challenged Carlos with 5% and lost. Nothing to be ashamed of and his honour was still intact.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 16, 2012, 12:06:58 AM
You just have to be a real man like Duregal. He challenged Carlos with 5% and lost. Nothing to be ashamed of and his honour was still intact.

Besides, he managed to survive so we can have a rematch.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 16, 2012, 01:43:27 AM
I have finally accomplished one of my goals become the most wanted man on a continent. It was not as hard as I thought . Guess you just got to make the right people anger at you. Now I just need to make it rise to the point where it is the biggest bounty ever.  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 16, 2012, 02:04:43 AM
I have finally accomplished one of my goals become the most wanted man on a continent. It was not as hard as I thought . Guess you just got to make the right people anger at you. Now I just need to make it rise to the point where it is the biggest bounty ever.  ;D

Doubt you will accomplish that in a short time. The biggest ever was 7000.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 16, 2012, 02:12:43 AM
Doubt you will accomplish that in a short time. The biggest ever was 7000.

Yeah I know but who knows maybe in the long term I can.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 16, 2012, 02:14:34 AM
I think once your bounty goes over 1000 people will start to get your head for coins :) It would be interesting to survive all the visitors.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 16, 2012, 02:25:05 AM
I think once your bounty goes over 1000 people will start to get your head for coins :) It would be interesting to survive all the visitors.

Would make for some awesome RP if I do.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 16, 2012, 02:45:54 AM
I have finally accomplished one of my goals become the most wanted man on a continent. It was not as hard as I thought . Guess you just got to make the right people anger at you. Now I just need to make it rise to the point where it is the biggest bounty ever.  ;D

Lets be reasonable. If we're talking about Dwilight here, you are not the most wanted man on the continent. I can name at least 3 characters who are hated more than yours, and mine is one of them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 16, 2012, 02:48:04 AM
Lets be reasonable. If we're talking about Dwilight here, you are not the most wanted man on the continent. I can name at least 3 characters who are hated more than yours, and mine is one of them.

Has Brom pissed off SA though? Without having all of SA after you, you hardly qualify as wanted on the continent at all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 16, 2012, 02:50:48 AM
Has Brom pissed off SA though? Without having all of SA after you, you hardly qualify as wanted on the continent at all.

I would say that "most wanted" is not a function purely of the number of those wanting you, but also of the "quantity, or quantitative amount of hate" that they have for you. If "most wanted" became a function of both of these, Brom easily qualifies in the top 5.

Also, Brom certainly fought against SA while in Caerwyn, even if he wasn't one of the major players. Brom has people that like him and people that hate him in nearly every cultural region on the continent.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 16, 2012, 03:37:44 AM
Lets be reasonable. If we're talking about Dwilight here, you are not the most wanted man on the continent. I can name at least 3 characters who are hated more than yours, and mine is one of them.

Um, what?

I'm sorry, your character is not "most wanted." "Most wanted" in the Lurias maybe. But I'm not sure you realize how isolated the Lurias are: they're just not really a very relevant part of the larger arena of Dwilight yet, not in the way that the Astroist realms, the Moot, or Aurvandil/Madina are.

I find it very interesting that the Dwilight University has become such a conduit for a Dwilight-wide culture and discussion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 16, 2012, 03:41:59 AM
I stated my character was the most wanted meaning highest bounty. I never claimed to be the most hated they are to different things. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 16, 2012, 04:07:00 AM
Not necessarily true. My character has demanded a duel to the death, but I know for sure his swordfighting is lower if not much lower than his opponent. Depending upon the level of offense given, I believe a death duel should be demanded no matter whether or not your chances of winning are good or not. At least if we want to RP correctly.

How much would you like bet on this assumption? Have you ever seen your opponent in a tournament or other indication of his skill? You might be surprised at just who is the better swordsman unless you have something more then speculation to back up those claims.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 16, 2012, 04:08:06 AM
Um, what?

I'm sorry, your character is not "most wanted." "Most wanted" in the Lurias maybe. But I'm not sure you realize how isolated the Lurias are: they're just not really a very relevant part of the larger arena of Dwilight yet, not in the way that the Astroist realms, the Moot, or Aurvandil/Madina are.

I find it very interesting that the Dwilight University has become such a conduit for a Dwilight-wide culture and discussion.

My character is NOT most wanted. I said he was on the list. He's also not been confined to the Lurias. He has been elsewhere, and enemies he has made have also moved to different locations. I'd say each cultural location gets to put at least one noble in the top 5, and in the top 10, would be very interesting to see personally. My character is top 2 in Luria, and possibly mentionable elsewhere, depending on who you ask. Then again, my enemies elsewhere may no longer be playing the game in Dwilight, i simply don't know, due to the way cultural isolation works.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 16, 2012, 04:08:53 AM
How much would you like bet on this assumption? Have you ever seen your opponent in a tournament or other indication of his skill? You might be surprised at just who is the better swordsman unless you have something more then speculation to back up those claims.

I can 100% guarantee that Brom does not have a greater skill than his opponent. Although it is possible they have the same skill.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 16, 2012, 04:10:18 AM
I can 100% guarantee that Brom does not have a greater skill than his opponent. Although it is possible they have the same skill.

Again you are assuming. Firstly you are assuming that because you use cavalry and didn't explicitly train the skill, that yours has never increased. Secondly you are assuming that both characters started at the same base skill level. You can't 100% guarantee it cause you have no idea what level your opponents skill started at or what gains he has made.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 16, 2012, 04:21:04 AM
Again you are assuming. Firstly you are assuming that because you use cavalry and didn't explicitly train the skill, that yours has never increased. Secondly you are assuming that both characters started at the same base skill level. You can't 100% guarantee it cause you have no idea what level your opponents skill started at or what gains he has made.

If I know what mine is, and its the lowest you can have then yes I do. But, perhaps I'm just wrong on how the code works. (But I do know how much Brom has even though he hasn't trained it).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 16, 2012, 04:28:07 AM
If I know what mine is, and its the lowest you can have then yes I do. But, perhaps I'm just wrong on how the code works. (But I do know how much Brom has even though he hasn't trained it).

Or perhaps you just don't know as much as you think you do.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 16, 2012, 05:27:26 AM
Or perhaps you just don't know as much as you think you do.

Seems to be the case quite often. But we're off topic yet again. At any rate, the point of the matter is that not everyone that requests duels to the death has a high swordfighting and that doing so solely for RP reasons is the best way to do so, even if one may lose or even has a high likelihood of losing. To not do so because "a character might die" just seems wrong in my opinion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 16, 2012, 05:29:40 AM
My character is NOT most wanted. I said he was on the list. He's also not been confined to the Lurias. He has been elsewhere, and enemies he has made have also moved to different locations. I'd say each cultural location gets to put at least one noble in the top 5, and in the top 10, would be very interesting to see personally. My character is top 2 in Luria, and possibly mentionable elsewhere, depending on who you ask. Then again, my enemies elsewhere may no longer be playing the game in Dwilight, i simply don't know, due to the way cultural isolation works.

Hmm....

I don't think anybody from the Moot realms would make the list. :/ We don't really make many enemies.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 16, 2012, 05:33:30 AM
Has Brom pissed off SA though? Without having all of SA after you, you hardly qualify as wanted on the continent at all.

We mostly don't even know who he is, let alone why he should be hated. The Lurias were almost entirely off of our radar until Solari recently decided to introduce SA to Solaria. I now eagerly anticipate us getting sucked into Lurian intrigues at some future time. Heck, with Madina undergoing a deathbed conversion at the moment it's suddenly within the realm of possibility that SA will permeate the entire continent, though I'm sure the south is unlikely to ever be as committed to it as the northern realms are.

Hmm....

I don't think anybody from the Moot realms would make the list. :/ We don't really make many enemies.

If anyone from the Moot's going to pull it off it will be Hireshmont.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 16, 2012, 05:38:51 AM
We mostly don't even know who he is, let alone why he should be hated. The Lurias were almost entirely off of our radar until Solari recently decided to introduce SA to Solaria. I now eagerly anticipate us getting sucked into Lurian intrigues at some future time. Heck, with Madina undergoing a deathbed conversion at the moment it's suddenly within the realm of possibility that SA will permeate the entire continent, though I'm sure the south is unlikely to ever be as committed to it as the northern realms are.

If anyone from the Moot's going to pull it off it will be Hireshmont.

If you want to get sucked into Lurian intrigues you better help Brom stay in the Lurias. Otherwise, you'll lose at least 50% of your intrigue right there. In fact, I'm not sure how much intrigue has happened in the Lurias that Brom didn't have at least some small finger in. (Very few players would actually know the # of stuff he's been involved in, so consider that if you want to disagree with this statement)

Anyway, yes it seems SA has finally managed to start reaching into all of Dwilight. Just means they'll implode ever earlier.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 16, 2012, 05:46:07 AM
If you want to get sucked into Lurian intrigues you better help Brom stay in the Lurias. Otherwise, you'll lose at least 50% of your intrigue right there.

You need to give us an IC reason first.

Anyway, yes it seems SA has finally managed to start reaching into all of Dwilight. Just means they'll implode ever earlier.

Perhaps, but won't that be fun if it happens? Even more fun the longer it takes.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 16, 2012, 05:47:34 AM
You need to give us an IC reason first.

Perhaps, but won't that be fun if it happens? Even more fun the longer it takes.

That can be arranged. I can also arrange the whole piss off SA in one go thing as well. Still working out the details. As far as I can tell, anything negative against the prophet would do the trick.

And absolutely yes.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 16, 2012, 06:21:30 AM
If anyone from the Moot's going to pull it off it will be Hireshmont.

But he's so charming....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 16, 2012, 07:06:56 AM
But he's so charming....

So is Brom...I honestly have no idea why he is hated...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 16, 2012, 07:17:11 AM
I have no idea why anyone would hate Allison.   ::)

I think her infamy is mostly limited to the SA arena though. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 16, 2012, 07:20:19 AM
I have no idea why anyone would hate Allison.   ::)

I think her infamy is mostly limited to the SA arena though.

Envy Dustole, it is just sad sad envy.

After all not every noble can have such a curvy rear end.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 16, 2012, 08:00:07 AM
Envy Dustole, it is just sad sad envy.

After all not every noble can have such a curvy rear end.

I think I just threw up a little in my mouth :o
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 16, 2012, 02:32:45 PM
I find it very interesting that the Dwilight University has become such a conduit for a Dwilight-wide culture and discussion.
I'm finding the University to be an extreme disappointment. As soon as I return to Libidizedd, I'm fairly certain I will leave it, and tear down the guildhouse.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 16, 2012, 02:56:42 PM
That can be arranged. I can also arrange the whole piss off SA in one go thing as well. Still working out the details. As far as I can tell, anything negative against the prophet would do the trick.
I think that you'd find it a bit harder to do that than you think it would be. Quite a few followers of SA have a very pragmatic view of things.  Especially when it comes to non-believers. We can recognize when we're being provoked n purpose. And we're quite used to people trying to manipulate us.

There are, of course, certain hotheads (Branthorpe :P ) who will instantly start foaming at the mouth at any opportunity.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 16, 2012, 03:13:48 PM
I don't know, I'm sure saying Mathurin had a bad hair day can incite a crusade.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 16, 2012, 03:19:03 PM
I'm finding the University to be an extreme disappointment. As soon as I return to Libidizedd, I'm fairly certain I will leave it, and tear down the guildhouse.

Why? It's mostly harmless, and it is probably the guild with the most widely disseminated membership.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 16, 2012, 04:06:06 PM
The latest round of ridiculous discussions about theocracies irritated me. But I can live with that. Knowing how the University was founded, I expected it to be nothing more than a ego-trip for Bowie. I wasn't disappointed. But, again, I can live with that.

I think what really killed it was this comment: " I would ask you to refrain your butt kissing to the halls of SA if you could." This was a comment from a council member in one realm. The guild elders took no action whatsoever to censure or curb such absolutely ridiculous behavior. That comment, and the exchanges over the duel challenges which followed, and the way the whole thing is handled really kills it for me. The fact that the guild lets such things occur, and doesn't do anything about it. Seriously? The general of a realm tells the duke of another realm to stop kissing ass, then says he won't duel over it because there's no personal gain in it for him, and no one in the guild even blinks? For me, that just kills the entire atmosphere of the guild, and the game. It's the same kind of crap that made me give up leading SA, and dropping all the way down to an aspirant rank.

If I hadn't already been traveling away from Libidizedd when the whole thing started, I probably would have already left and torn down the guildhouse. I just don't have any patience for that kind of crap. It's not just that people do it, but that everyone else let's them get away with it. People that act like that should be kicked out and ostracized.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 16, 2012, 04:22:01 PM
The latest round of ridiculous discussions about theocracies irritated me. But I can live with that. Knowing how the University was founded, I expected it to be nothing more than a ego-trip for Bowie. I wasn't disappointed. But, again, I can live with that.

I think what really killed it was this comment: " I would ask you to refrain your butt kissing to the halls of SA if you could." This was a comment from a council member in one realm. The guild elders took no action whatsoever to censure or curb such absolutely ridiculous behavior. That comment, and the exchanges over the duel challenges which followed, and the way the whole thing is handled really kills it for me. The fact that the guild lets such things occur, and doesn't do anything about it. Seriously? The general of a realm tells the duke of another realm to stop kissing ass, then says he won't duel over it because there's no personal gain in it for him, and no one in the guild even blinks? For me, that just kills the entire atmosphere of the guild, and the game. It's the same kind of crap that made me give up leading SA, and dropping all the way down to an aspirant rank.

If I hadn't already been traveling away from Libidizedd when the whole thing started, I probably would have already left and torn down the guildhouse. I just don't have any patience for that kind of crap. It's not just that people do it, but that everyone else let's them get away with it. People that act like that should be kicked out and ostracized.

Well, people did blink, there were a few duel challenges. I don't think anyone would be extremely unhappy to see the duels occur. Now, if the recipient is too much of a coward to accept the challenges.....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 16, 2012, 04:29:00 PM
Well, people did blink, there were a few duel challenges. I don't think anyone would be extremely unhappy to see the duels occur. Now, if the recipient is too much of a coward to accept the challenges.....


Well before you all go calling me a coward I did accept one death duel in private and am waiting for a response. So don't go around calling people cowards if you dont know all the facts.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 16, 2012, 04:37:00 PM
Well before you all go calling me a coward I did accept one death duel in private and am waiting for a response. So don't go around calling people cowards if you dont know all the facts.

Sorry, I meant the comment as a semi-IC taunt. I have no problem with you accepting or not the challenges. I've refused challenges before myself (and people can legitimately call that character a coward).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 16, 2012, 04:40:34 PM
Sorry, I meant the comment as a semi-IC taunt. I have no problem with you accepting or not the challenges. I've refused challenges before myself (and people can legitimately call that character a coward).

Well My character sword skill is pretty high. One of the people that challenged me to the death duel was my own cousin in real life. lol
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 16, 2012, 04:40:51 PM
The person making these statements was challenged by a couple people to death duels. He replied that he wouldn't accept the challenges, regardless of the insults and cries of cowardice, unless he could get some personal gain out of it. Something like "unless I can personally profit from killing you" or something like that. The fact that the leaders of the guild did not take issue with this is unacceptable to me. There were just a few calls from some members to "take it to personal messages". Nothing like "It is unacceptable for such a prestigious noble, a council member no less, to display such ignoble behavior, and it will not be tolerated in the University." Which, to me, is the minimum that the guild should do.

This is not "mostly harmless". I consider this type of playing to be detrimental to the game atmosphere. It is behavior that should not be allowed out of any noble, let alone the council member of a realm. To insult a foreign duke in such a manner and refuse to accept the resulting multiple duel challenges. The fact that the Dwilight University is such a widespread, multi-realm guild only makes it worse. The improper behavior is therefore more widespread.

It is up to the players to uphold the atmosphere of the game. Since the DU appears to me to be detrimental to the atmosphere of the game, and personally unacceptable to Brance, I'm going to remove it from Libidizedd. Brance hasn't decided yet if he will ban it from Astrum completely. It will be a few weeks until I can return to Libidizedd to do it, though. We'll see if the DU manages to redeem itself before then.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 16, 2012, 04:46:11 PM
Well My character sword skill is pretty high. One of the people that challenged me to the death duel was my own cousin in real life. lol

Was? I had no idea you took BM so seriously.....  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 16, 2012, 04:49:56 PM
The person making these statements was challenged by a couple people to death duels. He replied that he wouldn't accept the challenges, regardless of the insults and cries of cowardice, unless he could get some personal gain out of it. Something like "unless I can personally profit from killing you" or something like that. The fact that the leaders of the guild did not take issue with this is unacceptable to me. There were just a few calls from some members to "take it to personal messages". Nothing like "It is unacceptable for such a prestigious noble, a council member no less, to display such ignoble behavior, and it will not be tolerated in the University." Which, to me, is the minimum that the guild should do.

This is not "mostly harmless". I consider this type of playing to be detrimental to the game atmosphere. It is behavior that should not be allowed out of any noble, let alone the council member of a realm. To insult a foreign duke in such a manner and refuse to accept the resulting multiple duel challenges. The fact that the Dwilight University is such a widespread, multi-realm guild only makes it worse. The improper behavior is therefore more widespread.

It is up to the players to uphold the atmosphere of the game. Since the DU appears to me to be detrimental to the atmosphere of the game, and personally unacceptable to Brance, I'm going to remove it from Libidizedd. Brance hasn't decided yet if he will ban it from Astrum completely. It will be a few weeks until I can return to Libidizedd to do it, though. We'll see if the DU manages to redeem itself before then.

First off some of the death duel challenges made no since and would not happen in real life I got one from  a marshal that I have never even spoke to and the fact is I cant duel every single person that wanted to death duel me I would have to go all over the continent.

Indirik like I stated I did accept a death duel with the  main person I insulted. I am still waiting for a response from him.

   
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 16, 2012, 04:50:41 PM
Was? I had no idea you took BM so seriously.....  ;)

lol still is.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 16, 2012, 04:52:05 PM
This is not "mostly harmless". I consider this type of playing to be detrimental to the game atmosphere. It is behavior that should not be allowed out of any noble, let alone the council member of a realm. To insult a foreign duke in such a manner and refuse to accept the resulting multiple duel challenges. The fact that the Dwilight University is such a widespread, multi-realm guild only makes it worse. The improper behavior is therefore more widespread.

Hum, I see your point. Pierre was pretty happy to see the duel challenge, and though it was warranted. His main concern was to stop the improper behaviour within the University ("Have your duel, but have it outside.")

I didn't see it as a role of the DU to monitor who accepts duel challenges and who doesn't among students. I do try to maintain a separation between who you are in the "real" world and who you are in the University. This is a courtyard brawl between students that professors should not get embroiled in it to decide who is right and who isn't. But it is true that that's not very medieval: a Duke is a Duke, and should be treated as such everywhere.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 16, 2012, 04:55:25 PM
Well before you all go calling me a coward I did accept one death duel in private and am waiting for a response. So don't go around calling people cowards if you dont know all the facts.
Wait...


And you're criticizing people for not knowing all the facts? How did you expect them to know that you really did accept one duel? Of course they're calling you a coward. And rightly so. If you expect people to know "all the facts", then you had best make the effort to tell them the facts, or don't be surprised when they don't.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 16, 2012, 04:59:57 PM
Wait...

  • The insult was public.
  • The multiple challenges were public.
  • The multiple refusals were public.
  • The single acceptance was private.

And you're criticizing people for not knowing all the facts? How did you expect them to know that you really did accept one duel? Of course they're calling you a coward. And rightly so. If you expect people to know "all the facts", then you had best make the effort to tell them the facts, or don't be surprised when they don't.

I said in public I would duel him if I received his city If I won  not my fault if you did not read that. I am still waiting for him to answer. I sent him a another letter to him last night to see if he is willing to accept.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 16, 2012, 05:02:03 PM
I didn't see it as a role of the DU to monitor who accepts duel challenges and who doesn't among students.
It is the role of the Elders of the guild to maintain decorum and civility among their members.

Quote
I do try to maintain a separation between who you are in the "real" world and who you are in the University. This is a courtyard brawl between students that professors should not get embroiled in it to decide who is right and who isn't.
In a way, I agree. They should not step in and say determine who is the right and who the wrong. But they *should* step in and say "This behavior is unacceptable in the University." The Elders need to step in and stop the brawl, and make it clear that brawling isn't allowed.

Quote
But it is true that that's not very medieval: a Duke is a Duke, and should be treated as such everywhere.
I agree.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 16, 2012, 05:05:26 PM
I said in public I would duel him if I received his city If I won. not my fault if you did not read that
I did read that. It changes nothing. You refused a duel of honor. A duel for profit is not a duel of honor. I would consider this extremely ignoble behavior. After such a display as Creed exhibited in the University, I would almost certainly demand that such a person be banned from Astrum.

The point still remains: all the insults, challenges, and refusals were public. So far as anyone knows, that's all that's happened.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 16, 2012, 05:07:03 PM
I did read that. It changes nothing. You refused a duel of honor. A duel for profit is not a duel of honor. I would consider this extremely ignoble behavior. After such a display as Creed exhibited in the University, I would almost certainly demand that such a person be banned from Astrum.

The point still remains: all the insults, challenges, and refusals were public. So far as anyone knows, that's all that's happened.

A duel for honor yes but my honor was never insulted. So why should I duel to the death for nothing? Also the way I play my character is my choice and who are you to tell me how to play? 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 16, 2012, 05:13:04 PM
A duel for honor yes but my honor was never insulted. So why should I duel to the death for nothing?

You insulted a nobleman. That nobleman demanded a duel. By refusing to duel, yet refusing to apologize, you imply that your words mean nothing. By accepting the duel, you would gain recognition: people would know that when you insult someone, you really mean it, and are ready to back your words with action. By refusing to duel, people can safely throw you to the bin of history. They know you bark but won't bite.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 16, 2012, 05:29:35 PM
You insulted someone else. You know that you insulted someone else, and did it specifically because it was insulting. And they responded with a duel challenge. They felt that it was such a horrible insult that they decided it was worth putting their life on the line to prove it. Multiple people did so. At least one of the ones who challenged was even of equivalent station: A duke and a general. So there's no grounds for refusal based on social station. (i.e. a 17 yr old nobody challenging a king.)  You claim that your character is an expert swordsman, so there's no grounds for refusal based on a swordmaster challenging someone who doesn't know which end of the sword has the pointy bits.

Why should Creed duel? Because if he doesn't, then everyone in the University will consider him a coward. Since there's no obvious reason why he shouldn't duel after having done what he did, they have no other choice.

So, yeah, you don't have to duel. That's your choice. I'm just telling you what will happen if you don't. Your character will forever after be know to everyone in the Dwilight University as someone ignorant, loudmouthed coward.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 16, 2012, 05:36:12 PM
You insulted someone else. You know that you insulted someone else, and did it specifically because it was insulting. And they responded with a duel challenge. They felt that it was such a horrible insult that they decided it was worth putting their life on the line to prove it. Multiple people did so. At least one of the ones who challenged was even of equivalent station: A duke and a general. So there's no grounds for refusal based on social station. (i.e. a 17 yr old nobody challenging a king.)  You claim that your character is an expert swordsman, so there's no grounds for refusal based on a swordmaster challenging someone who doesn't know which end of the sword has the pointy bits.

Why should Creed duel? Because if he doesn't, then everyone in the University will consider him a coward. Since there's no obvious reason why he shouldn't duel after having done what he did, they have no other choice.

So, yeah, you don't have to duel. That's your choice. I'm just telling you what will happen if you don't. Your character will forever after be know to everyone in the Dwilight University as someone ignorant, loudmouthed coward.

Well I can see your point now that you put it that way. Well I accepted his challenge so it is up to Branthorpe to accept it or not. If I hurt the game for you I am sorry was never my intention.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on February 16, 2012, 05:54:19 PM
Yeah...even if Branthorpe doesn't accept, you're still the one that will be seen as a coward.

"Man, you can't drive for !@#$! And your girlfriend's ugly!"

"Yeah? Let's race then!"

"Okay, but if I win, I get your house."

".....what?"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 16, 2012, 06:06:37 PM
You could always report it as an SMA issue if you feel that strongly about it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 16, 2012, 06:10:20 PM
Yeah...even if Branthorpe doesn't accept, you're still the one that will be seen as a coward.



Dont know how My character will been seen as the coward if I accept the duel and he chooses not to go through with it but whatever not really a big deal.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 16, 2012, 08:09:12 PM
Well I can see your point now that you put it that way. Well I accepted his challenge so it is up to Branthorpe to accept it or not. If I hurt the game for you I am sorry was never my intention.
Thank you for your change of heart.

To be clear, I'm not mad at you, or your character. You are correct in that you are allowed to play your character however you want. I wasn't trying to state that your character's actions alone soured me on the whole DU. One character acting in such a manner is no big deal. There are character with varying degrees of honor, situational ethics, ambition and sense of justice, etc. If we all thought the same, then life would be boring.

Rather, my issue with the whole situation is the way the group handled it. Just about everyone just shrugged it off. "Meh, whatever... Just take it outside." That is the situation that I really don't see as acceptable behavior from the group at large. But,hey, maybe the attitude displayed by Creed is shared by all the elders in the University. In which this is an organization Brance doesn't want to be associated with.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 16, 2012, 08:14:14 PM
You could always report it as an SMA issue if you feel that strongly about it.
That is an option, yes. But I don't have an issue with the way Creed handled it. As a player I think it's an interesting way to take it. My character finds it despicable. But then, Brance is often accused of having a stick up his ass. I don't think that Creed's actions deserve an SMA report.

What I find most disturbing is the casual acceptance of it, and even some support for it, among the entire guild. Even if I wasn't pretty sure the answer would come back as "Handle it IC", how would you report an entire guild as an SMA violation?  ??? So, I'm going to handle it IC. If Vellos hadn't brought up the DU, I wouldn't even be discussing it here.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 16, 2012, 08:50:14 PM
"Meh, whatever... Just take it outside."

I think you're a bit harsh here. People were insulted. They responded by issuing duel challenges. The response of the Elders was, really, "Go and duel". It is an appropriate way to deal with insults.

If Branthorpe had not issued a duel challenge and asked for the student to be expelled, my reaction could have been different.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 16, 2012, 09:52:40 PM
I think you're a bit harsh here. People were insulted. They responded by issuing duel challenges.

The response of the Elders was, really, "Go and duel". It is an appropriate way to deal with insults.
No, that's not the response of the Elders at all. There are three Elders in Dwilight University:

So, one of three elders (Bowie) ignored it, one (Pierre) said "sure, duel, but do it elsewhere", and the third (Moritz) just wished Creed had been more inventive and poetic in insulting Branthorpe, since "poetic insults are felt much more deeply then direct base attacks." (direct quote) Not a single one criticized Creed for his direct insult on a prestigious duke.

In any case, issuing the challenge in the DU channel was absolutely proper, because that's the channel in which the insult was given.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 16, 2012, 09:59:18 PM
Really? He called the prophet a student? He must be out of his mind. A crusade against him will teach him a lesson.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 16, 2012, 10:01:05 PM
Really? He called the prophet a student? He must be out of his mind. A crusade against him will teach him a lesson.

His title is "student" within the Dwilight University. Depending upon how the DU is RP'ed this could be either extremely appropriate, or simply insulting. I tend towards the appropriate side of the spectrum. Because as was brought up, if you're a non-believer "who cares about this prophet guy anyway">
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 16, 2012, 10:05:42 PM
And since there are over 100 nobles believing the stars, it will be insulting to them. It would be interesting to see how the prophet will react. Too bad indirik will close down the only university guildhouse in Astrum.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 16, 2012, 10:08:39 PM
Really? He called the prophet a student? He must be out of his mind. A crusade against him will teach him a lesson.

Quote from: Moritz Von Igelfeld
Your religious mantra concerning the prophet does nothing to advance learning and by singling out a particular student for special praise you limit that students ability to engage in the conversation as an equal.

As if the Holy Prophet of Sanguis Astroism could debate theology as an equal with, oh, anyone. The whole tone and content of Moritz's was actually a rather clever insult.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 16, 2012, 10:19:57 PM
  • Moritz - His response was in support of Creed, but wished Creed had put a bit more effort into his rebuke. Then he called the Holy Prophet of Sanguis Astroism, who is probably the most powerful man in the entire damn world, a mere "student", told Branthorpe to stop kissing ass (paraphrased), and called Branthorpe petty, cowardly, and murderous (not paraphrased) for issuing the challenge.

Quote
Regarding your response to Sir Creed, what has death ever solved? Do you feel so degraded by his words that you now must never see his face again? Are you truly so petty? Forgiveness is a far better course to take and shows more courage than your murderous intentions. Trust me, if he foolishly puts his pen to paper again without first putting his words to thought, his stay in these halls will be in jeopardy.

Sounds pretty paraphrased to me....

But, I see Brance's point. But I don't think your point is so strong as to warrant your statement "The Dwilight University is damaging BM's atmosphere" (yes, I can paraphrase too). But if you were to raise it IC, I'd see Brance's point.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 16, 2012, 10:30:31 PM
Oh, it will be handled IC, one way or another.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 16, 2012, 10:48:03 PM
Sounds pretty paraphrased to me....

But, I see Brance's point. But I don't think your point is so strong as to warrant your statement "The Dwilight University is damaging BM's atmosphere" (yes, I can paraphrase too). But if you were to raise it IC, I'd see Brance's point.

If such attitudes were the exception, it would not be damaging. However they aren't, and to be honest it is up to the more knowledgeable and long term players to try and correct this attitude. "Death solving nothing" is a pretty modern concept, but it is all too common throughout BM and Dwilight.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 17, 2012, 12:16:04 AM
As if the Holy Prophet of Sanguis Astroism could debate theology as an equal with, oh, anyone. The whole tone and content of Moritz's was actually a rather clever insult.

FWIW, as a devoted vulgarity-reporter myself, I can testify that at least one other person has been clicking the vulgarity button quite a bit on Dwilight University messages recently.

IG, IC processes are available, and do seem to be getting some use.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 17, 2012, 12:28:41 AM
I've tried once or twice, but someone has been beating me to it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on February 17, 2012, 12:45:43 AM
Just several days new to the University, the surge of SMA inappropriate letters shocked me quite a bit. I guess I've become spoiled being in contact with just Terran/Véinsørmoot for so long. I also attempted the vulgarity button on several of those messages only to be beaten to it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on February 17, 2012, 12:55:11 AM
Perhaps if the University truly lacks in living up to everything it really could be (and I think it has in some ways, the wiki stuff and essays, etc are pretty neat) it is time that some competing Universities were founded?

Especially for Sanguis Astroism its a golden opportunity to get some cool stuff going. Weren't most medieval universities very much Church run organizations anyways? At least founded and funded by them?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 17, 2012, 02:17:57 AM
Perhaps if the University truly lacks in living up to everything it really could be (and I think it has in some ways, the wiki stuff and essays, etc are pretty neat) it is time that some competing Universities were founded?

Especially for Sanguis Astroism its a golden opportunity to get some cool stuff going. Weren't most medieval universities very much Church run organizations anyways? At least founded and funded by them?

I've many times thought a Seminary of sorts would be a neat thing for SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ironsides on February 17, 2012, 04:29:45 AM
What's wrong with dueling over insults? I don't get the issue here. Then again, like the incident in the University, I've come late to this discussion....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 17, 2012, 04:33:04 AM
I've many times thought a Seminary of sorts would be a neat thing for SA.

Does SA really need more propaganda/indoctrination?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 17, 2012, 04:35:37 AM
Perhaps if the University truly lacks in living up to everything it really could be (and I think it has in some ways, the wiki stuff and essays, etc are pretty neat) it is time that some competing Universities were founded?
If only there were 96 hours in a day... I already have my finger in more pies than I can handle.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 17, 2012, 04:36:18 AM
Does SA really need more propaganda/indoctrination?
Yes.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 17, 2012, 04:48:56 AM
Yes.

Well as long as we're clear.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 17, 2012, 04:59:30 AM
Not everyone loves SA, thus yes, SA needs more propaganda, or more successful propaganda, or some cruise missiles/unmanned drones.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 17, 2012, 05:01:20 AM
Not everyone loves SA, thus yes, SA needs more propaganda, or more successful propaganda, or some cruise missiles/unmanned drones.

"So Sayeth we all"

"So Sayeth we all," the congregation repeats...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on February 17, 2012, 06:16:28 AM
As if the Holy Prophet of Sanguis Astroism could debate theology as an equal with, oh, anyone. The whole tone and content of Moritz's was actually a rather clever insult.

Not for an Astroist, but for non-Astroists his word has little spiritual authority.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on February 17, 2012, 06:18:14 AM
Not for an Astroist, but for non-Astroists his word has little spiritual authority.

Think of him like the Pope. Even if you're Mormon or Jewish or (insert non-Catholic here), you gotta give the leader of a billion people the respect he's due.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 17, 2012, 06:20:13 AM
Think of him like the Pope. Even if you're Mormon or Jewish or (insert non-Catholic here), you gotta give the leader of a billion people the respect he's due.

Respect, and deference to his ideas are two vastly different things.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on February 17, 2012, 06:21:18 AM
Respect, and deference to his ideas are two vastly different things.

Calling the Pope a "student" wouldn't go over very well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on February 17, 2012, 06:29:48 AM
Calling the Pope a "student" wouldn't go over very well.

Don't know about the context in the DU, nor I was arguing about his political power. It would be foolish to make enemies with such a powerful man, unless you really profited from such. The point I was making is that he can talk about theology with superiority to any Astroist, but the same does not applies to non-astroists. The Pope cannot hope to have his word followed with more reverence by a Jew than any random Rabbi. The Jew might possibly consider him an enlightened person, he could fear his power, but ultimately he thinks the Pope is wrong and disagrees on at least a few things.

So, yes, the Prophet of Sanguis Astroism could discuss theology in the same level of many people. Specially if it was abstract non-SA specific theology. Which I don't know if it is the case, of course, but assume it since it's the DU and not the Church of SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 17, 2012, 06:38:55 AM
Are you guys forgetting that Moritz is also a prophet of his own religion?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 17, 2012, 06:40:15 AM
Are you guys forgetting that Moritz is also a prophet of his own religion?

Perfect. We can shove a stick up in his... and show him who is the real prophet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 17, 2012, 06:48:37 AM
You all miss the point. In character the prophet of the continents largest, most powerful religion is likely going to have a massive reason to believe they have superior theological knowledge. Would people from other religions agree? Probably not but by the same token he, and the religion he heads aren't going to think that anyone can argue theology on a equal footing, which was the point of the original post. To call such a figure a mere "student" in term of theology is a massive insult to the Prophet and the religion in general. This isn't the modern age remember, it is unlikely that most religions consider others to have any validity, or respect the knowledge of their priests.

Are you guys forgetting that Moritz is also a prophet of his own religion?

Yup the smalles religion on the island by all metrics, fewest temples, fewest noble followers, fewest peasant followers. Chances are it barely even registers on the radar of greater SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on February 17, 2012, 07:20:22 AM
You all miss the point. In character the prophet of the continents largest, most powerful religion is likely going to have a massive reason to believe they have superior theological knowledge. Would people from other religions agree? Probably not but by the same token he, and the religion he heads aren't going to think that anyone can argue theology on a equal footing, which was the point of the original post. To call such a figure a mere "student" in term of theology is a massive insult to the Prophet and the religion in general. This isn't the modern age remember, it is unlikely that most religions consider others to have any validity, or respect the knowledge of their priests.

The whole Dwilight University and its foundations are pretty modern themselves. The institution promotes such kind of values, so it would be expected that in the institution other's points of view would be, if not considered, at least respected. It may be not very medieval, but nor is the guild. Who would have thought about a theology department in the middle ages with Catholics, Orthodox, Jews and Muslims for example? It would be madness at least, or deep heresy at worst.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 17, 2012, 07:26:58 AM
The whole Dwilight University and its foundations are pretty modern themselves. The institution promotes such kind of values, so it would be expected that in the institution other's points of view would be, if not considered, at least respected. It may be not very medieval, but nor is the guild. Who would have thought about a theology department in the middle ages with Catholics, Orthodox, Jews and Muslims for example? It would be madness at least, or deep heresy at worst.

That is like saying modern scientist all respect each others views and opinions.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 17, 2012, 07:41:00 AM
It would be madness at least, or deep heresy at worst.

Or, it would be some sections of Abbasid Baghdad or parts of Moorish Spain.

Regarding the Prophet and cross-religious boundaries... I guess nobody here has done much interfaith work IRL? Because if you have, you know that if two faiths are both committed to the idea that their teachings relate to the "Real, Ultimate Nature of Things" then they will take a powerful interest in each others' teachings, and tend to regard each others' highest figures as intellectual authorities (though not necessarily right for that). Consider that many Christian thinkers cited Avicenna, and much Ottoman law cited cases from Orthodox ecumenical rules as authoritative.

The idea that, in a medieval setting, members of one faith would just say that the leader of another faith is bogus without anything to say or without a perspective on the Real, Ultimate Nature of Things is not very tenable, unless there is a strong political motivation to make such a claim. But from a purely intellectual position, Medieval Christian thinkers may have thought their Muslim counterparts were implicitly worshipping demons, but they at least thought they were worshipping very smart demons with lots of interesting knowledge, a la Faustus.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on February 17, 2012, 08:17:49 AM
I've many times thought a Seminary of sorts would be a neat thing for SA.

Or Maroccidental U.  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 17, 2012, 09:20:56 AM
Calling the Pope a "student" wouldn't go over very well.

Unless the Pope decided to enroll in a University, and requested to be a student, which is what Mathurin did.

Did you notice how the position of Dean of Theology is vacant? Did you notice how extremely easy it is to be given a Dean position? You basically only have to write something with some original idea in it. That's pretty much it. Mathurin would get it the blink of the eye if he only tried. Branthorpe could get it. Anyone could get it, really.

(Though probably not Creed at this point.....)

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 17, 2012, 11:08:42 AM
Or, it would be some sections of Abbasid Baghdad or parts of Moorish Spain.

Regarding the Prophet and cross-religious boundaries... I guess nobody here has done much interfaith work IRL? Because if you have, you know that if two faiths are both committed to the idea that their teachings relate to the "Real, Ultimate Nature of Things" then they will take a powerful interest in each others' teachings, and tend to regard each others' highest figures as intellectual authorities (though not necessarily right for that). Consider that many Christian thinkers cited Avicenna, and much Ottoman law cited cases from Orthodox ecumenical rules as authoritative.

The idea that, in a medieval setting, members of one faith would just say that the leader of another faith is bogus without anything to say or without a perspective on the Real, Ultimate Nature of Things is not very tenable, unless there is a strong political motivation to make such a claim. But from a purely intellectual position, Medieval Christian thinkers may have thought their Muslim counterparts were implicitly worshipping demons, but they at least thought they were worshipping very smart demons with lots of interesting knowledge, a la Faustus.


Which was the whole point. There is a big difference between thinking another religion has aspects or teachings that are worthwhile as compared to thinking another religion is producing theology the equal of your own faith and prophets who are the equally as valid as your own religious leaders.

I think of it in a similar way to how Christians revere the Jewish prophets, but place Jesus above them all, or how the Muslims believe Jesus was a messenger of god while rejecting the claims of his divinity and in turn place Muhammad above him.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 17, 2012, 04:59:47 PM
Those are all Abrahamic faiths that derive from a single common theology, that of Judaism. As such, they have a great deal in common. Both Christianity and Judaism, for example, teach the Old Testament. Possibly Islam as well, though I'm not sure about that - after all, Islam teaches that Muhammad was simply the last in a long line of Prophets that includes Jesus and the Old Testament Prophets. I think that your argument would not fare as well were you to use Christianity and Hinduism, or Judaism and Buddhism.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 17, 2012, 06:47:07 PM
Those are all Abrahamic faiths that derive from a single common theology, that of Judaism. As such, they have a great deal in common. Both Christianity and Judaism, for example, teach the Old Testament. Possibly Islam as well, though I'm not sure about that - after all, Islam teaches that Muhammad was simply the last in a long line of Prophets that includes Jesus and the Old Testament Prophets. I think that your argument would not fare as well were you to use Christianity and Hinduism, or Judaism and Buddhism.

Yeah, Christians and Jews really hate the Dalai Lama.

But, in all seriousness, looking at the Mughals and other Indian states suggests that (or the Manichees or Nestorians earlier), in at least some cases, cross-religious spiritual authority of some kind was recognized.

Again, for a Medieval thinker, spiritual discussion is not relativistic as it is for us. We believe, or most of us do, that the most direct method to objectively debatable reality is probably the scientific method. Medievals, mostly (a few interesting dissenters among Christian heretics and some Muslim philosophers come to mind as counter-examples) thought that spiritual authority was a direct and objective thing. It's like if two scientists with radically different approaches to, say, evolution, just said, "Well, your model can be right for you, mine is right for me; ultimately, who's to say?" No, those people have a common idea of a methodology for debate and argument.

Similar things existed for Medieval philosophy and theology; common understandings of debate (such as the need for classical precedent in much of the Christian and Muslim intellectual world). They wouldn't say, "Don't bring your religion in here!" they would say, "Your religion is false, for we all know that Plato has said XYZ, which you erroneously interpret..." Now, of course, we don't have Plato. But the general idea should remain: that our characters, being Medieval, will not regard religion as a purely subjective matter, or something without recourse to objective mediation.

And I have often wondered why Mathurin doesn't take the Dean of Theology position.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 17, 2012, 07:17:15 PM
Unless the Pope decided to enroll in a University, and requested to be a student, which is what Mathurin did.
This point of view is something I find at odds with the station of many of the members of the University. Many of the most prominent "students" in the university would not "enroll as students". Nobles the stature of foreign rulers, dukes, heads of prestigious religions, would not become average, ordinary students. They would certainly be brought into the university as respected benefactors, supporters, honored professors, etc. The university would be falling all over itself to bestow any number of honorary degrees on someone with the stature of Mathurin. You wouldn't require him to write the equivalent of a term paper in order to be recognized as a Dean of Theology. And, to be fair, the same could be said for the prophet of Verdis Elementum, or whatever other religion has managed to survive and spread across a significant portion of the island.

I suppose this is an artifact of the guild system, though. Or perhaps the way the guild is run. But when you talk about "we're all equal here", I think you have to remember that some people are more equal than others.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Carna on February 17, 2012, 10:45:24 PM
This point of view is something I find at odds with the station of many of the members of the University. Many of the most prominent "students" in the university would not "enroll as students". Nobles the stature of foreign rulers, dukes, heads of prestigious religions, would not become average, ordinary students. They would certainly be brought into the university as respected benefactors, supporters, honored professors, etc. The university would be falling all over itself to bestow any number of honorary degrees on someone with the stature of Mathurin. You wouldn't require him to write the equivalent of a term paper in order to be recognized as a Dean of Theology. And, to be fair, the same could be said for the prophet of Verdis Elementum, or whatever other religion has managed to survive and spread across a significant portion of the island.

I suppose this is an artifact of the guild system, though. Or perhaps the way the guild is run. But when you talk about "we're all equal here", I think you have to remember that some people are more equal than others.

I rarely agree with Tim, but I figure I can make an exception. Reminds me of an old "help fairness" helpfile in a game I used to play. I've little idea about the academy in question and its basis, but thinking about old-day universities the chain of events Tim went through fits right in. Considering the atmosphere, any academy should be overjoyed and honoured to have leaders of the .001% in their faculty. its prestigious. Sounds like there's fun to be had though (",)

Finn.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 17, 2012, 11:30:21 PM
Yeah, Christians and Jews really hate the Dalai Lama.

But, in all seriousness, looking at the Mughals and other Indian states suggests that (or the Manichees or Nestorians earlier), in at least some cases, cross-religious spiritual authority of some kind was recognized.

Again, for a Medieval thinker, spiritual discussion is not relativistic as it is for us. We believe, or most of us do, that the most direct method to objectively debatable reality is probably the scientific method. Medievals, mostly (a few interesting dissenters among Christian heretics and some Muslim philosophers come to mind as counter-examples) thought that spiritual authority was a direct and objective thing. It's like if two scientists with radically different approaches to, say, evolution, just said, "Well, your model can be right for you, mine is right for me; ultimately, who's to say?" No, those people have a common idea of a methodology for debate and argument.

Similar things existed for Medieval philosophy and theology; common understandings of debate (such as the need for classical precedent in much of the Christian and Muslim intellectual world). They wouldn't say, "Don't bring your religion in here!" they would say, "Your religion is false, for we all know that Plato has said XYZ, which you erroneously interpret..." Now, of course, we don't have Plato. But the general idea should remain: that our characters, being Medieval, will not regard religion as a purely subjective matter, or something without recourse to objective mediation.

And I have often wondered why Mathurin doesn't take the Dean of Theology position.

You're missing my point. In your fictional example, both religions are based on the teachings of Plato, and the two different religions can debate productively the meaning of his words and how they should be applied. The same is true of the Abrahamic faiths and even more true of denominations under the Christian umbrella - they all purport to worship the same deity and accept a common mythology.

An Abrahamic faith does not have the same relationship with Hinduism. There's very little common ground on which they can meet to debate something on the merits. Religions in BM are the same way. If we ever have a schism in SA, there would be much more fertile ground for this in the divergence of one faith into two or more, all debating the true nature of the Stars and the value and meaning of Mathurin's teachings.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 18, 2012, 01:32:13 AM
You're missing my point. In your fictional example, both religions are based on the teachings of Plato, and the two different religions can debate productively the meaning of his words and how they should be applied. The same is true of the Abrahamic faiths and even more true of denominations under the Christian umbrella - they all purport to worship the same deity and accept a common mythology.

An Abrahamic faith does not have the same relationship with Hinduism. There's very little common ground on which they can meet to debate something on the merits. Religions in BM are the same way. If we ever have a schism in SA, there would be much more fertile ground for this in the divergence of one faith into two or more, all debating the true nature of the Stars and the value and meaning of Mathurin's teachings.

In my non-fictional example of Christianity and Islam, neither is based on Plato. I could probably find you Hindus citing Buddhists with ease; cross-citation in Chinese religious traditions is even easier. Consider the relationship between Patriarchs and the Pope pre-schism; disagreement, yes, but disagreement founded on a notion that there was a Real about which everyone was talking, and concerning which there could be an objective recourse.

Triunists ICly listen when Astroists speak on theological issues. Triunists ICly disagree with Triunists, but the belief is that, though we disagree with your model and think it erroneous, we still accept much of your methodology--- or at least think your methodology worthy of a critique by ours. This is a properly Medieval intellectual model.

But to simply say that promulgation of religious belief doesn't have a place in a Medieval university; that religion is a matter of personal choice or somehow less than objective... do remember, Medievals classified theology as one of the fundamental academic disciplines. The way we might see math, reading, history, science... for them, it's the trivium and quadrivium, but, of the higher disciplines, theology was primary. It was considered a rigorous, practically scientific subject. You can't read the debates between nominalists realists about the problem of universals without being inundated by citations of non-Christian thinkers, and repeatedly encountering what smells like peer-review.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 18, 2012, 02:00:50 AM
Religion wasn't a personal choice during Medieval.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 18, 2012, 02:57:05 AM
Religion wasn't a personal choice during Medieval.

Eh, now that's using a blanket judgement, something that people do too often with history.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 18, 2012, 04:04:22 AM
I am pretty sure Christians purged Jews more than once during Medieval period. If religion was a personal choice in those days, why would they have forcefully tried to convert people.

Western religions consider other religions false unlike Buddhism. Well Buddhists didn't start a crusade over Hindus for believing in something else at least.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on February 18, 2012, 05:07:11 AM
This point of view is something I find at odds with the station of many of the members of the University. Many of the most prominent "students" in the university would not "enroll as students". Nobles the stature of foreign rulers, dukes, heads of prestigious religions, would not become average, ordinary students. They would certainly be brought into the university as respected benefactors, supporters, honored professors, etc. The university would be falling all over itself to bestow any number of honorary degrees on someone with the stature of Mathurin. You wouldn't require him to write the equivalent of a term paper in order to be recognized as a Dean of Theology. And, to be fair, the same could be said for the prophet of Verdis Elementum, or whatever other religion has managed to survive and spread across a significant portion of the island.

I suppose this is an artifact of the guild system, though. Or perhaps the way the guild is run. But when you talk about "we're all equal here", I think you have to remember that some people are more equal than others.

That would be acceptable RP, but it was not what happened. Mathurin decided to enroll and become a student. And then he was called a 'mere' student. Had he refused to join as a student, or had he been invited as a professor or something, then it would have been insulting.

In my non-fictional example of Christianity and Islam, neither is based on Plato. I could probably find you Hindus citing Buddhists with ease; cross-citation in Chinese religious traditions is even easier.

Not really examples of inter-religious theological study from beliefs that do not share a common root.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 18, 2012, 06:07:32 AM
Not really examples of inter-religious theological study from beliefs that do not share a common root.

Umm... Christianity and Islam both citing Aristotle or Plato, neither of whom were of either religion, is pretty significant. I suppose you're right; we don't see Christians citing Confucian scholars (well, okay, actually, we did: Nestorian Christianity made a shot at it with some surprising success). But that's probably mostly because they didn't exist side-by-side much.

In every instance where religions existed side-by-side in the Medieval period, cases can be found where they regarded each others' leaders as relevant or even possibly authoritative on spiritual matters. Not necessarily correct, but not simply irrelevant. Not someone that can be written off because we all just have different beliefs about spiritual things and who's to say anyways?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Heq on February 19, 2012, 02:12:23 AM
I would add that religious institutions were also more likely to have common ground because for many of them their realm threats were the military infrastructure.  Yes, foreign religions were wrong and evil, but they were also unlikely to challange the idea of theocratic rule.  Powerful civil and military leaders did pretty much constantly.

I may think your religion is loonytoons, but there are solid political-economy reasons to at least pretend to have contact.  After all, we may disagree on the sky being blue, but all religions tend to believe in the importance of religion to the state.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: ^ban^ on February 19, 2012, 07:31:34 PM
Umm... Christianity and Islam both citing Aristotle or Plato, neither of whom were of either religion, is pretty significant.

Both Aristotle and Plato's ideas were based around the assumption that 'gods' existed. I don't think the same was true of Confucius.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 19, 2012, 09:36:30 PM
Both Aristotle and Plato's ideas were based around the assumption that 'gods' existed. I don't think the same was true of Confucius.

And yet Nestorians in China during the Tang dynasty cited Confucian scholars.

Funny how that works.

Again, the crucial thing to remember is that, in the Medieval context, the religious authorities took each other seriously as learned academics and credentialed experts in what they regarded as a rigorous field. That does not mean they agreed with each other, far from it, but it does mean that simply suggesting that theological issues would have a natural, subjective diversion along cultural lines would have been anathema.

(On a sidenote, I think Aristotle and Plato would object to being characterized as "assuming" gods exist, as they saw themselves as demonstrating that a god or divine power must exist, and other Medievals also did not view themselves as assuming that a god or gods existed.)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 19, 2012, 09:47:34 PM
BORING!


It is much more fun to poke D'hara!  I like preaching wherever I want to even when the ruler of another country tells me not to.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 19, 2012, 10:41:36 PM
This ought to be fun...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 19, 2012, 10:55:21 PM
This ought to be fun...

Yes indeed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on February 19, 2012, 11:32:03 PM
BORING!


It is much more fun to poke D'hara!  I like preaching wherever I want to even when the ruler of another country tells me not to.

And just when Constantine thought that leaving the Regency would allow him to live a nice peaceful Allison-free life...  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 20, 2012, 01:32:47 AM
And just when Constantine thought that leaving the Regency would allow him to live a nice peaceful Allison-free life...  :P

I'm very interested to see how this whole incident turns out...

I kind of really want to clap Allison in irons.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 20, 2012, 01:35:34 AM
Forcing me out of my lazyness, urgh!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on February 20, 2012, 02:36:12 AM
Why do I get the odd feeling Allison is going to get excommunicated (again?)...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Carna on February 20, 2012, 08:44:45 AM
Why do I get the odd feeling Allison is going to get excommunicated (again?)...

If Allison gets excommunicated, will Astrum lead a fancy crusade to capture the heretic and place a nice pious priest in her stead? Methinks she'll be arrested before very long though. Local laws and what-have-you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 20, 2012, 10:20:18 AM
If Allison gets excommunicated, will Astrum lead a fancy crusade to capture the heretic and place a nice pious priest in her stead? Methinks she'll be arrested before very long though. Local laws and what-have-you.

And what if she does? The could torture her, though that isn't likely to play well. The can keep her in prison for a while, then she can go right back to preaching where she wants. Unless she is caught trying to influence the peasants or incite stuff, its not like they can ban her.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: GoldPanda on February 20, 2012, 11:04:13 AM
I, for one, welcome our new Astroist overlords.

*raises a white flag*

What now, Allison?!

A strange game. The only winning move is to surrender.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 20, 2012, 03:15:50 PM
Exactly!  Assimilate.   Sanguis Astroism is like the Borg.  You will become us or die.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on February 20, 2012, 03:38:58 PM
Exactly!  Assimilate.   Sanguis Astroism is like the Borg.  You will become us or die.

Unless, of course, they encounter Species 8472.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 20, 2012, 05:02:28 PM
Unless, of course, they encounter Species 8472.

Don't those live in Volcano Nightcree?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on February 20, 2012, 05:24:18 PM
Unless, of course, they encounter Species 8472.

Yeah, they'll suffer a bit for a while but then bounce back and 8472 shall be crushed by their uneasy allies, the Moot.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 20, 2012, 11:12:39 PM
Exactly!  Assimilate.   Sanguis Astroism is like the Borg.  You will become us or die.

Rather, we will become you, and that will make us strong enough to kill you.

Sure, we sacrifice our whole identity to do it... but we still get to kill you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 21, 2012, 12:33:32 AM
Rather, we will become you, and that will make us strong enough to kill you.

Sure, we sacrifice our whole identity to do it... but we still get to kill you.

Amen.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 21, 2012, 12:38:21 AM
As long as the Zuma don't worship the Bloodstars, the realms of humanity will be safe...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 21, 2012, 07:50:34 AM
Well,  the Zuma have allowed SA to preach in their lands and to build shrines...  so the Zuma joining SA is not outside the realm of possibility!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Carna on February 22, 2012, 06:46:35 AM
The Zuma are as likely to be assimilated into SA as the Lurians are to stop their in-fighting. Longshot, to say the least :(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 22, 2012, 06:49:43 AM
The Zuma are as likely to be assimilated into SA as the Lurians are to stop their in-fighting. Longshot, to say the least :(

And yet what other religion has been granted permission to build shrines in Zuma territory?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 22, 2012, 04:31:02 PM
And yet what other religion has been granted permission to build shrines in Zuma territory?

And what religion has gone ahead and done it without permission, and had zero repercussions?

 ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 22, 2012, 10:23:57 PM
And what religion has gone ahead and done it without permission, and had zero repercussions?

 ::)

If you have built shrines in Zuma territory, now that the SA is running around the area the Zuma can actually LOCATE them. How long is that zero repercussions going to last if they inform the Zuma? If you are just referring to preaching cross over from preaching in adjoining regions, really is that something to crow about? If the Zuma declared war on you for preaching in your own regions the GM would simply have to go through yet another round of bitching.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 22, 2012, 10:34:09 PM
And what religion has gone ahead and done it without permission, and had zero repercussions?

 ::)

It does seem odd to me that you would boast about this after being the number one critic of the Zuma a while back. If you're so very tired of them, maybe it's best not to do things like this that you *know* could provoke them? Much less boast about it on the forum where the Zuma GM can see if he bothers to look...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 22, 2012, 10:52:58 PM
It does seem odd to me that you would boast about this after being the number one critic of the Zuma a while back. If you're so very tired of them, maybe it's best not to do things like this that you *know* could provoke them? Much less boast about it on the forum where the Zuma GM can see if he bothers to look...

What would it matter. The GM is hardly going to use Forum knowledge to act in game, and besides which Vellos has already pointed out IG that his religion has a significant following among the Zuma. I think he got his RP Zuma Monks killed for that. Lesson to take away, the Masters don't like anything that distracts the Zuma from the duties.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 22, 2012, 11:21:31 PM
That depends. The information might be there IG for the NPC characters to see, but the GM hasn't noticed or bothered to look.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 23, 2012, 03:28:48 AM
It does seem odd to me that you would boast about this after being the number one critic of the Zuma a while back. If you're so very tired of them, maybe it's best not to do things like this that you *know* could provoke them? Much less boast about it on the forum where the Zuma GM can see if he bothers to look...

If the Zuma declare war on Terran and destroy us because of Triunism's presence in Zuma lands, I would be totally fine with that. You would not hear a single complaint from me at such a turn of events.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 23, 2012, 04:21:11 AM
If the Zuma declare war on Terran and destroy us because of Triunism's presence in Zuma lands, I would be totally fine with that. You would not hear a single complaint from me at such a turn of events.

Like everything some players would be fine with it, some wouldn't. My understanding is the Triunism presence in Zuma lands comes from peaching in regions near the Zuma. I can image that quite a few players would be upset if the Zuma acted on that as the conversion of the Zuma would in that case be an unintended side effect of players preaching to their own peasants. Unless a religion has been actively preaching in Zuma lands that is a can of worms I sure wouldn't want to open.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 23, 2012, 04:34:11 AM
Like everything some players would be fine with it, some wouldn't. My understanding is the Triunism presence in Zuma lands comes from peaching in regions near the Zuma. I can image that quite a few players would be upset if the Zuma acted on that as the conversion of the Zuma would in that case be an unintended side effect of players preaching to their own peasants. Unless a religion has been actively preaching in Zuma lands that is a can of worms I sure wouldn't want to open.

It's also there because we've built shrines.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 23, 2012, 04:47:16 AM
It's also there because we've built shrines.

Awww well see until now the Zuma couldn't see those. Who can tell what the response will be if they find out IG.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 23, 2012, 06:42:07 PM
Awww well see until now the Zuma couldn't see those. Who can tell what the response will be if they find out IG.

And again, if they declare war because of that, fine. That's perfectly fine GMing, IMHO. We clandestinely constructed shrines to a foreign religion, and have evinced a desire to subvert the hearts of the Zuma. Attack us. That's quite reasonable justification for violence.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 23, 2012, 07:38:51 PM
I just have to say, that attitude bothers me. It's OK if the Zuma destroy Terran because of something that you personally were involved in, but not if it's because of something that someone else did.

What about all the people in Terran that had nothing to do with the Triunist shrines in Zumaland? Like the Astroist players. Are they supposed to be OK with it because it was a Terran that ordered the shrines built? It may not even have been a Terran priest that built the shrines. It's not like you can tell it was a Terran. Would it be OK for the Zuma to see the Triunist shrines, see a Triunist temple in Asylon, and go destroy Asylon? I don't think the Asylonian players would like that, nor agree that it was good GMing. Or if they asked Allison, who apparently is now trusted by the Zuma (and holy crap, talk about a huge potential for serious mayhem: Allison giving guidance to the Zuma!! :o), and Allison says "The D'Harans are the ones who follow Triunism", and the Zuma go off and destroy D'Hara, what are the D'Harans supposed to do? Are they supposed to be OK with that?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 23, 2012, 08:00:51 PM
Damn it... ignore that. I should know better than to start up that discussion again....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 23, 2012, 09:38:10 PM
Damn it... ignore that. I should know better than to start up that discussion again....

Probably should avoid it, but it was exactly what I was thinking.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 23, 2012, 09:43:07 PM
I just have to say, that attitude bothers me. It's OK if the Zuma destroy Terran because of something that you personally were involved in, but not if it's because of something that someone else did.

What about all the people in Terran that had nothing to do with the Triunist shrines in Zumaland? Like the Astroist players. Are they supposed to be OK with it because it was a Terran that ordered the shrines built? It may not even have been a Terran priest that built the shrines. It's not like you can tell it was a Terran. Would it be OK for the Zuma to see the Triunist shrines, see a Triunist temple in Asylon, and go destroy Asylon? I don't think the Asylonian players would like that, nor agree that it was good GMing. Or if they asked Allison, who apparently is now trusted by the Zuma (and holy crap, talk about a huge potential for serious mayhem: Allison giving guidance to the Zuma!! :o), and Allison says "The D'Harans are the ones who follow Triunism", and the Zuma go off and destroy D'Hara, what are the D'Harans supposed to do? Are they supposed to be OK with that?

Wait, so does this mean I can go back to try having the Zuma kill Solaria?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 23, 2012, 09:57:41 PM
Why not? You can  try to get Morek to kill Solaria. What makes the Zuma any different?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on February 23, 2012, 10:01:31 PM
Why not? You can  try to get Morek to kill Solaria. What makes the Zuma any different?

Well, they did try.  Malus made a better offer, and did it with the only person qualified to negotiate: their ruler, not their idiot general.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 23, 2012, 10:03:04 PM
Wait, so does this mean I can go back to try having the Zuma kill Solaria?

Who ever told you that you had to stop?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 23, 2012, 10:13:58 PM
Who ever told you that you had to stop?

No one "Told me" However, there was a huge outcry against a non-Terran player trying to have Terran hurt by the Zuma and it spawned a huge 20+ page thread on how the Zuma should never exist because diplomacy with the Zuma somehow is not worth anything while diplomacy with players is. Thus, I stopped because I didn't want anyone getting mad at me on an OOC level for doing something IC that the game allows. Sure, I know how this sounds but it is 100% true that this happens.

Well, they did try.  Malus made a better offer, and did it with the only person qualified to negotiate: their ruler, not their idiot general.

This is not true at all. We didn't try to negotiate with their General. Letters were exchanged, but no actual attempt to negotiate was made, because as you said it was their General and not their ruler. And you did make a good offer, and all of Luria will hate Malus ever more for it. (when they realize)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 23, 2012, 10:18:22 PM
No one "Told me" However, there was a huge outcry against a non-Terran player trying to have Terran hurt by the Zuma and it spawned a huge 20+ page thread on how the Zuma should never exist because diplomacy with the Zuma somehow is not worth anything while diplomacy with players is. Thus, I stopped because I didn't want anyone getting mad at me on an OOC level for doing something IC that the game allows. Sure, I know how this sounds but it is 100% true that this happens.

This is not true at all. We didn't try to negotiate with their General. Letters were exchanged, but no actual attempt to negotiate was made, because as you said it was their General and not their ruler. And you did make a good offer, and all of Luria will hate Malus ever more for it. (when they realize)

If you did it, then I would imagine you would get a fair bit of OOC hatred from some people. But then killing a realm does that, running a successful war can do that etc. If you want to ensure no one gets mad with you OOC best bet is to be a silent knight.

Also all of Luria won't hate Malus, Solaria will still loves him. If the rest of Luria doesn't at least despise him he really isn't doing much of a job at being a aggressive self centred tyrant.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on February 23, 2012, 10:30:22 PM
This is not true at all. We didn't try to negotiate with their General. Letters were exchanged, but no actual attempt to negotiate was made, because as you said it was their General and not their ruler. And you did make a good offer, and all of Luria will hate Malus ever more for it. (when they realize)

Nobody negotiated a deal.  Creed foolishly tried to commit Morek to a course of action Busto wasn't willing to pursue, and Malus didn't "offer" anything except religious tolerance.  There seriously wasn't a deal.  There was a period where PeL was pursuing any savior it could find, and people probably caught the stench of desperation.  That doesn't mean Malus was running around slamming doors.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 23, 2012, 10:45:38 PM
Nobody negotiated a deal.  Creed foolishly tried to commit Morek to a course of action Busto wasn't willing to pursue, and Malus didn't "offer" anything except religious tolerance.  There seriously wasn't a deal.  There was a period where PeL was pursuing any savior it could find, and people probably caught the stench of desperation.  That doesn't mean Malus was running around slamming doors.

I'm guessing he would have if he could. Still trying to figure out what really happened between Malus and the Zuma, of if he just made a VERY good guess.

If you did it, then I would imagine you would get a fair bit of OOC hatred from some people. But then killing a realm does that, running a successful war can do that etc. If you want to ensure no one gets mad with you OOC best bet is to be a silent knight.

Also all of Luria won't hate Malus, Solaria will still loves him. If the rest of Luria doesn't at least despise him he really isn't doing much of a job at being a aggressive self centred tyrant.

Meh, there is a difference between people getting mad at me OOC for killing their favorite realm, (bye Pian...) and people saying that I'm cheating, or abusing the system, etc... But yes I know all about the whole aggressive-self-centered tyrant thing. Its a blast.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on February 23, 2012, 11:41:59 PM
I'm guessing he would have if he could. Still trying to figure out what really happened between Malus and the Zuma, of if he just made a VERY good guess.

Partly because people aren't as secretive as they imagine, and partly that given enough pieces of disparate news, anyone can string together an explanation.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 23, 2012, 11:45:47 PM
Partly because people aren't as secretive as they imagine, and partly that given enough pieces of disparate news, anyone can string together an explanation.

In other words, when a noble is vocal and been around for a while, it is often trivial to work out which way they might jump when desperate. Once you can make that link, then you can start collecting the information required. It was rather obvious that PeL would start reaching out to every power they though might be able to assist them. Given Brom's RP'd personality, it was also obvious he would undertake much of that effort himself, and that he might not be that worried about exactly WHERE the assistance came from.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 24, 2012, 12:39:57 AM
Nobody negotiated a deal.  Creed foolishly tried to commit Morek to a course of action Busto wasn't willing to pursue, and Malus didn't "offer" anything except religious tolerance.  There seriously wasn't a deal.  There was a period where PeL was pursuing any savior it could find, and people probably caught the stench of desperation.  That doesn't mean Malus was running around slamming doors.

Religious tolerance alone is generally enough to make us delighted, especially when its in an area that had been closed off to us before. You certainly nullified any slim chance there might have been of Morek shifting itself off the couch to potentially intervene.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 24, 2012, 03:55:47 AM
Nobody negotiated a deal.  Creed foolishly tried to commit Morek to a course of action Busto wasn't willing to pursue, and Malus didn't "offer" anything except religious tolerance.  There seriously wasn't a deal.  There was a period where PeL was pursuing any savior it could find, and people probably caught the stench of desperation.  That doesn't mean Malus was running around slamming doors.

You know I was really trying to get Morek to destroy Solaria and make PeL our slave state I even came up with a way for us to insure that PeL never betrayed us. I was going to put Morek loyal nobles as the Dukes of PeLs city's.  But I am stuck with a bunch of religious freaks in my realm plus I think Pierre von Genf was jealous that what took him 4 years to do I was going to do in a week. He gave me the hardest time in the inner council I wanted to death duel him but people told me priest don't duel so kind of scraped that idea.

I had the nobles to support it but not the important ones. If only I got Busto to join in on it with me and I could have had a slave state. Now I am barred pretty much from ever holding a official position in Morek anymore.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 24, 2012, 03:57:09 AM
You know I was really trying to get Morek to destroy Solaria and make PeL our slave state I even came up with a way for us to insure that PeL never betrayed us. I was going to put Morek loyal nobles as the Dukes of PeLs city's.  But I am stuck with a bunch of religious freaks in my realm plus I think Pierre von Genf was jealous that what took him 4 years to do I was going to do in a week. . 

I had the nobles to support it but not the important ones. If only I got Busto to join in on it with me and I could have had a slave state. Now I am barred pretty much from ever holding a official position in Morek anymore.

You do realize, you can't make Pian a slave state unless we accept that right?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 24, 2012, 04:00:12 AM
That would be like saying did he realise he wanted to destroy the only Lurian realm that already allowed SA to preach and had a SA ruler :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 24, 2012, 04:04:08 AM
You do realize, you can't make Pian a slave state unless we accept that right?

Well it was accept our terms or die and I thought the terms I was going to give you was pretty sweet. You could keep your government and religion and what not but SA priest would be allowed to preach and build temples if PeL region lords agreed to it and we where going to get all of your land back from you. Which meant we were going to destroy Solaria and if you did not accept I was going to invade you anyways and find a noble in your realm that would accept the terms.   
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 24, 2012, 04:06:01 AM
That would be like saying did he realise he wanted to destroy the only Lurian realm that already allowed SA to preach and had a SA ruler :)

You do realize that SA kicked me out for so called heresy.?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 24, 2012, 04:06:31 AM
Well it was accept our terms or die and I thought the terms I was going to give you was pretty sweet. You could keep your government and religion and what not but SA priest would be allowed to preach and build temples if PeL region lords agreed to it and we where going to get all of your land back from you. Which meant we were going to destroy Solaria and if you did not accept I was going to invade you anyways and find a noble in your realm that would accept the terms.   

Instead you were relegated to clearing out monsters for Solaria. I think one character might be a bit delusional about what kind of authority he has.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 24, 2012, 04:07:57 AM
You do realize that SA kicked me out for so called heresy.?

And? Common sense says the Morek Theocracy is probably going to at least stay neutral in a conflict that has a SA ruler unless that ruler has done some serious damage to the religion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 24, 2012, 04:10:11 AM
Instead you were relegated to clearing out monsters for Solaria. I think one character might be a bit delusional about what kind of authority he has.

Well some nobles wanted to do that I never went down to clear out monsters but you are correct the Ordermarshal position in Morek right now does not have that much power. You just sit around most of the time. There really is not that much to do in morek right now.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 24, 2012, 04:19:06 AM
Instead you were relegated to clearing out monsters for Solaria. I think one character might be a bit delusional about what kind of authority he has.

Are we talking about Brom or Creed? ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 24, 2012, 06:08:23 PM
I am liking the fact that my priests and I can preach in D'hara and they can't do anything about it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on February 25, 2012, 05:19:57 AM
I am liking the fact that my priests and I can preach in D'hara and they can't do anything about it.

Don't be too sure about that. Preaching is allowed in Port Raviel, but if I hear about you preaching in Raviel...I'll have my knight arrest your priest.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 25, 2012, 07:01:04 AM
Don't be too sure about that. Preaching is allowed in Port Raviel, but if I hear about you preaching in Raviel...I'll have my knight arrest your priest.

I'm pretty sure you can't arrest without a war declaration...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 25, 2012, 08:31:37 AM
I'm pretty sure you can't arrest without a war declaration...

Are you sure about that?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 25, 2012, 11:01:12 AM
Would it matter? SA will just declare war and destroy D'Hara, heh.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on February 25, 2012, 03:23:17 PM
I believe as long as your unit is set to Police, the "arrest a Priest" option comes up under Orders. But then, I've only had the option to arrest priests of my own realm on stable. Haven't had the opportunity to try it on foreign priests yet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 25, 2012, 03:35:01 PM
You can only arrest a priest of your own realm, or a realm with which you are at war. Religious affiliation, of either the priest or arresting noble, is not a factor.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 25, 2012, 04:17:46 PM
Wop wop.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 25, 2012, 07:23:30 PM
That should be changed in my opinion for exactly this reason, D'hara doesn't want the priests preaching in their lands but without declaring war over you can't arrest. I would think even it wouldn't matter what the diplomacy is, if there is a noble breaking the laws there should be consequences.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on February 25, 2012, 09:11:54 PM
You can only arrest a priest of your own realm, or a realm with which you are at war. Religious affiliation, of either the priest or arresting noble, is not a factor.

So you can arrest your own realm-mate, but not that of a foreign realm? That should be changed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on February 25, 2012, 09:20:16 PM
So you can arrest your own realm-mate, but not that of a foreign realm? That should be changed.

I agree. Being able to arrest nobles from other realms that are in your realm would be a great catalyst for conflict.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 25, 2012, 09:43:49 PM
I agree. Being able to arrest nobles from other realms that are in your realm would be a great catalyst for conflict.

Indeed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 25, 2012, 10:20:49 PM
I agree. Being able to arrest nobles from other realms that are in your realm would be a great catalyst for conflict.

You mean as opposed to just declaring a conflict so you can arrest the priest in the first place?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 25, 2012, 10:27:53 PM
You mean as opposed to just declaring a conflict so you can arrest the priest in the first place?

Declaring war just so you can arrest a priest is a pretty extreme step. It also makes no sense that you can't just arrest any priest anywhere. If you're in the vicinity and you have a bunch of armed men backing you up, you ought to be able to try. Just like you can loot allied territory.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 25, 2012, 10:31:56 PM
Declaring war just so you can arrest a priest is a pretty extreme step. It also makes no sense that you can't just arrest any priest anywhere. If you're in the vicinity and you have a bunch of armed men backing you up, you ought to be able to try. Just like you can loot allied territory.

Arresting a noble from a realm you have no declared conflict with doesn't make a whole lot of sense either, just like you won't arrest neutral knights passing through your territory. If a priest is preaching without permission you already have everything you need for conflict, some angry letters to the ruler of the other realm, and perhaps the head of the religion would probably be a good start.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 25, 2012, 10:52:39 PM
I agree. Being able to arrest nobles from other realms that are in your realm would be a great catalyst for conflict.
As De-Legro already, you have what you need to start a conflict. Go ahead and declare it openly. What it appears to me is that you want to do whatever you feel like doing, and make the *other* guy declare the war. i.e you don't want to be the one to push the "declare war" link.

If they are preaching in your realm, then you go preach in their realm. Or stab the priest. Or go loot their realm. Get their allies to put pressure on them to stop. Cancel your peace treaties. Get your allies to do the same. Force your lords to sack their temples in your lands, or close them down altogether. Persecute their followers. Have your priests foment unrest and uprisings in their lands.

You have options. Use them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on February 26, 2012, 12:14:46 AM
As De-Legro already, you have what you need to start a conflict. Go ahead and declare it openly. What it appears to me is that you want to do whatever you feel like doing, and make the *other* guy declare the war. i.e you don't want to be the one to push the "declare war" link.

Uh... right back at you:

What it appears to me is that you want to do whatever you feel like doing, and make the *other* guy declare the war. i.e you don't want to be the one to push the "declare war" link.


Seriously, it goes both ways. However, by allowing realms to arrest priests it allows for a nice showdown. Sure, we're going to send our priest in to start converting. Arrest him. I dare you. If you do, instant Casus Belli. Does the small realm take the risk of offending the larger by arresting their priest? Does the small realm with good relations and powerful allies try to send their priest into a larger realm. I think allowing it adds a really nice political dynamic to the game.


If they are preaching in your realm, then you go preach in their realm. Or stab the priest. Or go loot their realm. Get their allies to put pressure on them to stop. Cancel your peace treaties. Get your allies to do the same. Force your lords to sack their temples in your lands, or close them down altogether. Persecute their followers. Have your priests foment unrest and uprisings in their lands.

You have options. Use them.

No one is saying there aren't already options. Of course there are. All I was saying is that this would be a really cool option to have also.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 26, 2012, 12:57:45 AM
Dont need to result in extremes...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 26, 2012, 04:03:08 AM
I just think it's strange that you can't arrest priests until after you declare war, when arresting priests would seem like a great way to provoke a war. Limiting arrests to after the war doesn't make wars more likely, it makes them less likely, as it establishes high costs for escalation.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 26, 2012, 04:17:30 AM
Exactly. I can't see any reason not to be able to do it and I think it adds some options for provoking people. What I like about it is you can provoke another realm with or without your ruler's support; just go ahead and arrest that priest. It also adds something to religious conflict. When a particularly zealous character decides he's offended by the preaching of that idolater from the realm next door, he has a way to vent his righteous anger, and he can do it with or without his ruler's permission. I'm a fan of anything that gives the average knight more ability to stir up trouble for their rulers.

You can argue that the ability to loot anywhere is good enough, but it's not the same. Looting is essentially a crime, and therefore almost impossible to justify to an angry realm council. Arresting a priest on the other hand can be done on principle and is therefore more defensible when your ruler gets upset at you, plus you may be able to get your co-religionists to back you. See? More conflict, politics and intrigue.

More of a discussion for the development thread at this point though.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 26, 2012, 05:54:02 AM
You can't arrest normal nobles.  It's already an advantage to arrest a priest with a war declaration, but my opinion carries a little less weight since I am the one instagating.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on February 26, 2012, 06:14:17 AM
Yes, but what can a "normal noble" do in another realm's regions? Nothing, if he has no unit with him. And if he does, he can be attacked.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 26, 2012, 02:34:09 PM
A diplomat could do some pretty severe damage to a realm by bribing the minor nobles.   That one isnt overt like preaching.  You dont need a unit and cant be arrested.  You know, priests have high oratory...  Might have to test this out.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on February 26, 2012, 04:16:43 PM
Hmm, true. Does seem like there should be a way to stop that. Declaring war to stop a priest preaching or a diplomat bad mouthing you seems a little extreme. Wasn't the treaty system going to cover stuff like this? Passage rights and so on?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on February 26, 2012, 05:04:59 PM
Hmm, true. Does seem like there should be a way to stop that. Declaring war to stop a priest preaching or a diplomat bad mouthing you seems a little extreme. Wasn't the treaty system going to cover stuff like this? Passage rights and so on?

For diplomats, yes. I seem to recall hearing about an 'Expel Diplomats' treaty you could sign against a realm to allow your nobles to arrest diplomats from that realm. However in the absence of that system there's not really much you can do short of declaring war and hoping you arrest the guy while he's moving around. So far as I know there is no chance that a diplomat can be caught and imprisoned for performing any negative actions the way that a priest or infiltrator can, though my experience with the class is limited. Perhaps that should be revisited as a stop gap until the New Treaty System is finished, unless the gold cost for such actions is deemed to be a sufficient balancing factor to counter the impossibility of preventing or stopping such actions short of war.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 26, 2012, 06:42:36 PM
I am liking the fact that my priests and I can preach in D'hara and they can't do anything about it.

You talk as if D'Hara was anti-SA. We aren't. Many of our lords follow SA. Why would we do anything against things that don't break the law?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 26, 2012, 06:47:24 PM
I just think it's strange that you can't arrest priests until after you declare war, when arresting priests would seem like a great way to provoke a war. Limiting arrests to after the war doesn't make wars more likely, it makes them less likely, as it establishes high costs for escalation.

It didn't use to be this way. Though I dislike priests preaching in my lands without having any easy way of dealing with them, it beats the old way of things where no one would ever care for priests. This no-arrest-without-declaration is necessary for the viability of the priest game, imo.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 26, 2012, 08:13:00 PM
There is already little enough reason to go to war.  We need more war.  To arrest a noble of a foreign realm is an act of war.  If you arrest a noble you are committing an act of war, which requires you to click the "declare war" button.  Pretty simple.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 26, 2012, 08:17:04 PM
There is already little enough reason to go to war.  We need more war.  To arrest a noble of a foreign realm is an act of war.  If you arrest a noble you are committing an act of war, which requires you to click the "declare war" button.  Pretty simple.

Arresting a foreign noble is not an act of war. I can arrest an infiltrator who tries to steal gold without declaring war.

Furthermore, as I've said, the current system doesn't create more wars. It creates less wars, because it raises the cost of provoking wars. Yes, it raises the benefits of war, but that is far less important than the question of the costs to make the actual transition. And, as noted, it means that only a ruler can do anything about a war (click "declare war") while, if arresting were possible, anybody could provoke a war.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 26, 2012, 09:20:40 PM
Arresting a foreign noble is not an act of war. I can arrest an infiltrator who tries to steal gold without declaring war.

Furthermore, as I've said, the current system doesn't create more wars. It creates less wars, because it raises the cost of provoking wars. Yes, it raises the benefits of war, but that is far less important than the question of the costs to make the actual transition. And, as noted, it means that only a ruler can do anything about a war (click "declare war") while, if arresting were possible, anybody could provoke a war.


You can catch an infiltrator in the midst of committing a crime.  Such as changing signs, stealing gold from the tax office or assaulting a noble for example.  You cannot order your unit to arrest an infiltrator who happens to be passing through your lands and not committing any crimes.  Further, lets say that there are only two nobles in a region.  Realm A and Realm B.  The noble from realm B assaults the noble from realm A and does not get caught, but successfully assaults the noble.  Now, you can infer that the noble from realm B is an infiltrator and you can infer that they are the one that is guilty of the assault.  However you cannot send a police unit to the region and push a button to arrest the Infiltrator. 

If a priest tries to do something that provokes the commoners of a region such as,  Auto Da Fe or declaring yourself Lord of a region and a few other commands like that, then the priest has a chance of being arrested just like an Infiltrator who assaults, steals, etc...

A priest preaching is the lowliest action that a priest can take.  They could be making the peasants hate you or lower their morale or building a shrine.  Preaching isn't something that you should worry about.  It is what happens later, after the preaching that you need to worry about.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 26, 2012, 09:49:41 PM

You can catch an infiltrator in the midst of committing a crime.  Such as changing signs, stealing gold from the tax office or assaulting a noble for example.  You cannot order your unit to arrest an infiltrator who happens to be passing through your lands and not committing any crimes.  Further, lets say that there are only two nobles in a region.  Realm A and Realm B.  The noble from realm B assaults the noble from realm A and does not get caught, but successfully assaults the noble.  Now, you can infer that the noble from realm B is an infiltrator and you can infer that they are the one that is guilty of the assault.  However you cannot send a police unit to the region and push a button to arrest the Infiltrator. 

If a priest tries to do something that provokes the commoners of a region such as,  Auto Da Fe or declaring yourself Lord of a region and a few other commands like that, then the priest has a chance of being arrested just like an Infiltrator who assaults, steals, etc...

A priest preaching is the lowliest action that a priest can take.  They could be making the peasants hate you or lower their morale or building a shrine.  Preaching isn't something that you should worry about.  It is what happens later, after the preaching that you need to worry about.

Still doesn't change the fact that the mechanics as they stand reduce rather than increase the possibility of war.

They incentivize going and preaching anywhere (as you said, a mild provocation), but disincentivize arresting the priest (the escalation). More free arresting would disincentivize preaching in unfriendly places (so less mild provocations), but incentivize arresting (the escalation). I tend to think the second is more likely to create wars.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 26, 2012, 10:17:31 PM
Still doesn't change the fact that the mechanics as they stand reduce rather than increase the possibility of war.

They incentivize going and preaching anywhere (as you said, a mild provocation), but disincentivize arresting the priest (the escalation). More free arresting would disincentivize preaching in unfriendly places (so less mild provocations), but incentivize arresting (the escalation). I tend to think the second is more likely to create wars.

Perhaps, but only if it didn't destroy the inventive to actually preach. I think that given the present difficulty for most religions to even get priests (How many religions have only 1 priest?) that making things harder then they already are to preach in other realms would pretty much kill it. In the 4 religions I've had priest in we already "couldn't" preach outside of "allowed" regions, on threat of being banned by our realm. Add in a simple button press to "combat" the few priest that do preach were they want to, and I can't see the practise surviving at all.

I really don't see either case as working to produce wars though, unless the religion is backed up by a realm. Most times I see this sort of thing, the realm just disowns the priest, since really why would they go to war over religion unless it is a theocracy or the ruler happens to share the religion. People SHOULD care that one of their nobles is arrested, but the dominant attitude tends to be, well he was preaching where he shouldn't.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 27, 2012, 01:54:59 AM
Perhaps, but only if it didn't destroy the inventive to actually preach. I think that given the present difficulty for most religions to even get priests (How many religions have only 1 priest?) that making things harder then they already are to preach in other realms would pretty much kill it. In the 4 religions I've had priest in we already "couldn't" preach outside of "allowed" regions, on threat of being banned by our realm. Add in a simple button press to "combat" the few priest that do preach were they want to, and I can't see the practise surviving at all.

I really don't see either case as working to produce wars though, unless the religion is backed up by a realm. Most times I see this sort of thing, the realm just disowns the priest, since really why would they go to war over religion unless it is a theocracy or the ruler happens to share the religion. People SHOULD care that one of their nobles is arrested, but the dominant attitude tends to be, well he was preaching where he shouldn't.

Precisely. Priests were being arrested left and right, and nobody ever raised a fuss about it. It meant that religions has no means to cross borders, because they'd be arrested on sight and their realm would not defend them.

It not requires a lot more muscle to keep priests out, which is necessary for the priest game.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on February 27, 2012, 08:30:31 PM

You can catch an infiltrator in the midst of committing a crime. 

But preaching is a crime in Keplerstan, the game mechanics simply don't recognize that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 27, 2012, 08:35:57 PM
But preaching is a crime in Keplerstan, the game mechanics simply don't recognize that.

But preaching involves commoners.  You would tell a noble that he has no right to speak to a commoner?  I was under the impression that a Noble can do whatever they like to commoners.  An infiltrator's actions are against the nobility.  Be it changing road signs, attacking a noble or stealing gold.  Now, if a priest were to cause the commoners to rise up against the nobility, that is a crime and it can very easily result in the priest getting sent to jail.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on February 27, 2012, 10:09:18 PM
You would tell a noble that he has no right to speak to a commoner?

If what they're speaking is heresy against the Almighty? Absolutely. I don't care who they're talking to. If you're spewing blasphemy against the Holy Church, you're lucky to just be locked and not burnt at the stake!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 27, 2012, 10:12:27 PM
But preaching is a crime in Keplerstan, the game mechanics simply don't recognize that.

Obviously the underlying conventions of acceptable Noble behaviour overrule the quaint and slightly backwards local laws of Keplerstan.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 27, 2012, 10:19:21 PM
But preaching is a crime in Keplerstan, the game mechanics simply don't recognize that.
There are things that the game will not let you do, because it would make a for a not-so-good game. Like randomly arresting any noble you feel like arresting. Or banning/executing any random prisoner of war. Or banning or executing any random noble belonging to an other realm. Or allowing game mechanics to enforce any arbitrary law that your realm may pass.

These are things which you theoretically could very well do, were this Real Life. But it's not. So the range of actions you can take are limited, in order to make a good game experience for everyone.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 03, 2012, 07:37:17 PM
You know, having the player of Twinblade in my realm is good/bad.  He is a great Marshal and will be a great General since he is a shoe in for the next election, but how long until I have a rebellion in my realm?  At least it brings some potential fun to Kabrinskia.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 03, 2012, 08:16:44 PM
You know, having the player of Twinblade in my realm is good/bad.  He is a great Marshal and will be a great General since he is a shoe in for the next election, but how long until I have a rebellion in my realm?  At least it brings some potential fun to Kabrinskia.

He's back?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 03, 2012, 09:18:51 PM
You know, having the player of Twinblade in my realm is good/bad.  He is a great Marshal and will be a great General since he is a shoe in for the next election, but how long until I have a rebellion in my realm?  At least it brings some potential fun to Kabrinskia.

ooo.... wow. Yup. Just checked through the nobles. He's back. Interesting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 03, 2012, 11:00:00 PM
ooo.... wow. Yup. Just checked through the nobles. He's back. Interesting.

Isn't he the guy who played half a realm...?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 03, 2012, 11:14:56 PM
Isn't he the guy who played half a realm...?

More like half of two realms.

He was half of Irombrozia (the half that favored rejecting peace with Riombara back when Irombrozia appeared to be winning and maybe could have had peace) and about 2/3 of Aquilegia.

He doomed Irombrozia before he even closed his accounts; but he killed Aquilegia when he left.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 04, 2012, 12:57:42 AM
More like half of two realms.

He was half of Irombrozia (the half that favored rejecting peace with Riombara back when Irombrozia appeared to be winning and maybe could have had peace) and about 2/3 of Aquilegia.

He doomed Irombrozia before he even closed his accounts; but he killed Aquilegia when he left.

Well, had we not been gangbanged by *all* of the western realms, his gamble would have paid off and Rio would be dead. Or had we had a bit more help in fending off the West. Or maybe had I not went on vacation during a crucial moment in the war.

Regardless.

Though nothing justifies cheating, I did otherwise find him to be an enjoyable player to deal with. Particularily his heenite character...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 04, 2012, 02:25:33 AM
Indeed, he was (is, I guess) enjoyable personally to play alongside.

And behold, we have hijacked the thread. Again.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 04, 2012, 03:37:35 AM
Indeed, he was (is, I guess) enjoyable personally to play alongside.

And behold, we have hijacked the thread. Again.

Indeed, we are threadjacking again.

But that being said, any reason to believe it's the same guy? I mean, Twinblade isn't such a farfetched name for anyone trying to make one up. Could just be someone else who thought of the same name.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 04, 2012, 03:58:53 AM
No, it's him. He hangs out on IRC quite a bit. He's not trying to hide the fact that he's back.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on March 04, 2012, 05:09:15 AM
So the punishment for multi-cheating to that degree isn't a lifetime ban, then, obviously.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on March 04, 2012, 07:55:55 AM
There are two or three others here in the forums, including the player of the Psyche family and even a member of the dev team.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 04, 2012, 04:35:09 PM
There are two or three others here in the forums, including the player of the Psyche family and even a member of the dev team.

That being said, was there a pardon given? It was pretty serious cheating that had pretty serious consequences...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2012, 06:28:06 PM
He was the worst cheater in recent memory. I think we as players on Dwilight should make a fairly concerted effort make him feel unwelcome by outright banning him from any kingdom he shows up to. The guy sounds like a major dork.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on March 04, 2012, 06:43:57 PM
I believe the official response to his cheating was that he had left the game himself, and so because he was gone there was no need to address the issue at the time. However, I think that should be looked at again, because he is obviously back and there is little question as to the guilt of the matter.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on March 04, 2012, 07:06:12 PM
In that case there shouldn't be any action until someone with the relevant authority (whether that's Tom or the Titans is up to them) decides if his past offences stand and if they have any effect on his current account.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2012, 08:00:16 PM
He might have made 50 forum accounts and right at this moment could be conducting hundreds of seperate conversations with himself... Who knows I could be the only real person here!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on March 04, 2012, 08:12:56 PM
He might have made 50 forum accounts and right at this moment could be conducting hundreds of seperate conversations with himself... Who knows I could be the only real person here!!!!!!!!!!!

Actually..the others didn't want me to tell you...we're actually YOU. You have multiple personality disorder, and one of them is a brilliant game designer, others are competent and hardworking developers, one is a cheater named twinblade, etc.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2012, 08:44:20 PM
Actually..the others didn't want me to tell you...we're actually YOU. You have multiple personality disorder, and one of them is a brilliant game designer, others are competent and hardworking developers, one is a cheater named twinblade, etc.

I must have wrote this earlier to throw myself off of discovering that I am actually Twinblade? I can't fool myself!... I mean you are onto me, but you are actually me so its me who is onto you but I know its me so I just make it seem like I know its you but actually its me... 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 04, 2012, 09:44:47 PM
Well this is getting confusing... and off topic
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2012, 10:18:09 PM
SANGUIS ASTROISM IS EVIL!!! ok back on topic, discuss!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on March 04, 2012, 10:19:47 PM
SANGUIS ASTROISM IS EVIL!!! ok back on topic, discuss!

So, will SA be destroyed before or after they take over the world?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 04, 2012, 10:46:05 PM
I'm a bit curious at how many newcomers that Kabrinskia's getting. We got quite a few in the past two weeks.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2012, 10:57:33 PM
Well judging with Twinblades arrival you haven't gotten any new arrivals at all... lolz
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lorgan on March 04, 2012, 11:05:38 PM
This thread has suddenly become a lot more fun.  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 04, 2012, 11:12:52 PM
I'm a bit curious at how many newcomers that Kabrinskia's getting. We got quite a few in the past two weeks.

Well judging with Twinblades arrival you haven't gotten any new arrivals at all... lolz

If you think that's the case, file a Titan report. Gossiping about it on the forum probably won't help.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2012, 11:32:11 PM
Im just joking. I put the 'lolz' at the end for that purpose.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 05, 2012, 08:54:58 AM
So, will SA be destroyed before or after they take over the world?

After.

Not long afterwards, though. Of course, you always have the opportunity to hasten SA's demise by converting to it.  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on March 05, 2012, 07:59:17 PM
After.

Not long afterwards, though. Of course, you always have the opportunity to hasten SA's demise by converting to it.  ;D

Hmm, for some reason I feel this is a trick, but another part of me is starting to hail the bloodstars....so I don't know...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Galvez on March 14, 2012, 04:09:41 PM
Is there any news why the Zuma declared war on Morek?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 14, 2012, 04:16:05 PM
I've heard a lot of "What the heck?", but no one seems to have any idea at all. Big surprise.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 14, 2012, 04:25:40 PM
A noble of Morek apparently attacked Screamer.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on March 14, 2012, 04:31:41 PM
I'm sure Morek are shaking in their boots, what with Zuma territory being so close to them and all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: LilWolf on March 14, 2012, 04:52:53 PM
Is there any news why the Zuma declared war on Morek?

Apparently because I went and tried to stab Screamer. That's the second war my infiltrator has played a part in starting(first being the whole Lurias war in the south).

But yeah, don't see what they're going to do about it. Maybe they'll demand Morek bans me and hands me over to them or something, but we'll see. Frankly I just hope thy get told to stuff it and the island decides it's time to end Zuma.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on March 14, 2012, 06:14:05 PM
Apparently because I went and tried to stab Screamer. That's the second war my infiltrator has played a part in starting(first being the whole Lurias war in the south).

But yeah, don't see what they're going to do about it. Maybe they'll demand Morek bans me and hands me over to them or something, but we'll see. Frankly I just hope thy get told to stuff it and the island decides it's time to end Zuma.

Time to end a GM controlled realm for good. It was pointless to have daimons in Dwilight anyway.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 14, 2012, 06:48:08 PM
Oh you guys talk so big half way across the map. If you really wanted to fight Zuma, you'd join a frontline realm like the cool dudes...  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 14, 2012, 10:25:17 PM
Your only a frontline realm if you actually are at war unless you mean Zuma interaction as a whole. Who thinks the island will help Morek and attack the Zuma or who thinks the rest the realms will just say its sucks for Morek, they shouldn't have attacked them and got caught?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arrakis on March 14, 2012, 10:28:50 PM
I'm pretty sure if Zuma makes any direct hostilities against Morek that SA would defend Morek.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 14, 2012, 11:21:08 PM
Time to end a GM controlled realm for good. It was pointless to have daimons in Dwilight anyway.

Good luck trying.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 15, 2012, 12:04:44 AM
Its a war of bluster without muster. Morek can say and do whatever it wants about the Zuma, there is very little each side can do to eachother unless the Zuma send over and invasion force... And actually settle in the east lands.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on March 15, 2012, 12:25:49 AM
equipment damage and morale will probably destroy daimon armies. Well I am not even sure they are affected by them. But Morek will gain the upper hand if Daimons do send an invasion force.

Well at least for the defending part.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on March 15, 2012, 12:27:00 AM
Its a war of bluster without muster. Morek can say and do whatever it wants about the Zuma, there is very little each side can do to eachother unless the Zuma send over and invasion force... And actually settle in the east lands.

Unless they are already there, or even more sinister, unless they have collaborators in the eastern realms.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 15, 2012, 02:46:08 AM
CREeeeEeeeeEeeeeeEeeeeEeeDdddD!!!!*shakes his fist at the heavens* Damn you Creed and Ironsides!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on March 15, 2012, 03:27:42 AM
Unless they are already there, or even more sinister, unless they have collaborators in the eastern realms.

Or even more sinister: The founder of SA is Screamer's cousin.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 15, 2012, 03:41:34 AM
That would be rather interesting turnout, if it was true does that mean SA is really daimon worship but changed a little so others humans don't find out?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on March 15, 2012, 05:26:56 AM
equipment damage and morale will probably destroy daimon armies. Well I am not even sure they are affected by them. But Morek will gain the upper hand if Daimons do send an invasion force.

Well at least for the defending part.

They are humans, lead by daimons. I suspect they may be able to use the "buy favors" feature to get their equipment repaired. Not sure about morale...they might have a cheat in for that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 15, 2012, 05:43:27 AM
They are humans, lead by daimons. I suspect they may be able to use the "buy favors" feature to get their equipment repaired. Not sure about morale...they might have a cheat in for that.

You sure about that?

If so they can have units of 100 men with like 10,000 CS...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on March 15, 2012, 05:47:12 AM
They are RP'd as humans lead by Daimon leaders. Beyond that who knows. Even if they are "human" forces, they are also NPC forces, so the regular mechanics don't need to apply.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 15, 2012, 05:53:17 AM
They are RP'd as humans lead by Daimon leaders. Beyond that who knows. Even if they are "human" forces, they are also NPC forces, so the regular mechanics don't need to apply.

That's silly.

Regardless, game says they are units of 100. And doesn't the realities of the game trump RP? Therefore either they are daimons, or they are humans with supernatural powers.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on March 15, 2012, 06:04:04 AM
That's silly.

Regardless, game says they are units of 100. And doesn't the realities of the game trump RP? Therefore either they are daimons, or they are humans with supernatural powers.

Lasers, the Zuma are the vanguard of the High Tech battlemaster. Eventually you will all learn that their true civilisation is underground.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on March 15, 2012, 06:22:32 AM
They are highly advanced aliens from the outer space. Their spaceship is hidden underground!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on March 15, 2012, 06:23:01 AM
They are highly advanced aliens from the outer space. Their spaceship is hidden underground!

Thus the link with the blood stars.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on March 15, 2012, 07:16:28 AM
Thus the link with the blood stars.

Blood stars are actually UFOs!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 15, 2012, 07:58:11 AM
ok ok stop... So why would the Daimons attack Morek, if Morek was worshiping the UFO's? And why would a Morek noble attack the Zumans if they...gah.... :o
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on March 15, 2012, 12:01:45 PM
ok ok stop... So why would the Daimons attack Morek, if Morek was worshiping the UFO's? And why would a Morek noble attack the Zumans if they...gah.... :o

To HIDE THE TRUTH
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 15, 2012, 01:14:52 PM
Blood stars are actually UFOs!
That's actually not too far from what would be the true physics/mechanics behind the Bloodstars: three objects in geosynchronous orbit. That would give you the three objects in the sky that are always in the same position, and do not move with the regular stars and planets.

In Anne McCaffrey's Pern novels, the three colony ships that took the colonists to Pern were left in geosynchronous orbit. When the colony devolved into a medieval lifestyle and forgot about their technological origins, they forgot about the colony ships. The three stars visible in the sky became known as the Dawn Sisters, since that is when they were visible in the reflected sunlight. In a different part of the world they were seen at dusk and were known by another name (which I can't recall right now...).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 15, 2012, 01:15:53 PM
Lasers, the Zuma are the vanguard of the High Tech battlemaster. Eventually you will all learn that their true civilisation is underground.

I see Prudent made a trip to Dwilight... :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on March 15, 2012, 05:10:44 PM
CREeeeEeeeeEeeeeeEeeeeEeeDdddD!!!!*shakes his fist at the heavens* Damn you Creed and Ironsides!


You got to love Creed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on March 15, 2012, 10:28:47 PM

You got to love Creed.

People love the Three Stooges as well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on March 16, 2012, 12:53:20 AM
People love the Three Stooges as well.


lol are you calling Creed a idiot?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 16, 2012, 02:05:13 AM
We would never do that... ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 16, 2012, 02:49:01 AM
Depends on which Creed you mean. Creed. Or Ursarkar E. CREEEEEEEEEEEEEED.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on March 16, 2012, 03:30:59 AM
Well guys I am banned from the military, SA, Donghaiwei, all Government positions, Lordships, oh and I am banned from becoming a knight in any of the regions in the Donghaiwei Duchy.  lol I really dont have much to do in Morek.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 16, 2012, 03:39:40 AM
So why stay there? and what did you do to get banned from that much stuff?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on March 16, 2012, 03:43:55 AM
So why stay there? and what did you do to get banned from that much stuff?

Don't ask me I was just being my wonderful self. Sharing my views with the rest of the realm. As for the reason I stay I have my reasons. I am hoping they will come to fruition soon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on March 16, 2012, 03:46:35 AM
So why stay there? and what did you do to get banned from that much stuff?

Probably stays in an attempt to colonise the Flow Peninsula, since Morek lays claim to the area.

In terms of what he did to be banned from so many positions, the word my character heard was he was being hostile to the theocracy and the church. If true its pretty easy to see why he ended up in his current position. Although if true it is also hard to see a colony attempt.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 16, 2012, 04:01:02 AM
So the church and your "wonderful self" didn't get along then and are you in a different religion?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on March 16, 2012, 04:05:17 AM
So the church and your "wonderful self" didn't get along then and are you in a different religion?

Well I was in the church of SA but was tried for heresy and convicted and thrown out of the church. Yes Creed has a different version of SA he believes in. You can say the church and my wonderful self do not get along.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on March 17, 2012, 02:13:05 AM
Are you like Martin Luther (Lutheranism)? Or John Smith (Mormonism)?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on March 17, 2012, 03:46:56 AM
If nothing else Creed does make Morek interesting.  I think it is a toss up between which is more interesting the upcomming war or what creed is doing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 17, 2012, 03:48:38 AM
Wow Creed you are so interesting you got someone to make a forum account to post about it. ( I am being serious)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on March 17, 2012, 04:36:13 AM
Are you like Martin Luther (Lutheranism)? Or John Smith (Mormonism)?

If I had to pick one it would probably be  Lutheranism but that is just me others might see it a different way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on March 17, 2012, 04:38:21 AM
Wow Creed you are so interesting you got someone to make a forum account to post about it. ( I am being serious)

Yeah I try to keep Creed a interesting character. He is the kind of character you either love or you hate there is no in between. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on March 17, 2012, 04:46:16 AM
Yeah I try to keep Creed a interesting character. He is the kind of character you either love or you hate there is no in between.

Just like Allison?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 17, 2012, 04:48:23 AM
Ah, well that tells me a lot actually about your character very interesting in the way he acts but some think it shouldn't be done so hate him others think its great and love him. Am I right?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on March 17, 2012, 05:06:29 AM
Wow Creed you are so interesting you got someone to make a forum account to post about it. ( I am being serious)
Hey now, I have been debating on it.  Just finally had someone who was involved enough in morek now. Though I think Allison is a bit more stubborn and crazy then creed is.

Yes most of the church hates Creed because he dares to be a bit different.

I would also agree that Creed would be a Lutheranism or some other protestant vain but not as far different as Mormonism
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on March 17, 2012, 05:14:35 AM
Ah, well that tells me a lot actually about your character very interesting in the way he acts but some think it shouldn't be done so hate him others think its great and love him. Am I right?

Yeah that sounds about right.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on March 17, 2012, 05:16:08 AM
Just like Allison?

Naw I dont think creed is  like Allison but a few people have compared creed to Allison. I don't believe Creed is as crazy as Allison.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 17, 2012, 05:19:14 AM
I like how everyone classifies Allison as crazy. I don't know much about her other then that she is kinda considered a warmonger in my realm and the obvious of her being ruler of Kabrinskia.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on March 17, 2012, 06:49:14 AM
I like how everyone classifies Allison as crazy. I don't know much about her other then that she is kinda considered a warmonger in my realm and the obvious of her being ruler of Kabrinskia.

And has had a hole made in the head. Literally.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 17, 2012, 08:57:53 AM
And has a loyal Lord in Gustav Kuriga, a man who has a lonely dire wolf and has named himself "Kabrinski's Wolf".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 17, 2012, 09:34:29 AM
I would also agree that Creed would be a Lutheranism or some other protestant vain but not as far different as Mormonism

Martin Luther did not add a new extra god and claimed he was better than the other gods, did he?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 17, 2012, 09:42:46 AM
I would say that Creed is the most dynamic and exteme rebels that has ever graced the halls of Sanguis Astroism in its entire history since the beginning of time eternal, way before the big bang...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on March 17, 2012, 10:41:49 AM
Martin Luther did not add a new extra god and claimed he was better than the other gods, did he?

He added a fourth star and claims it to be more important than the previous three?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 17, 2012, 11:27:32 AM
He added a fourth star and claims it to be more important than the previous three?

Yes.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on March 17, 2012, 11:40:16 AM
...inspiring.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 17, 2012, 11:46:00 AM
...inspiring.

He did not imbue this fourth Star with flammae, however.  I'm not overly worried. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on March 17, 2012, 11:47:59 AM
He did not imbue this fourth Star with flammae, however.  I'm not overly worried. ;)

Little he knows the fourth Star is actually the Sun! 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Darksun on March 17, 2012, 01:42:07 PM
Little he knows the fourth Star is actually the Sun! 8)

If I remember his shenanigans correctly, the fourth star was "Darkness" or some such.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 17, 2012, 02:10:15 PM
Yes most of the church hates Creed because he dares to be a bit different.
Different does not equate to good.

No offense to the player, but the character Creed is arrogant, crude, rude, insulting, etc. Not a pleasant experience to interact with at all.

Allison is very frustrating, arrogant, and aggressive, but in a completely different sense. Whereas Allison tries makes controversy in order to get things done and move toward a goal and make progress, it feels to me like Creed wants to cause trouble just to cause trouble. It's "I want to be controversial", but he has really nothing to *be* controversial about.

That's just the feeling I've gotten. Others may have a different experience.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on March 17, 2012, 02:49:41 PM
arrogant, crude, rude, insulting, etc. Not a pleasant experience to interact with at all.

I find the same can be said about quite a few members of the SA faith.  Why is it that Creed is condemned for acting that way but supporters of the faith are not?  Is
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on March 17, 2012, 03:05:03 PM
Different does not equate to good.

No offense to the player, but the character Creed is arrogant, crude, rude, insulting, etc. Not a pleasant experience to interact with at all.

Allison is very frustrating, arrogant, and aggressive, but in a completely different sense. Whereas Allison tries makes controversy in order to get things done and move toward a goal and make progress, it feels to me like Creed wants to cause trouble just to cause trouble. It's "I want to be controversial", but he has really nothing to *be* controversial about.

That's just the feeling I've gotten. Others may have a different experience.


I can see what you are saying and yes creed can be arrogant, crude, rude and insulting sometimes but that is only sometimes if you interacted with me somewhat you would find my character quite fun to RP with.

You have to remember to that Creed is hated by the church and it is not uncommon for him to receive death threats or bans but everything that Creed does is for a larger goal. You may not be able to see what that goal is but when it does happen you will see why he has acted the way he did.

Also I am a noble are nobles suppose to act arrogant, rude and insulting sometimes.

Indirik I ask that you have your character interact with Creed again and I a sure you can have fun with him. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on March 17, 2012, 03:07:38 PM
He did not imbue this fourth Star with flammae, however.  I'm not overly worried. ;)

As for everyone saying Creed believes in a fourth star it is not really a fourth star in the since like the blood stars it is totally different. While I don't blame people for having this misconception due to that fact I have not yet really shared the 4 books of the Dark Star with anyone besides a select few.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 17, 2012, 04:29:35 PM
I like how everyone classifies Allison as crazy. I don't know much about her other then that she is kinda considered a warmonger in my realm and the obvious of her being ruler of Kabrinskia.


Allison is crazy.  She had a hole drilled into her skull.  It took a lot of work for Allison to get the reputation she has.  Unfortunately for her she gained many enemies to get where she is.  Most of them are in the church too.   
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 17, 2012, 04:40:26 PM
Allison is crazy.  She had a hole drilled into her skull.  It took a lot of work for Allison to get the reputation she has.  Unfortunately for her she gained many enemies to get where she is.  Most of them are in the church too.


Allison never really crossed the line into heresy. She knows where the line is, and she prodded it to see if it bent, but she always ended up on the right side of it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on March 17, 2012, 05:48:30 PM

Allison never really crossed the line into heresy. She knows where the line is, and she prodded it to see if it bent, but she always ended up on the right side of it.

And you know what that is good for Allison but it would never be any fun if everyone just agreed with the majority views. You have to have players that challenge the status quo or the game would become stagnate. I try to liven up the game of course some people are not going to like how I go about it but then I have people that have enjoyed how I have played Creed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 17, 2012, 06:14:15 PM
And you know what that is good for Allison but it would never be any fun if everyone just agreed with the majority views. You have to have players that challenge the status quo or the game would become stagnate. I try to liven up the game of course some people are not going to like how I go about it but then I have people that have enjoyed how I have played Creed.

Oh, sure. I enjoy it!

Naw I dont think creed is  like Allison but a few people have compared creed to Allison. I don't believe Creed is as crazy as Allison.

I was just trying to explain that the craziness scale is not the right one to consider here. SA has no a priori problem with crazy people. If that's how the Stars roll, we go with it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 17, 2012, 06:14:25 PM

Allison never really crossed the line into heresy. She knows where the line is, and she prodded it to see if it bent, but she always ended up on the right side of it.

Wasn't she excommunicated once?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on March 17, 2012, 06:28:41 PM
Wasn't she excommunicated once?

If I recall correctly, that was for misusing her station as a Priest and as a Light of the faith to commit an auto de fe.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on March 17, 2012, 06:33:54 PM

Allison is crazy.  She had a hole drilled into her skull.  It took a lot of work for Allison to get the reputation she has.  Unfortunately for her she gained many enemies to get where she is.  Most of them are in the church too.

Headache cure? Not unheard of.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on March 17, 2012, 06:56:37 PM

Allison never really crossed the line into heresy. She knows where the line is, and she prodded it to see if it bent, but she always ended up on the right side of it.

If no body crossed the line that would be boring.  Different views help define everyone's beliefs.  The SA church like to try and squash anyone that does not agree with them.  Everything is fine as long as you believe in the blood stars and believe in them the way the church wants you to.  If you do not well you are out of luck.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on March 17, 2012, 08:27:45 PM
Sounds pretty SMA to me.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 17, 2012, 08:30:13 PM
People who joined SA mostly did not so because they sought RP, but because it was an institution that opened doors. Bashing on people that are out of line is an extremely easy and risk-free method of "proving" oneself in such a context.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 17, 2012, 09:59:07 PM
Lol Indirik calling Creed arrogant... The pot calling the kettle black lolz ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on March 17, 2012, 10:10:32 PM
People who joined SA mostly did not so because they sought RP, but because it was an institution that opened doors. Bashing on people that are out of line is an extremely easy and risk-free method of "proving" oneself in such a context.

And that is exactly why Creed is having such a hard time right now.  To much of the faith I think have joined simply because SA is so large and joining opens doors.  TOf course outlawing anyone from speaking out against the church provides an environment  where not many speak up.  Those that do tend to get treated like Allison and Creed.

Lol Indirik calling Creed arrogant... The pot calling the kettle black lolz ;)
I am sure I could name a few more people in SA that act to arrogant for their own good.  I have not had much contact with Indirik in game so dont know about him.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 18, 2012, 01:10:27 AM
I think people tend to forget that SA is roleplayed as a hardcore religious fundamentalist outfit in the vein of the Taliban or Spanish Inquisition. The church is not some namby pamby all inclusive enlightened modern day church that has gone through reformation and read books by Thomas Hobbes etc. You either submit to SA or you are infidel. Creeds character as wonderful as he is is going against the holy of holy holies the most sacred gods word on earth super structures. In reality Creed would be tied to a pyre and burned for merely suggesting a Dark star. This merely my opinion of SA and even Glaumring doesnt fully subscribe to it because is an outsider southern born. In ordr to survive the church became a necessity.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on March 18, 2012, 01:27:40 AM
I think you got it perfectly.  Though I think there are a few that are at least trying to change some of it.  I am sure of Morek could get away with burning Creed at the stake they would.  I am sure the regent and and judge would love to do that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 18, 2012, 02:40:12 AM
I am sure I could name a few more people in SA that act to arrogant for their own good.  I have not had much contact with Indirik in game so dont know about him.
I freely admit that Brance (my Dwilight character) acts fairly arrogant. The difference, I think, is that to this point Brance is a /very/ successful noble. He is the founder of Astrum, which has grown to be the largest and most powerful realm on Dwilight. He is the ruler of said realm, and a powerful and influential duke. I think there are only two people in SA that have been followers longer than he has, and one of them is the founder. For a while he was the leader of SA itself. And he is completely dedicated to the Stars, and supremely confident in the righteousness of his faith. After all, the Stars have led him to success after success after success, allowing him to dispatch all of his enemies. He has a right to be arrogant and confident. Eventually, someone might teach him some humility. Maybe.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 18, 2012, 02:46:16 AM
I think you got it perfectly.  Though I think there are a few that are at least trying to change some of it.
he he he... if so, they are in for a rude surprise. We're not likely to be getting any less aggressive any time soon.

Quote
I am sure of Morek could get away with burning Creed at the stake they would.  I am sure the regent and and judge would love to do that.
The Regent of SA? Nah... Pierre is a softy. I don't know Morek's judge. But Busto is very easygoing. You've gotta do a lot to really get him angry. But Creed did manage to do it, which is why Busto asked him to step down as general.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on March 18, 2012, 03:29:17 AM
I know things are not likely to change but thats part of the fun of a good rp.

I disagree with Pierre.  As regent he has been very vocal against Creed and what creed has been saying recently.  The judge has been quite with most of the recent stuff( or at least been quiet in speaking to the realm at large).  Pierre has been doing most of the arguing.  Though I would say what caused Busto to ask Creed to step down had very little if anything to do with faith.  Once again that is going from what was said in the realm.


And so it is acceptable for a member of SA and ruler of a realm who was ex regent of SA to be arrogant but not for a master swordsman and marshal who is not of the SA faith?-
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 18, 2012, 03:42:45 AM
Though I would say what caused Busto to ask Creed to step down had very little if anything to do with faith.  Once again that is going from what was said in the realm.
It was not directly related to SA. It was an incident that happened in the Dwilight University.

Quote
And so it is acceptable for a member of SA and ruler of a realm who was ex regent of SA to be arrogant but not for a master swordsman and marshal who is not of the SA faith?-
Master swordsmen are a dime a dozen. All it takes is gold and free time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on March 18, 2012, 03:49:29 AM
It was not directly related to SA. It was an incident that happened in the Dwilight University.
Once again... That was not the reason that was given in the realm.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 18, 2012, 09:04:58 AM
The Regent of SA? Nah... Pierre is a softy.

I disagree with Pierre.  As regent he has been very vocal against Creed and what creed has been saying recently.  The judge has been quite with most of the recent stuff( or at least been quiet in speaking to the realm at large).  Pierre has been doing most of the arguing. 

These are not mutually exclusive statements.... I really can't imagine Pierre burning anyone at the stake. It's just not his style.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on March 18, 2012, 03:02:03 PM
And so it is acceptable for a member of SA and ruler of a realm who was ex regent of SA to be arrogant but not for a master swordsman and marshal who is not of the SA faith?-

Anyone can be arrogant. The question is whether they can walk the walk. Brance has lots of power and influence, and at this point does not need to demonstrate it for people to know it's there. Creed on the other hand has not yet warranted being taken seriously as either a threat or a power player in his own right. Right now he's just a crackpot heretic who's been marginalized. Incidentally, that's the difference between Creed and Allison. She's powerful and dangerous, and has proven it on many occasions. She has skirted the line of heresy and schism numerous times, but she's too powerful and has too many supporters for the Church to get rid of her easily. She's been too crafty to do anything that would *really* piss of the Church (like start preaching about a Dark Star) or cost her her political support.

Of course if Creed succeeds in stirring up real trouble, people will naturally start to take him more seriously. Personally I hope he does. It would give us all something interesting to do.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 20, 2012, 01:03:12 PM
Allison is being told on she's being naughty. Why can't she play nice with the other kids?  :'(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 20, 2012, 01:43:06 PM
The funny part is that the other SA rulers don't care.  No one in the church or other rulers have said anything to Allison about this whole incident.   I'm playing it off as Terran being dumb.   They did agree for the Trader to show up and then got mad when the Trader showed up.   Just silly.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 20, 2012, 02:06:40 PM
Heh. We agreed for a trade in Faithill, but have scout reports of a trader in Vashgew. Bit of a difference.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 20, 2012, 03:26:43 PM
Personally happy Allison is stirring stuff up . In game not so happy about it, but I personally am ready for some crazy stuff going on.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 20, 2012, 05:09:57 PM
Personally happy Allison is stirring stuff up . In game not so happy about it, but I personally am ready for some crazy stuff going on.

I just want something to happen. :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on March 20, 2012, 05:12:08 PM
I think we all just want something to hapen
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 20, 2012, 05:18:42 PM
Oh, the anticipation! Just wait for the big reveal. You won't be disappointed. :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 20, 2012, 06:29:36 PM
Never are when it's a Kabrinski scheme.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 21, 2012, 12:45:30 AM
I think we all just want something to hapen

Nah, I'm fine with all being peaceful. I have plenty of wars with all my other chars.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 21, 2012, 12:59:15 AM
Nah, I'm fine with all being peaceful. I have plenty of wars with all my other chars.

You are lame.

We need everybody to do their part in blowing this thing out of proportion. It's a team effort.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 21, 2012, 01:02:05 AM
Nah, I'm fine with all being peaceful. I have plenty of wars with all my other chars.

lol thats the lamest thing I have ever heard( you are joking right?)... You can never have too much war. :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 21, 2012, 12:43:45 PM
lol thats the lamest thing I have ever heard( you are joking right?)... You can never have too much war. :P

There's enough politics on Dwilight to keep be entertained without conflict. Keeping peace is a war of its own.

Hell, getting food and surviving is a struggle on its own. War is for the bored with nothing better to do (as all my other characters).

Where Guillaume tries to get as much war as possible for his realm, Machiavel does the opposite. That's pretty much what he was elected for. There's absolutely nothing to gain with war, and even a victory can be quite costly.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 21, 2012, 01:28:30 PM
There's absolutely nothing to gain with war
Bragging rights, and another notch on your sword hilt.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on March 21, 2012, 03:36:33 PM

Hell, getting food and surviving is a struggle on its own. War is for the bored with nothing better to do (as all my other characters).



Exactly, I am in Morek where we have plenty of food.    playing with little groups of monsers and undead will only amuse you so long.  Which is why creeds arguments and the idea of a war are very interesting
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 21, 2012, 04:24:36 PM
I know of two major conflicts brewing, but nobody else seems to be wanting to help them boil over. I tell ya, trying to start a war on your own is tricky business.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 21, 2012, 04:31:43 PM
Well, just to let you know, it's your fault it's going slow. :) Not that you would know that. I'm just sayin'...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 21, 2012, 05:43:54 PM
Well, just to let you know, it's your fault it's going slow. :) Not that you would know that. I'm just sayin'...

lol, seriously?

Here I am publicly accusing Allison of being an oath-breaker, accusing her of invading Terran, trying to instigate fights between Kabrinskian traders and Terran soldiers, and openly developing an alliance against Kabrinskia... and I'm making conflict come slower?

 :o

I believe that you're telling the truth; I just don't understand how. After this all goes down, a "behind the scenes" would be great.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 21, 2012, 05:57:24 PM
Funny how things happen, isn't it?

But yeah, there are some interesting questions that we all have, and just can't ask right now. Even OOC I don't want to know, because I don't want to spoil the suspense/surprise.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on March 22, 2012, 01:22:12 AM
I know of two major conflicts brewing, but nobody else seems to be wanting to help them boil over. I tell ya, trying to start a war on your own is tricky business.

In the Lurias war seek you ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on March 22, 2012, 01:43:25 AM
In the Lurias war seek you ;)

Brom was heading over to the west, he should be able to help get a war going. God knows he caused enough in the east, intentionally and unintentionally.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on March 22, 2012, 03:51:17 AM
Brom was heading over to the west, he should be able to help get a war going. God knows he caused enough in the east, intentionally and unintentionally.

Don't worry it was all intentional. I mean 5 rebellions/assassinations don't just start themselves.

So who is wanting war? It can be arranged...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on March 22, 2012, 04:11:17 AM
Don't worry it was all intentional. I mean 5 rebellions/assassinations don't just start themselves.

So who is wanting war? It can be arranged...

So the only unintentional part was the fact they all failed? Or did you truly plan that assassinating a King and then blaming another realm would result in the death of your own realm?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on March 22, 2012, 04:13:42 AM
So the only unintentional part was the fact they all failed? Or did you truly plan that assassinating a King and then blaming another realm would result in the death of your own realm?

Yes.

Albeit that was just bad timing. If I had known y'all were trying to have us killed before I even did any of that, I would have just asked Fulco and Malus for help planning it anyway.

Although, to be fair, they didn't all fail. I had a lot of fun running them, and I remained in power for a long time. Not to mention getting away with 4 out of 5 seems like a pretty good streak imho.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 25, 2012, 10:35:47 AM
Hey, Gustav got grouped up with Allison as a troublemaker. Not fair! all he did was share decisions from the Elder Council, exactly as he said he would when he was voted in. >_<
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 25, 2012, 02:27:14 PM
I'm glad you did. Someone needs to do it. There's no law or convention that says the elder council is private/secret.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 25, 2012, 05:39:50 PM
So SA is declaring open season for preaching.

This may get very interesting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 25, 2012, 09:02:14 PM
Pierre and Busto promised to support the measure and then they decided not to vote.  Pierre thought he could suspend a vote and so some of the other Elders didn't vote.   In the end, no one voted against it and it passed.  Even the two most outspoken Elders against it.  Labell and Medugnatos didn't vote against it.   


In the end, the other Elders apathy and ignorance made them look bad.    SA has 13 priests and all the other religions combined have only 9.  Some SA people are freaking out about this but they don't realize that having 99% of the commoners in a region following your faith and having temples in a region and every region around it make it almost impossible for a foreign priest to make any sort of headway preaching in an SA region.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 25, 2012, 10:02:06 PM
That's a very slanted and biased view of the events. The proposed amendment was not worded the way it was presented to Busto and Brance. Whether or not it "passed" is also debatable, as it did not garner yes votes from 2/3rds of the total elders. I think the votes were 4:1 in favor, meaning less than half the elders voted. A poorly written charter leaves the interpretation of the voting rather vague. Also, a don't think Allison has the authority to declare the vote as passed or failed. Several of the elders didn't vote not out of apathy, but because the regent suspended the vote before it could finish. And Pierre did not support it because he asked Allison to wait on calling a vote, and she went ahead and called the vote anyay. And the elders that voted for it were mostly Allison and her puppets.

And then Allison went ahead and trumpeted the news to the world in exactly the way that those she claimed supported her told her *not* to do it.

So, yes, this will be interesting.

I think what would be more interesting is if some other religions joined the bandwagon in support. After all, the resolution declares open preaching for all priests in all lands, not just SA priests. This could, if handled properly by the right people, be a religious first in BattleMaster.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 25, 2012, 10:13:34 PM
Ah, Gustav is a puppet, is he? ^_^

Or perhaps Allison just knows him well enough to know what to ask of him and what he won't do?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 25, 2012, 10:19:00 PM
Quite honestly, yes. Allison constantly tells everyone that she has the voting support to do whatever she wants, because she knows that certain people, like Gustav, will vote however she tells them to vote.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 25, 2012, 10:21:42 PM
Quite honestly, yes. Allison constantly tells everyone that she has the voting support to do whatever she wants, because she knows that certain people, like Gustav, will vote however she tells them to vote.

Not however she tells him to vote. She just knows what he is willing to support. There is a difference.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 25, 2012, 10:27:04 PM
I think what would be more interesting is if some other religions joined the bandwagon in support. After all, the resolution declares open preaching for all priests in all lands, not just SA priests. This could, if handled properly by the right people, be a religious first in BattleMaster.
Actually it doesn't really allow priests to preach anywhere because after when of the consul's complained Busto said that theocracies don't have to let other priests preach in their lands so if that's true then SA priests get to preach as they please but theocracies don't so its really just a SA saying we get to preach  where ever we want regardless of what any realm says. Allison even said any realm caught arresting a SA priest she will declare war on and that if the entire south rebel's she doesn't care since she believes SA will win.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 25, 2012, 10:28:37 PM
Quite honestly, yes. Allison constantly tells everyone that she has the voting support to do whatever she wants, because she knows that certain people, like Gustav, will vote however she tells them to vote.


I don't have the voting support to do whatever I want.  I don't have 2/3rds majority.  I can with the right persuasion block just about any vote I don't like though...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 25, 2012, 10:42:15 PM
Besides, Gustav is getting a bit annoyed...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 25, 2012, 10:58:00 PM
Besides, Gustav is getting a bit annoyed...

Good because I really hope the elders dont support this. I and I hope many others will leave if the amendment is not repealed. Allison is trying to say the church has power over not only members of the church but the entire island by saying no realm may deny the preaching of SA regardless of their laws must obey SA or be destroyed. So it seems a crusade against SA or maybe just a war against Kabrinskia could definently happen if Allison holds true to what she said of any realm found arresting an SA priest will be declared war on them. I have also heard some theocracy ruler's say they are fine with saying SA may preach anywhere while others may not preach in the theocracies thus the possibility of a crusade against SA not only war against Kabrinskia.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 25, 2012, 11:05:08 PM
Then Gustav should show it by doing something to indicate he's not really Allison's lapdog.

As for a 2/3rds vote, dustole, all you need 2/3rds of the people who /actually/ vote, right? ;)

And as for preaching, any theocratic ruler who knows which way the wind blows will open their borders. Writing the declaration the way it was done was brilliant. Allowing reciprocal preaching turns it from an oppressive declaration of foreign domination into a declaration of religion trumping secular trivialities. The church *needs* to enforce that portion of the declaration, and make it stick.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 25, 2012, 11:12:50 PM
Then Gustav should show it by doing something to indicate he's not really Allison's lapdog.

As for a 2/3rds vote, dustole, all you need 2/3rds of the people who /actually/ vote, right? ;)

And as for preaching, any theocratic ruler who knows which way the wind blows will open their borders. Writing the declaration the way it was done was brilliant. Allowing reciprocal preaching turns it from an oppressive declaration of foreign domination into a declaration of religion trumping secular trivialities. The church *needs* to enforce that portion of the declaration, and make it stick.

Heh.

If this amendment passes formally.... it'll be very interesting. I'm already thinking of responses to it for Hireshmont. My favorite one so far is the one I gave the rulers: SA just claimed sovereignty over the Zuma?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 25, 2012, 11:21:39 PM
Well it did pass formally it just must not of been shared with many rulers that aren't of SA. Basically it passed but with lots of argueing/protesting happening afterwards which hasn't stopped yet. That will be quite the interesting reply and actually very interesting to here what the Zuma say because Allison did say all of Dwilight which would include the Zuma's lands. You could use that to your advantage if you wanted to repeal it too.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 25, 2012, 11:31:05 PM
Well it did pass formally it just must not of been shared with many rulers that aren't of SA. Basically it passed but with lots of argueing/protesting happening afterwards which hasn't stopped yet. That will be quite the interesting reply and actually very interesting to here what the Zuma say because Allison did say all of Dwilight which would include the Zuma's lands. You could use that to your advantage if you wanted to repeal it too.


I'm in good with the Zuma.  I've already negotiated preaching rights with the Zuma and the rights to built shrines in Zuma lands.   SA priests have been in Zuma lands for quite some time now.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 25, 2012, 11:31:36 PM
Then Gustav should show it by doing something to indicate he's not really Allison's lapdog.

As for a 2/3rds vote, dustole, all you need 2/3rds of the people who /actually/ vote, right? ;)

And as for preaching, any theocratic ruler who knows which way the wind blows will open their borders. Writing the declaration the way it was done was brilliant. Allowing reciprocal preaching turns it from an oppressive declaration of foreign domination into a declaration of religion trumping secular trivialities. The church *needs* to enforce that portion of the declaration, and make it stick.

Someone didn't read the message I sent to all the full members of SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on March 25, 2012, 11:41:17 PM
So what is the point of the amendent if it alows for SA priests to go everywhere but SA theocrocies do not need to allow priests to preach.  Also does this only allow preaching to the peasents or are priess allowed to openly preaxh to nobels as well?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 25, 2012, 11:46:45 PM
So what is the point of the amendent if it alows for SA priests to go everywhere but SA theocrocies do not need to allow priests to preach.  Also does this only allow preaching to the peasents or are priess allowed to openly preaxh to nobels as well?


I think that the Theocracies will come around.  There are only the Iashalurians who are throwing a fit about it right now.  I attribute that to Aram opposing anything Allisons says.  As for preaching to nobles, nothing stops us from doing that.  There is no game mechanic to preach to a noble.  You just need to convince them to join your church.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on March 26, 2012, 12:03:24 AM
I'm finding the support of theocracies such as Astrum and Morek for this new declaration very interesting. I remember when the negotiations with Caerwyn were going on, Constantine was criticized for trying to impose preaching rights on the Caerwynians as apparently Brance and Bustoarsenzio thought that was going too far.

Apparently that attitude has changed, at least with Brance; I'd be interested to see what provoked this. Terran aggression perhaps?

Of course this declaration need not turn into a universal crusade, declaring that SA priests will not be prohibited from preaching in foreign lands is not the same as forcing foreign lands to welcome our priests. Although with Allison at it's head and the theocracies apparently compliant we'll have to see.

In short very fun from a player perspective, not so fun for my character lol
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on March 26, 2012, 12:46:58 AM

I think that the Theocracies will come around.  There are only the Iashalurians who are throwing a fit about it right now.  I attribute that to Aram opposing anything Allisons says.  As for preaching to nobles, nothing stops us from doing that.  There is no game mechanic to preach to a noble.  You just need to convince them to join your church.
It has been explained often that the laws and core ideas of the church are the core ideas of a theocrecy.  You would think that they woul not need to come around.  As to preaching to nobles it boils down if the realm will allow it.  I am guessing that a forign priest can be arrested (from a mecanic) for just abouythingr.  The questin is how much political trouble it causes on both ends.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 26, 2012, 01:43:45 AM
I have never heard of a priest being arrested for preaching to a noble as it is done through letters, not forcing anyone to do anything.
"declaring that SA priests will not be prohibited from preaching in foreign lands is not the same as forcing foreign lands to welcome our priests."
please share the difference.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on March 26, 2012, 02:45:23 AM
I have never heard of a priest being arrested for preaching to a noble as it is done through letters, not forcing anyone to do anything.
"declaring that SA priests will not be prohibited from preaching in foreign lands is not the same as forcing foreign lands to welcome our priests."
please share the difference.

Simple: The Church does not reprimand priests for preaching where they please (a de-facto reality anyway, since priests can't be excommunicated) while at the same time only declaring a crusade when a priest is actually tortured or executed (something that has already been proposed by King Turin).

Of course individual realms such as Kabrinskia may declare wars if they wish, but one theocracy does not make a crusade and King Turin seems to believe that a mere arrest is not a cause for Iashalur to declare war.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 26, 2012, 02:54:09 AM

I'm in good with the Zuma.  I've already negotiated preaching rights with the Zuma and the rights to built shrines in Zuma lands.   SA priests have been in Zuma lands for quite some time now.

Except you just made a proclamation asserting the right of all religions to preach in Zuma lands.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 26, 2012, 02:58:02 AM
No, it is the right for all religions to preach in SA lands. There is a difference...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on March 26, 2012, 03:07:47 AM
No, it is the right for all religions to preach in SA lands. There is a difference...

That is not what is says. It says ALL religions can preach in ALL lands.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on March 26, 2012, 03:12:28 AM
okay--non-SA realms will revoke passage rights for anyone from a SA realm.

We won't be prohibiting preaching, just calling you a trespasser.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 26, 2012, 05:20:43 AM
Simple: The Church does not reprimand priests for preaching where they please (a de-facto reality anyway, since priests can't be excommunicated) while at the same time only declaring a crusade when a priest is actually tortured or executed (something that has already been proposed by King Turin).

Of course individual realms such as Kabrinskia may declare wars if they wish, but one theocracy does not make a crusade and King Turin seems to believe that a mere arrest is not a cause for Iashalur to declare war.

I think most would agree to that though what if a priest repeatedly gets arrested and the realm decides to deport the priest as a way for the priest to stop preaching there. (I understand the church says there is nothing wrong with preaching in other realms but what would the church's reaction be if a priest got deported for this?)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 26, 2012, 05:51:32 AM
It is a good thing Allison is in Zuma lands now to explain this whole situation to the Zuma along with stopping their war with Morek. 

Arresting a priest is not a simple thing.  You have to declare war on the realm that the priest belongs to.  So in order to arrest that pesky priest chances are you will have to declare war on a Theocracy of Sanguis Astroism to do it.  It is no easy think to arrest a priest.  Some serious consideration would have to go into it.  Madina is currently the only realm around who declared war on SA and wasn't destroyed outright.  Mainly because they were too far south and that was before the founding of Kabrinskia to bring the churches reach a little further south.  That is also the main reason the church just stood back and watched when they were begging for SA's help against Auvrindale.  Declaring war on an SA realm just to arrest a priest is a fairly risky move. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 26, 2012, 06:10:00 AM
Hmmm, not nessacarily. If a realm were to declare war on the grounds that they will fight that realm until the priest is gave to them or arrested, next turn the priest is arrested and peace made if the priest is also let free immediately as King Turin did say he was fine with a realm arresting a priest if they don't do anything to them like torture or execute.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 26, 2012, 06:40:20 AM
Hmmm, not nessacarily. If a realm were to declare war on the grounds that they will fight that realm until the priest is gave to them or arrested, next turn the priest is arrested and peace made if the priest is also let free immediately as King Turin did say he was fine with a realm arresting a priest if they don't do anything to them like torture or execute.


Turin is a bit of a softy.  There are many nobles in SA just looking for a reason for a war.  Any reason.  Turin is probably the one noble in a position where he couldn't do anything even if he wanted to.  He just has a poor location for warfare at this time. 

I still stand by the fact that any realm who declares war to simply arrest a priest is taking a big risk. Especially if you are the first realm to do it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 26, 2012, 07:21:13 AM
Declaring war on a theocracy is indeed a risky move. But I would hope OOCly that players in Dwilight will be a mite bit less gang-bang happy than in, say, Atamara. I think distance partly contributes to this,

From an outsider's perspective, it looked like it took a !@#$load of crap to get SA to actually productively work together against Thulsoma or Averoth.

Anyways, we'll see how this all plays out.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 26, 2012, 07:38:51 AM
Obviously a big risk, if I were to do it I would set up an agreement making temporary wars like that allowed upon by both realms so its not just a hope they will have peace but the word of the realm.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on March 26, 2012, 12:06:32 PM
Obviously a big risk, if I were to do it I would set up an agreement making temporary wars like that allowed upon by both realms so its not just a hope they will have peace but the word of the realm.

Temporary wars, to arrest a priest with no real consequences? Sounds awfully close to a friendly conflict and hardly SMA to me. I see a real problem with needing to declare war to arrest priest, but setting up agreements for a war deceleration to basically mean nothing is not a great way to handle it.

From the Wiki on SMA

Quote
No powergaming. If the only reason you do something is game-mechanics, you should probably not do it. No declarations of war if you don't actually intend to fight, for example. No "assassinate me so the bounty stays within our realm", etc.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 26, 2012, 12:35:11 PM
Temporary wars, to arrest a priest with no real consequences? Sounds awfully close to a friendly conflict and hardly SMA to me. I see a real problem with needing to declare war to arrest priest, but setting up agreements for a war deceleration to basically mean nothing is not a great way to handle it.

War with limited aims however are perfectly fine. You can say "I declare war with the objective to arrest this man and bring him to justice. Once that objective is achieved, I will accept a return to peace".

If you really want to be friendly, however, what you should do is ask the priests' judge to ban the priest, and then arrest the rogue. If the other judge refuses to comply, then yes, you should declare war with all the consequences that imply.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on March 26, 2012, 12:47:55 PM
Sanguis Astroism theocracies will collectively declare war on any realm that threatens the expansion of their empire. They might not do it simultaneously, but they eventually will. To think otherwise would be an exercise of futility. You're looking at Astrum, Iashalur, Kabrinskia, Morek Empire, and Corsanctum. You should probably throw in Libero and Summerdale into that mix, too. It's best to just embrace the religion or to act like it's not there.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 26, 2012, 01:14:37 PM
or to act like it's not there.

You mean, for example, not including Asylon in your list of SA-ish realms?  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 26, 2012, 01:56:02 PM
Some of you people really need to brush up on your game mechanics. As has been said it takes a war declaration to arrest a priest. You can't deport a priest (or anyone) without first banning them. You can't banish a foreign priest unless he was tossed in prison by the game itself while commiting a crime like inciting the peasants or performing an auto de fe. I.e. you cannot have a noble arrest a foreign priest and then have your judge ban them. You cannot cancel a war without agreement from both sides. A cease-fire constitutes improving relations which requires mutual consent. If you declare war you have to get the other side to agree to end it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 26, 2012, 02:21:51 PM
I think most would agree to that though what if a priest repeatedly gets arrested and the realm decides to deport the priest as a way for the priest to stop preaching there. (I understand the church says there is nothing wrong with preaching in other realms but what would the church's reaction be if a priest got deported for this?)

Some of you people really need to brush up on your game mechanics. As has been said it takes a war declaration to arrest a priest. You can't deport a priest (or anyone) without first banning them. You can't banish a foreign priest unless he was tossed in prison by the game itself while commiting a crime like inciting the peasants or performing an auto de fe. I.e. you cannot have a noble arrest a foreign priest and then have your judge ban them. You cannot cancel a war without agreement from both sides. A cease-fire constitutes improving relations which requires mutual consent. If you declare war you have to get the other side to agree to end it.

And not the least, you can NEVER deport a priest.

okay--non-SA realms will revoke passage rights for anyone from a SA realm.

We won't be prohibiting preaching, just calling you a trespasser.

That's what Machiavel said. "That's fine, SA is already allowed in our realm. That doesn't mean it gives any foreigner the right to tresspass and do as they wish".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 26, 2012, 02:35:05 PM
And not the least, you can NEVER deport a priest.

Really? Why? Priests won't get banned unless they use on of their most extremes options - I don't see why the game would not allow you to deport a banned priests who carelessly got caught a second time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Iltaran on March 26, 2012, 02:58:18 PM
Really? Why? Priests won't get banned unless they use on of their most extremes options - I don't see why the game would not allow you to deport a banned priests who carelessly got caught a second time.

Priests can't leave their continent (either by emigrating or being deported), because they're linked to their specific religion and it only exists in the database for that continent. Technical issue.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 26, 2012, 03:00:13 PM
Priests can't leave their continent (either by emigrating or being deported), because they're linked to their specific religion and it only exists in the database for that continent. Technical issue.

Oh, ok. That wasn't obvious, but it makes sense.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telrunya on March 26, 2012, 03:04:26 PM
Otherwise you'd need to force a class switch.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 26, 2012, 03:12:33 PM
But they can still be executed, right?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on March 26, 2012, 04:05:56 PM
Otherwise you'd need to force a class switch.

Which, IMO, should be permitted in this very special case; if the player really wants to be a priest, he can always join a religion on his new continent and switch back.

I have an equal problem with Elders not being able to kick priests out of a religion for this exact same reason, though that has been discussed elsewhere.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 26, 2012, 05:28:15 PM
And not the least, you can NEVER deport a priest.

Seriously?

That's annoying.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on March 26, 2012, 06:05:01 PM
You know, I think I started channelling Alaron when I wrote his two recent letters to the church and to the elders regarding this whole thing. As in jabbing my finger on the table when thinking about points of my argument, and talking in a bit of a posh arguing voice.

I think I've finally cracked. But damn, that's the most fun caused by the game I've had in a while.

But anyway - while I am aware of the game mechanics regarding the arresting of Priests, I think Alaron was looking at it from a different standpoint. Such as that he was the Lord of a region, and what he says about the region goes unless otherwise said by his Duke or by the Ruler. Besides, if the game mechanics prohibit the arrest of a foreign priest without a war declaration, there is always the dagger...  ;D - After all, I did decide I wanted Alaron to be the nutcase of my family...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 26, 2012, 06:32:30 PM
The most fun I have with Allison is when I do something controversial that gets other nobles to speak up and take part.  Alaron is a prime example.  Before this, I had no idea he even existed.  He brings a bit of fun to the events.  Even more so since a Magistratum helps me.  The 3 Lights would be my Judge /if/ the Elders even accept the magistratum.  I am quite confident that 2 out of 3 Lights will not convict me.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 26, 2012, 07:21:38 PM
Besides, if the game mechanics prohibit the arrest of a foreign priest without a war declaration, there is always the dagger...  ;D - After all, I did decide I wanted Alaron to be the nutcase of my family...
That is an interesting idea, if the priest won't listen to the realm's law and judge then take out the priest.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 26, 2012, 07:36:24 PM
Attacking a priest of SA might be more dangerous than simply declaring war and arresting them to return them to their realm.  There at least the priest isn't harmed. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 26, 2012, 07:50:15 PM
But if an infil doesn't get caught there is no harm and no chance of the priest coming back unlike just arresting, plus if he does get caught Dwilight has a war on its hands.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on March 26, 2012, 08:49:11 PM
But if an infil doesn't get caught there is no harm and no chance of the priest coming back unlike just arresting, plus if he does get caught Dwilight has a war on its hands.

Just because the infiltrator doesn't get caught doesn't mean that no one will be blamed. In fact it gives us considerably more leeway on the subject of who exactly we will choose to blame.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on March 26, 2012, 08:51:04 PM
Step 1: Post a nice 500 gold bounty on the priest. Bounties are anonymous.
Step 2: Let an infil from another realm know where the priest is--you certainly wouldn't want an infil from your own realm to stab them.
Step 3: make sure that all of your realms' nobles are out of the region when the stabbing occurs, for deniability.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 26, 2012, 08:56:12 PM
Step 1: Post a nice 500 gold bounty on the priest. Bounties are anonymous.
Step 2: Let an infil from another realm know where the priest is--you certainly wouldn't want an infil from your own realm to stab them.
Step 3: make sure that all of your realms' nobles are out of the region when the stabbing occurs, for deniability.


Genius.  Allison already has one of the highest bounties!  Stab away.  She is in Zuma lands right now so come get her!  I like drama.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on March 27, 2012, 01:19:23 AM
War with limited aims however are perfectly fine. You can say "I declare war with the objective to arrest this man and bring him to justice. Once that objective is achieved, I will accept a return to peace".

If you really want to be friendly, however, what you should do is ask the priests' judge to ban the priest, and then arrest the rogue. If the other judge refuses to comply, then yes, you should declare war with all the consequences that imply.

Yes, so long as you are actually going to FIGHT to cause the change you want. Declaring war with a understanding that the armies will never meet and that no looting or anything will be done, that is wrong.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 27, 2012, 01:32:51 AM
Seriously?

That's annoying.

Yes, but you can execute them.

The real pain, imo, is that you can't kick a priest out of a church. That, along with not being able to demote people with bigger debts than the lower rank's maximum, are the two most broken things about guilds/religion in my eyes.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on March 27, 2012, 01:36:39 AM
So, SA is delayed in its conquering of the world. What is everyone to do now?

Also, since Allison is with the Zuma still, can we just feed her to them?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on March 27, 2012, 01:55:36 AM
Step 1: Post a nice 500 gold bounty on the priest. Bounties are anonymous.
Step 2: Let an infil from another realm know where the priest is--you certainly wouldn't want an infil from your own realm to stab them.
Step 3: make sure that all of your realms' nobles are out of the region when the stabbing occurs, for deniability.

Which won't come even remotely close to stopping us from blaming whoever we want. Could be the realm the infiltrator is from. Could be the realm that let a priest get assaulted within their borders. Or maybe we'll let it slide. It all depends on what our particular goals are at any given time, not to mention what's going on in the halls of the Church.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 27, 2012, 02:04:04 AM
Which won't come even remotely close to stopping us from blaming whoever we want. Could be the realm the infiltrator is from. Could be the realm that let a priest get assaulted within their borders. Or maybe we'll let it slide. It all depends on what our particular goals are at any given time, not to mention what's going on in the halls of the Church.

All of this for a dude being, at worst, unable to read his messages for a day or so.

I don't mean to metagame and all, but infil attacks have only been used as justifications, not as dissuasion (at least, not successfully on other continents than the Colonies, and perhaps even there).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on March 27, 2012, 02:35:51 AM
All of this for a dude being, at worst, unable to read his messages for a day or so.

I don't mean to metagame and all, but infil attacks have only been used as justifications, not as dissuasion (at least, not successfully on other continents than the Colonies, and perhaps even there).

Yeah, but the IC implications are pretty serious.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 27, 2012, 02:42:03 AM
Yes, so long as you are actually going to FIGHT to cause the change you want. Declaring war with a understanding that the armies will never meet and that no looting or anything will be done, that is wrong.

Eh, I don't know.

Placing a standing kill order on all neighbors, but never actually invading them, doesn't seem un-SMA to me. Declaring war for the purpose of auto-engaging any errant neighbor seems like a lot of fun. Way more fun than sitting at neutral would be. That is to say, I would see nothing wrong with two realms basically deciding they find it intolerable to have the other realm's nobles or soldiers ever enter their land, and thus declaring war, even if they have no intention of conquest. War could be plausibly and SMAly declared with defensive aims.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on March 27, 2012, 02:44:12 AM
All of this for a dude being, at worst, unable to read his messages for a day or so.

I don't mean to metagame and all, but infil attacks have only been used as justifications, not as dissuasion (at least, not successfully on other continents than the Colonies, and perhaps even there).

BoM just lost their General to a infil. We were probably lucky that we were refitting and not in the middle of raiding.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 27, 2012, 02:59:23 AM
How often does an infil actually kill a noble when the infil attacks a noble?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 27, 2012, 03:04:57 AM
How often does an infil actually kill a noble when the infil attacks a noble?

Never.

Not sure if that question was rhetorical or not.

BoM just lost their General to a infil. We were probably lucky that we were refitting and not in the middle of raiding.

Extremely rare occurence. The dude usually gets appointed/elected right back when it happens too.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on March 27, 2012, 03:11:47 AM
Eh, I don't know.

Placing a standing kill order on all neighbors, but never actually invading them, doesn't seem un-SMA to me. Declaring war for the purpose of auto-engaging any errant neighbor seems like a lot of fun. Way more fun than sitting at neutral would be. That is to say, I would see nothing wrong with two realms basically deciding they find it intolerable to have the other realm's nobles or soldiers ever enter their land, and thus declaring war, even if they have no intention of conquest. War could be plausibly and SMAly declared with defensive aims.

I can't see a problem with that. Battles will be fought, if only small ones. My objection was an agreement to declare war, arrest a priest and then both side immediately sign for peace. Now if you declared war OVER a priest and the whole point of it was to arrest and punish him, sure that is fine, it was specifically the idea of a war with an agreement of no actual conflict that breaches the stated rules of SMA.

Quote
No declarations of war if you don't actually intend to fight, for example

Never.

Not sure if that question was rhetorical or not.

Extremely rare occurence. The dude usually gets appointed/elected right back when it happens too.

AT must be the exception then, I'm seeing quite a few people lose positions to infils. Sure they get reappointed when they return but the damage during that time is pretty significant.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 27, 2012, 03:17:01 AM
AT must be the exception then, I'm seeing quite a few people lose positions to infils. Sure they get reappointed when they return but the damage during that time is pretty significant.

I haven't seen it happen in years, and there's been plenty of wars on BT and Dwi. Might have happened a few times without me noticing, but that just goes to say how much of an impact it had, especially if on BT as I was involved in most of the wars one way or another there.

The times I've seen people gone missing are usually due to capture in battle. Unless it's the general/marshal and he's the only active guy in command of the armies, it doesn't tend to harm much.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 27, 2012, 03:21:52 AM
AT must be the exception then, I'm seeing quite a few people lose positions to infils. Sure they get reappointed when they return but the damage during that time is pretty significant.

Not really on the Eston/Darka/Talerium/CE front. But maybe that is because it is essentially a big stand still most of the time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on March 27, 2012, 03:22:51 AM
I haven't seen it happen in years, and there's been plenty of wars on BT and Dwi. Might have happened a few times without me noticing, but that just goes to say how much of an impact it had, especially if on BT as I was involved in most of the wars one way or another there.

The times I've seen people gone missing are usually due to capture in battle. Unless it's the general/marshal and he's the only active guy in command of the armies, it doesn't tend to harm much.

So you mean it is a problem for about 60-70% of the realms in the game.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on March 27, 2012, 04:25:23 AM
The most fun I have with Allison is when I do something controversial that gets other nobles to speak up and take part.  Alaron is a prime example.  Before this, I had no idea he even existed.  He brings a bit of fun to the events.  Even more so since a Magistratum helps me.  The 3 Lights would be my Judge /if/ the Elders even accept the magistratum.  I am quite confident that 2 out of 3 Lights will not convict me.

Indeed. I mean, the first hurdle is that the Magistratum is even convened. But, as you may have guessed from the last message I sent to the full members - there are two options at the moment. The first one is that Pierre goes ahead with this vote of his to have Allison removed with no trial whatsoever, though there is some outcry coming out at this right now. Because it isn't the three Lights who would have the only say in the verdict, that may pass. It may not as well, plus there is the possibility of the Prophet intervening.

But the second option is the Magistratum, which by your (and Allison's) reckoning would be an automatic "not guilty" verdict. Perhaps slightly unwittingly, Alaron's given you a lifeline. If (and only if) the Magistratum goes ahead, and you are acquitted as you say, then you're practically untouchable bar the Regent misusing his own powers to remove you as a Consul.

And as far as Alaron requesting the Magistratum? Well, if it goes ahead and you're found not guilty - that's due process and he'd have nothing to complain about. Although there might be something in the future no doubt. As for running as a Consul himself, well from what I recall when the last election came around, someone basically said that it was not a position for anyone who was not well established in the religion already. Personally, I think that's rubbish as sometimes you need a fresh outlook on things. But we'll see.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 27, 2012, 08:47:32 AM
Ibar the Regent misusing his own powers to remove you as a Consul.

The pointer hovered over there for a few seconds. I almost twitched.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 27, 2012, 01:45:14 PM
So you mean it is a problem for about 60-70% of the realms in the game.

Nowadays, perhaps.

But all other instances of wounding fail to cause great damage in the vast majority of cases (unless context dictates otherwise, such as a ruler needing to negotiate with others). The number of generals who lose those positions for any period of time (and who don't have an alt as vice-marshal) is probably infinitely small.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on March 27, 2012, 03:01:28 PM
The pointer hovered over there for a few seconds. I almost twitched.

Eh? There's no spelling mistake in the actual post, if that's what's causing the almost-twitching.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 27, 2012, 03:07:17 PM
Eh? There's no spelling mistake in the actual post, if that's what's causing the almost-twitching.

Huh? No, I mean I almost abused my power and demoted Allison. I probably couldn't get away with it, though, but there have been occasions in the past when I considered whether I should click a link or not, only to realize that I had clicked it anyway.

It's all fun and games, it's ok to be trigger-happy sometimes....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on March 27, 2012, 03:39:05 PM
Huh? No, I mean I almost abused my power and demoted Allison. I probably couldn't get away with it, though, but there have been occasions in the past when I considered whether I should click a link or not, only to realize that I had clicked it anyway.

It's all fun and games, it's ok to be trigger-happy sometimes....

Ah, now I understand. My apologies. But yes, all fun and games. It provides us something to do in this time of relative peace.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 27, 2012, 06:19:23 PM
O it would be funny if you did demote and you said you had the papers made for the removal of position but have no idea that they were used before the vote was over. Also isn't rather unfair for the  defendant to get to vote on their own case, because no one is going to say "hmm, I should get myself removed from office and banned for the next five years."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 27, 2012, 07:24:26 PM
Isnt it a bit unfair for the accuser to vote in favor of removing Allison?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 27, 2012, 07:37:23 PM
Isnt it a bit unfair for the accuser to vote in favor of removing Allison?

...fair? What's that? Never heard of the Fair Star. If there ever was one, Allison buried it deep way before my time and burned the map.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on March 27, 2012, 07:50:25 PM
Isnt it a bit unfair for the accuser to vote in favor of removing Allison?

Isn't it a bit unfair to universally state what all other religions, realms, and nobles must do, simply because you choose to?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 27, 2012, 07:53:17 PM
Haha!  Allison is untouchable
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on March 27, 2012, 08:05:58 PM
Haha!  Allison is untouchable

That's what you think.

I've only just arrived to this side of the continent. :)

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on March 27, 2012, 08:25:15 PM
Haha!  Allison is untouchable

Well, I don't know about that. We'll see. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 27, 2012, 08:41:47 PM
"Fair" doesn't apply to non-Astroists. They all deserve whatever fate we decree for them. :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on March 27, 2012, 09:00:54 PM
Well, the Magistratum is going ahead. Though whether it was caused by Alaron's petition or Pierre's use of his authority is unclear. Yes, I know Pierre said it was down to my petition, but as has been established, the procedures regarding the Magistratum and full members petitioning the elders have been deemed to be "murky".

Either way.. I had a hand in something for once. I think I'm enjoying the politics of the Church quite a lot now.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on March 27, 2012, 09:28:38 PM
Careful, it's addicting. In my own experience, there's no other political forum like it in the entire game. It's multi-realm (twelve realms and counting!), and open to all full members, of which there are currently 70. Granted, when things heat up keeping up with the message traffic can be a full time job, but it's just so much *fun*.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 27, 2012, 10:27:26 PM
Careful, it's addicting. In my own experience, there's no other political forum like it in the entire game. It's multi-realm (twelve realms and counting!), and open to all full members, of which there are currently 70. Granted, when things heat up keeping up with the message traffic can be a full time job, but it's just so much *fun*.

Ya'll are makin' me jealous.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on March 27, 2012, 10:40:35 PM
Ya'll are makin' me jealous.

It's way cooler than the 'Moot. Yeah, that's right. I said it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 28, 2012, 12:08:46 AM
I love Magistratum trials.  I face them somewhat regularly.  I always seem to win.  :)  I am confident that I will win this Magistratum as well.  When that is over I will run for the Regency.  If that doesn't piss off my enemies within SA I don't know what will. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on March 28, 2012, 12:42:26 AM
I love Magistratum trials.  I face them somewhat regularly.  I always seem to win.  :)  I am confident that I will win this Magistratum as well.  When that is over I will run for the Regency.  If that doesn't piss off my enemies within SA I don't know what will.

And I'll probably run for Consul. And if anyone plays the "haven't been around long enough" card, I will tell them to bugger off. I think six months plus OOCly, and watching the discussions as well as being involved in the latest one gives me some qualification. Plus there is that pilgrimage in D'Hara I'm on right now as well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 28, 2012, 12:46:49 AM
Might be tough.  I am lining up my 3 Consuls now and going to campaign to get them in.  In the past I have been able to easily get 2 Consuls elected.  This will be the first time I will try for 3. 

I am finding people who will support Allison as Regent and then I will put all of my influence and political might behind getting them elected as Consul.  If my election math is right, I just need to get 1 Consul elected that will support Allison and I have enough other votes in the SA Council to get me elected as Regent. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on March 28, 2012, 12:51:35 AM
Eoghan's going to try running again this time, too.  Hard to garner support when I've no real idea how to play politics; I could always point fingers at everyone else and say "Look at all those guys, they're crazy!  Vote for me, I'm the reasonable one!"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on March 28, 2012, 12:59:45 AM
Might be tough.  I am lining up my 3 Consuls now and going to campaign to get them in.  In the past I have been able to easily get 2 Consuls elected.  This will be the first time I will try for 3. 

I am finding people who will support Allison as Regent and then I will put all of my influence and political might behind getting them elected as Consul.  If my election math is right, I just need to get 1 Consul elected that will support Allison and I have enough other votes in the SA Council to get me elected as Regent.

You were the one who suggested I run ICly.. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 28, 2012, 01:01:36 AM
You were the one who suggested I run ICly.. ;)


Of course.  I'm trying to make you like Allison.  She needs your votes for other Consuls!   :)  The more people that run the better chance I have of getting my 3 in.  Splits up the votes.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on March 28, 2012, 03:59:35 AM
It's way cooler than the 'Moot. Yeah, that's right. I said it.

To the 'Moot's credit, it is the subject of much discussion in general, IC.  Kudos on that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on March 28, 2012, 04:09:01 AM
Nowadays, perhaps.

But all other instances of wounding fail to cause great damage in the vast majority of cases (unless context dictates otherwise, such as a ruler needing to negotiate with others). The number of generals who lose those positions for any period of time (and who don't have an alt as vice-marshal) is probably infinitely small.

Wouldn't that be the point. Random stabbing shouldn't has disastrous effects. Stabbing the right person at the right time, that is a whole different matter.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on March 28, 2012, 05:40:09 AM
The pointer hovered over there for a few seconds. I almost twitched.

Wimp.

You could do a lot more than just demote, you know  ;)


Never mind, noticed she still has that priestly protection there.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 28, 2012, 06:10:03 AM
Hmm, perhaps a change that could be done for priests to be able to be kicked out of their religion is if they are kicked out they preach local folklore or whatever it is that the standard religion is for a region before any priest preaches there.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on March 28, 2012, 08:08:19 AM
Nobody is responding to anything I have to say! T-T
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 28, 2012, 08:16:56 AM
Nobody is responding to anything I have to say! T-T

Your responses are fairly neutral.  I am saving my remarks for those that I can more easily disprove.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 28, 2012, 01:33:34 PM
Hmm, perhaps a change that could be done for priests to be able to be kicked out of their religion is if they are kicked out they preach local folklore or whatever it is that the standard religion is for a region before any priest preaches there.

Apparently it's intended, you can look for this very discussion.

I still think it's pretty damn stupid.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on March 28, 2012, 04:16:54 PM
Eoghan's going to try running again this time, too.  Hard to garner support when I've no real idea how to play politics; I could always point fingers at everyone else and say "Look at all those guys, they're crazy!  Vote for me, I'm the reasonable one!"

You just need to lobby the right people. Starting with any of your realm mates who are full members is a good bet. Getting elected in BM is just like getting elected in the real world; you have to put yourself out there, press the flesh, and lobby as many individual people as you can for their votes. It also doesn't hurt to get people with influence to endorse you.

You'll also want a platform. "Here's what I stand for, and what I'll do if I'm elected" is a good start. "Here's what's wrong with the system and here's what I intend to do to make it better" is another viable approach. Eoghan actually probably has a decent shot at election. He's known to most of the membership at this point and he's generally taken the high road on the issues he weighs in on. Nothing to drag down your reputation, and plenty of evidence that he's a reasonable, well-spoken individual.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on March 28, 2012, 05:11:46 PM
You just need to lobby the right people. Starting with any of your realm mates who are full members is a good bet. Getting elected in BM is just like getting elected in the real world; you have to put yourself out there, press the flesh, and lobby as many individual people as you can for their votes. It also doesn't hurt to get people with influence to endorse you.

You'll also want a platform. "Here's what I stand for, and what I'll do if I'm elected" is a good start. "Here's what's wrong with the system and here's what I intend to do to make it better" is another viable approach. Eoghan actually probably has a decent shot at election. He's known to most of the membership at this point and he's generally taken the high road on the issues he weighs in on. Nothing to drag down your reputation, and plenty of evidence that he's a reasonable, well-spoken individual.


Sage advice. Alaron, in contrast to Eoghan, is more of a maverick (I hate using that word, but it applies here). He is slowly finding his voice and becoming more active and vocal, as can be seen. For example, the pilgrimage to D'Hara, and of course the whole thing about the Magistratum. Given what he's hearing from Allison now, I wonder whether standing on a reform and/or anti-corruption platform would do him any favours. However, he is slightly unstable - the whole thing about removing foreign priests with the dagger probably does him no credit, even when he tried to frame it as being his prerogative as a Lord to allow or forbid preaching as he saw fit.

As far as campaigning.. well, he's sort of well-known within his army and usually volunteers for special assignments, so that may provide some backing. Also been a Lord for most of his time in Astrum, helping to rebuild his region. So at least he has evidence of taking action to fix things. Still might be difficult though. But it certainly will be fun.

On that note, what would it take to secure Lysander's backing? Name your price. ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on March 28, 2012, 05:26:55 PM
Sage advice. Alaron, in contrast to Eoghan, is more of a maverick (I hate using that word, but it applies here). He is slowly finding his voice and becoming more active and vocal, as can be seen. For example, the pilgrimage to D'Hara, and of course the whole thing about the Magistratum. Given what he's hearing from Allison now, I wonder whether standing on a reform and/or anti-corruption platform would do him any favours. However, he is slightly unstable - the whole thing about removing foreign priests with the dagger probably does him no credit, even when he tried to frame it as being his prerogative as a Lord to allow or forbid preaching as he saw fit.

As far as campaigning.. well, he's sort of well-known within his army and usually volunteers for special assignments, so that may provide some backing. Also been a Lord for most of his time in Astrum, helping to rebuild his region. So at least he has evidence of taking action to fix things. Still might be difficult though. But it certainly will be fun.

On that note, what would it take to secure Lysander's backing? Name your price. ;D

You should contact him IC if you want to know whether he would support you  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 28, 2012, 05:27:03 PM
@penchant: there will *never* be priests of paganism, or priests who are not members of a player-created religion. This has been firmly rejected.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 28, 2012, 06:47:34 PM
Ok, just trying to find a way to kick priests out of a religion so they can't use it as protection while not forcing a class change.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 28, 2012, 11:17:46 PM
Ok, just trying to find a way to kick priests out of a religion so they can't use it as protection while not forcing a class change.

I personally see no reason to not just kick them back into warriors. It's the default class, after all, and if they don't represent the church they won't be needing any priest-specific actions.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 28, 2012, 11:29:29 PM
I think kicking out priests should wait until we have some sort of Schism ability.  There should be consequences to kicking out a priest.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on March 29, 2012, 12:08:30 AM
I think kicking out priests should wait until we have some sort of Schism ability.  There should be consequences to kicking out a priest.

You say, thinking of how many times this might have happened to Allison.

But, what about griefers? We had a priest in SA at one point who was fairly obviously working with enemies of the Church, but we couldn't touch him just because of his class. Heck, we still can't touch him now that he's resurfaced. We can and have banned him from the theocratic realms, but it annoys me that he is essentially an untouchable spy in the full membership. If he wanted to make life unpleasant for us by haranguing or mocking us constantly, he could and we couldn't do anything about it. IMO a religion needs to be able to control who represents it; when someone is obviously not aligned with the goals of the religion, or even aligned directly against them, religions need a recourse to be able to simply kick him out. The Vatican sure as hell can defrock people; why can't we?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 29, 2012, 12:10:20 AM
You say, thinking of how many times this might have happened to Allison.

But, what about griefers? We had a priest in SA at one point who was fairly obviously working with enemies of the Church, but we couldn't touch him just because of his class. Heck, we still can't touch him now that he's resurfaced. We can and have banned him from the theocratic realms, but it annoys me that he is essentially an untouchable spy in the full membership. If he wanted to make life unpleasant for us by haranguing or mocking us constantly, he could and we couldn't do anything about it. IMO a religion needs to be able to control who represents it; when someone is obviously not aligned with the goals of the religion, or even aligned directly against them, religions need a recourse to be able to simply kick him out. The Vatican sure as hell can defrock people; why can't we?

Indeed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 29, 2012, 12:18:19 AM
The Catholic church doesn't kick people out with an excommunication. 

definition:  to sentence (a member of the Church) to exclusion from the communion of believers and from the privileges and public prayers of the Church

If a priest gets excommunicated they don't suddenly stop being a catholic priest.  They would still preach Christianity.  Sure they couldn't go to rome and kiss the popes ring, but they don't stop being a priest.  The rogue SA priest you speak of is essentially excommunicated.  Any Theocratic realm he ends up in is going to ban him.  He will be ignored by most when speaking in the church.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on March 29, 2012, 12:57:15 AM
If a priest gets excommunicated they don't suddenly stop being a catholic priest.  They would still preach Christianity.  Sure they couldn't go to rome and kiss the popes ring, but they don't stop being a priest.  The rogue SA priest you speak of is essentially excommunicated.  Any Theocratic realm he ends up in is going to ban him.  He will be ignored by most when speaking in the church.
Actually, yes, they do.  They could call themselves a priest, but legally they would not be, and they would not be a member of the Catholic (big C, is an important difference) Church, and thus would not be a Catholic priest even if they started their own religion or joined another one . . . they'd be some other sort of priest.

The Catholic Church, along with other churches, also has a procedure known as defrocking, which does not excommunicate someone, but simply removes them from being a priest (or other ordained ministry).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 29, 2012, 03:10:44 AM
Actually, yes, they do.  They could call themselves a priest, but legally they would not be, and they would not be a member of the Catholic (big C, is an important difference) Church, and thus would not be a Catholic priest even if they started their own religion or joined another one . . . they'd be some other sort of priest.

The Catholic Church, along with other churches, also has a procedure known as defrocking, which does not excommunicate someone, but simply removes them from being a priest (or other ordained ministry).

Exactly. They would be christian priests if they want to, sure, but not Catholic priests. In the days, an excommunicated person was a persona non grata of the lowest social status.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on March 30, 2012, 07:20:05 AM
Eoghan's going to try running again this time, too.  Hard to garner support when I've no real idea how to play politics; I could always point fingers at everyone else and say "Look at all those guys, they're crazy!  Vote for me, I'm the reasonable one!"

It's so weird seeing people use my not-particularly-common real name to talk about a character IC. I saw this post and thought, "Wait, what? What am I running for?"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 30, 2012, 07:32:16 AM
You have a pretty cool name then. :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on March 30, 2012, 07:39:24 AM
It's so weird seeing people use my not-particularly-common real name to talk about a character IC. I saw this post and thought, "Wait, what? What am I running for?"

I think you sent me an OOC message about that in-game, too. 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on March 30, 2012, 07:49:58 AM
Hah, I did. How do you pronounce your character's name, out of curiosity?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on March 30, 2012, 04:08:01 PM
Hah, I did. How do you pronounce your character's name, out of curiosity?

I always pronounce it "Owen", though I think it can also be pronounced "Ewan", as in "Obi-wan Kenobi".  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on March 30, 2012, 06:16:57 PM
I always pronounce it "Owen", though I think it can also be pronounced "Ewan", as in "Obi-wan Kenobi".  :P

I kinda read it as "Yogan" or "Johann"...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on March 30, 2012, 07:48:02 PM
The proper pronunciation is Oh-han, with the emphasis on the first syllable and a very short, almost non-existent 'a' sound in the second syllable. But I just use "Owen", as it's easier and is the anglicised version of that name.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 31, 2012, 06:49:32 PM
Woot Woot!  War!!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 31, 2012, 09:28:15 PM
Honk honk yo tech-9 in the air my homies... Ok war this fun!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on April 02, 2012, 09:04:31 AM
Eoghan's been captured by rogues and is still in jail, what news from the Riddermark?  Is Allison excommunicated (again) yet?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on April 02, 2012, 09:09:52 AM
Eoghan's been captured by rogues and is still in jail, what news from the Riddermark?  Is Allison excommunicated (again) yet?

Nope. Now there is a insult slugfest between Karibash and Turin/Thomas. I'm enjoying it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: T Strike on April 02, 2012, 01:36:34 PM
Yeah, now i'm arguing with him. Funny stuff.. I called him old man and stuff feels so good!!!! No offense to him in real life though... I'm sure he is a handsome gent with an amazing wife that models everyday of her life. *wink* *wink* good job ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BarticaBoat on April 04, 2012, 08:00:05 AM
Nope. Now there is a insult slugfest between Karibash and Turin/Thomas. I'm enjoying it.

I'm glad, Karibash is hella mad though. My one issue is that dates have been goofed, I left Averoth before Saxons existed in Thulsoma ;_; it's ancient history for everyone else, but to me it's still fresh...
thomas is dodging the duel, saying he's on business in solaria but i'm looking forward to dueling Turin. And you. Get ready!
i think my insults and threats have been pretty good, yes?

Yeah, now i'm arguing with him. Funny stuff.. I called him old man and stuff feels so good!!!! No offense to him in real life though... I'm sure he is a handsome gent with an amazing wife that models everyday of her life. *wink* *wink* good job ;)

Ironically, I'm a 20 year old university student. I hope you're ready to duel, Karibash is not going to forget. He's been semi-retired for a while, and to have all these young'uns suddenly doubting him is pretty much the best way to get him explode back into south-east kill everything mode. I believe I am to duel you as well, and you're in Astrum too so you can't run  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on April 04, 2012, 08:36:38 AM
Man, I wish Eoghan wasn't jailed for the duration of all that.  Sounds like crazy things went down while I was out.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: T Strike on April 04, 2012, 04:02:22 PM
I'm glad, Karibash is hella mad though. My one issue is that dates have been goofed, I left Averoth before Saxons existed in Thulsoma ;_; it's ancient history for everyone else, but to me it's still fresh...
thomas is dodging the duel, saying he's on business in solaria but i'm looking forward to dueling Turin. And you. Get ready!
i think my insults and threats have been pretty good, yes?

Ironically, I'm a 20 year old university student. I hope you're ready to duel, Karibash is not going to forget. He's been semi-retired for a while, and to have all these young'uns suddenly doubting him is pretty much the best way to get him explode back into south-east kill everything mode. I believe I am to duel you as well, and you're in Astrum too so you can't run  ;)

Eh, time for Ekirt to die I guess I need to bring another noble to Westmoor. Your Saxon buddies have arrived in Fontan. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on April 04, 2012, 08:19:28 PM
The Army of the Maddening Star (Kabrinskia), sponsored by Lady Allison Kabrinski, Priestess of Sanguis Astroism, Grandmistress of Kabrinskia, Duchess of the Maddening Star, Margravine of Golden Farrow, Ambassador of Kabrinskia

Now that's a title.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on April 04, 2012, 08:22:43 PM

thomas is dodging the duel, saying he's on business in solaria but i'm looking forward to dueling Turin. And you. Get ready!
i think my insults and threats have been pretty good, yes?


Ugh, Thomas... we don't want him anymore, can you please take him back?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 16, 2012, 08:22:05 PM
Why do nobles like to accuse Allison of wrongdoing?  It seems she can't sneeze without it being some sort of conspiracy and have a Magistratum called.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 16, 2012, 08:26:28 PM
Because she's usually up to something sneaky and underhanded.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on April 16, 2012, 10:05:14 PM
Because she's usually up to something sneaky and underhanded.

I've really got to get to know this Allison. Brom and her could make great friends.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on April 16, 2012, 10:15:43 PM
Why do nobles like to accuse Allison of wrongdoing?  It seems she can't sneeze without it being some sort of conspiracy and have a Magistratum called.

lol, is there another Magistratum being called? lulz.

Here's hoping Kabrinskia is thrown into spiritual and political chaos at the height of a war.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on April 16, 2012, 10:17:13 PM
lol, is there another Magistratum being called? lulz.

Here's hoping Kabrinskia is thrown into spiritual and political chaos at the height of a war.

No they need to wait and do that until after Kabrinskia provokes the full-scale war, so that they can actually lose stuff.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on April 16, 2012, 10:36:07 PM
Don't tell anyone, but I'm actually supposed to be leading a Magistratum right now, only I haven't gotten all the other Lights to respond yet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on April 16, 2012, 10:38:28 PM
lol, is there another Magistratum being called? lulz.

Here's hoping Kabrinskia is thrown into spiritual and political chaos at the height of a war.

I don't even know what's going on with the first Magistratum regarding Allison's alleged abuse of status/power. Now people are trying to accuse her of manipulating the elections by telling people how to vote...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on April 16, 2012, 10:53:17 PM
I love how all the Allisonites are acting so outraged at all the accusations of corruption- as I recall it, such accusations against the Elders were Allison's specialty back in the day.

Then again she got away with it and the Elders are apparently unable to do the same, so she obviously did something right. I am definitely enjoying not being an Elder atm  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on April 17, 2012, 12:32:34 AM
The Elders didn't have a horde of followers to speak up on their behalf, since they were mostly quiet except when they made decisions.  Allison, however, has her entire country backing her up and has proven quite apt at whipping them into a fervour.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on April 17, 2012, 02:00:35 AM
You know what it is: Allison just works harder than everyone else. It's not easy getting so many people willing to follow you. The other Elders who oppose Allison have certainly never bothered. You don't play the game, don't complain when you lose  :)

I have been trying to explain this to certain others. Fortunately Lysander doesn't much care. Allison winning the Regency might even be a good thing by his lights, it remains to be seen.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 17, 2012, 03:08:37 AM
As controversial as Allison is I thank the stars she is IG or I would die of boredom. Most people want to defeat Allison and see her banished far away or dead. In the past I was like that to but realized the best way to beat Allison is to join Allison in her merry making, trouble making... Because when Allison destroys Dwilight one day in some epic war or trickery..  There will only be a few nobles left standing and I plan on being one of them. Friend or foe I am going to help Allison sew chaos and destruction all the while. Dwilight and BM is best played as a dramatic tragedy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 17, 2012, 03:29:50 AM
As controversial as Allison is I thank the stars she is IG or I would die of boredom. Most people want to defeat Allison and see her banished far away or dead. In the past I was like that to but realized the best way to beat Allison is to join Allison in her merry making, trouble making... Because when Allison destroys Dwilight one day in some epic war or trickery..  There will only be a few nobles left standing and I plan on being one of them. Friend or foe I am going to help Allison sew chaos and destruction all the while. Dwilight and BM is best played as a dramatic tragedy.
Says the one defending Terran from Kabrinskia...though I am glad you are but the two things seem to contradict each other
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 17, 2012, 03:33:40 AM
Most of you have very singular plots and paths that wind down roads of black or white... Glaumring wanders complex trails of grey.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 17, 2012, 03:51:19 AM
IOW: He's lost. :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 17, 2012, 03:52:37 AM
Perhaps...  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on April 17, 2012, 06:45:49 AM
Why do nobles like to accuse Allison of wrongdoing?  It seems she can't sneeze without it being some sort of conspiracy and have a Magistratum called.

This last case, aka 'She RECOMMENDED people! IN SECRET! MANIPULATIVEPOWERABUSEEVILHERESYYYY!' is, at best, boy-who-cried-wolf. Whether she did or didn't do something in the past before my character was around it's a bit silly. It actually works in her favor when her opponents overreact to every little thing, because, again, boy who cried wolf scenario.

And no, Allison does not whip her nobles into any kind of frenzy when it comes to defending against the attacks within the SA on her person. It kind of happens naturally.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 17, 2012, 09:32:47 AM
Whether she did or didn't do something in the past before my character was around it's a bit silly. It actually works in her favor when her opponents overreact to every little thing, because, again, boy who cried wolf scenario.

Are you sure you're not in the Little Red Riding Hood's third house ?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on April 17, 2012, 11:55:24 AM
This last case, aka 'She RECOMMENDED people! IN SECRET! MANIPULATIVEPOWERABUSEEVILHERESYYYY!' is, at best, boy-who-cried-wolf. Whether she did or didn't do something in the past before my character was around it's a bit silly. It actually works in her favor when her opponents overreact to every little thing, because, again, boy who cried wolf scenario.

And no, Allison does not whip her nobles into any kind of frenzy when it comes to defending against the attacks within the SA on her person. It kind of happens naturally.

The crazy is contagious eh :p
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 25, 2012, 03:20:01 AM
Ugh, know we have some people from Summerdale complaining about the bug basically but in-character. "They must have used witchcraft to convert the loyal militia to work for Libero, we need to investigate and punish not only the one who committed it but possibly the queen of his realm too." -not actually a quote but a sum of what I have been hearing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 25, 2012, 03:21:25 AM
Hey, play through the bug. Gotta make up some IC reason for what happened. And if you can get a reason to declare war on someone else out of it, sound even better to me.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on April 25, 2012, 03:21:59 AM
Ugh, know we have some people from Summerdale complaining about the bug basically but in-character. "They must have used witchcraft to convert the loyal militia to work for Libero, we need to investigate and punish not only the one who committed it but possibly the queen of his realm too." -not actually a quote but a sum of what I have been hearing.

*Expression slowly morphs into troll-faced glee.*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 25, 2012, 03:27:45 AM
Hey, play through the bug. Gotta make up some IC reason for what happened. And if you can get a reason to declare war on someone else out of it, sound even better to me.
Well don't really see a way for it to produce a war considering the two realms are already at war. Though I guess if the Summerdale nobles were annoying enough they could cause the other SA realms to gang up on them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Broose on April 25, 2012, 03:46:10 AM
Ugh, know we have some people from Summerdale complaining about the bug basically but in-character. "They must have used witchcraft to convert the loyal militia to work for Libero, we need to investigate and punish not only the one who committed it but possibly the queen of his realm too." -not actually a quote but a sum of what I have been hearing.

I'm insulted that you would imply our roleplay is just 'complaining about the bug, but in-character.' The only reason I brought it up was because one of our knights insulted some Libero nobles and I thought I'd follow up on it when someone asked him to apologize. I thought reviving some of the tension between SA and Summerdale might actually be interesting, but I'm glad to see my efforts are being dismissed as OOC whining.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on April 25, 2012, 04:10:04 AM
OOC I may know that this was a bug or whatever, but IC, Rabisu believes there may indeed be some great evils and will gladly travel there to burn whoever's responsible.

Absolutely nothing can go wrong with this.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 25, 2012, 05:07:42 AM
I'm insulted that you would imply our roleplay is just 'complaining about the bug, but in-character.' The only reason I brought it up was because one of our knights insulted some Libero nobles and I thought I'd follow up on it when someone asked him to apologize. I thought reviving some of the tension between SA and Summerdale might actually be interesting, but I'm glad to see my efforts are being dismissed as OOC whining.
Sorry if I came off kinda agrresive, and I  guess it should be addressed in-game.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on April 25, 2012, 06:00:52 AM
I'm seeing what I can do about it IC, but I fully expect my remark about passing it to the Office of Austere should get them even more riled up; whoopsie. Oh wait, I changed that from "Office of Austere" to "Elder Council" before sending it.  Well, we'll see where this goes when the Dalians come back, but Glaumring certainly isn't helping calm things down (what else is new  :P).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on April 25, 2012, 06:39:10 AM
Ugh, know we have some people from Summerdale complaining about the bug basically but in-character. "They must have used witchcraft to convert the loyal militia to work for Libero, we need to investigate and punish not only the one who committed it but possibly the queen of his realm too." -not actually a quote but a sum of what I have been hearing.

A bug gave you a free region and a ton of militia. I suggest you be grateful rather than whining about the other side's completely justified frustration.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Broose on April 25, 2012, 07:58:49 AM
Sorry if I came off kinda agrresive, and I  guess it should be addressed in-game.
It's fine, I just don't want anyone to get the wrong idea and think I'm using the letters to complain about an OOC issue.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arrakis on April 25, 2012, 10:54:55 AM
The bug interpretation where Orris is labelled as a sorcerer with an old witch/hag as his assistant is a marvelous storytelling. One of the Summerdalian nobles first came up with it in a roleplay, and pretty much everyone has fallen into it (myself included - gonna be placin' some gold on that sorcerer's head!). Nothing wrong going on here.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on April 25, 2012, 11:12:05 AM
Snip.

Traitor! You killed off poor Leopold! :(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arrakis on April 25, 2012, 11:58:22 AM
Just paused him :) If anything at all was going on in Iashalur I would've sticked by, but there is nothing and there was no drive to change that. I might return one day although the way this Summerdale experience is going, I doubt it. :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 25, 2012, 02:31:12 PM
A bug gave you a free region and a ton of militia. I suggest you be grateful rather than whining about the other side's completely justified frustration.
I am a D'hara, not of Summerdale or Libero Empire so this bug does not affect me, I know of the complaints which after thinking about it myself should be brought up because it was a strange occurence IC that should be dealt with actually.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Brant on April 25, 2012, 04:13:54 PM
The other thing I wonder...   why the big "how dare you"  about witchcraft accusations?   Maybe I'm wrong but I can't see where magic use was forbidden or where it obtained such a stigma from.   Probably that damned bloodmoon fruit.   
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 25, 2012, 04:31:23 PM
The other thing I wonder...   why the big "how dare you"  about witchcraft accusations?   Maybe I'm wrong but I can't see where magic use was forbidden or where it obtained such a stigma from.   Probably that damned bloodmoon fruit.

You may be witnessing how stigma form in the first place!  :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 25, 2012, 07:19:29 PM
Everything is a weapon... Absolutely everything. Its only when people realize that they are being attacked in an obscure and intangible way does it confuse and anger, to realize that no where is safe and even words and ideas as deadly as knives...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: ^ban^ on April 26, 2012, 01:20:01 AM
The other thing I wonder...   why the big "how dare you"  about witchcraft accusations?   Maybe I'm wrong but I can't see where magic use was forbidden or where it obtained such a stigma from.   Probably that damned bloodmoon fruit.   

Witchcraft is how we roleplayed the things cheaters did back in the day.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 26, 2012, 02:33:47 AM
Yeah same for when we played UO. Glitches etc all works of the gods or witchcraft.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on April 26, 2012, 10:06:56 AM
Just paused him :) If anything at all was going on in Iashalur I would've sticked by, but there is nothing and there was no drive to change that. I might return one day although the way this Summerdale experience is going, I doubt it. :)

I was going to see about doing some long-range work from Samhain duchy if we *ever* actually got the nobles to take it.  Make it a seat of power for the Order of the Palm so the organization can actually do things, if I could get Turin to agree to it.  Blech, can't expand without more nobles, can't get more nobles without things to do; 'tis a vicious cycle.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arrakis on April 26, 2012, 12:04:56 PM
Yeah, I had some really neat plans in regards to guilds too and some other culturally interesting things. Too bad they didn't live, aka too bad I don't wanna grow old waiting to get the chance to do them.

Problem with new players in Iashalur should be a bit better now with all the influx of new players, however, I see you're still stuck below 20. The reasons for that are not just a boring geography but also the atmosphere of the realm and how attractive the realm is. I mean, Iashalur has that default banner for ages now, how hard it is to get that thing changed?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 26, 2012, 02:27:46 PM
I was going to see about doing some long-range work from Samhain duchy if we *ever* actually got the nobles to take it.  Make it a seat of power for the Order of the Palm so the organization can actually do things, if I could get Turin to agree to it.  Blech, can't expand without more nobles, can't get more nobles without things to do; 'tis a vicious cycle.

What actually happens in the Order of the Palm?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 26, 2012, 03:37:38 PM
Iashulars banner is the suck. And the massive SA alliances make for dull game. I think the alliance was useful for fighting Caerwyn after that there just is no point. The alliance is already fractured idealogically anyways.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on April 26, 2012, 03:45:01 PM
And it will fracture more if need be to keep things interesting. It's not very useful outside of the north anyway. The eastern and western halves are too far apart to help each other effectively unless, as was the case with Averoth, the enemy happens to be right in between them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Adriddae on April 26, 2012, 07:07:05 PM
What's all this talk about secularism? Did Medieval people really separate church and secular issues like this?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 26, 2012, 07:43:10 PM
If you are thinking about their philosophical worldview, then probably not.

If the question you are asking is "was it possible that one catholic goes to war against another without a crusade being declared on them", then I think you got your answer..... The Pope had enough with his own wars that he did not meddle in all the other ones. Some, but not all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 26, 2012, 10:22:40 PM
The issue lately is that no one on SA will fight another SA , and then if they do they try to get a crusade called on eschother. Its part of the reason why Asylon went to war with Kabrinskia, to show Astroists that its ok to fight. I know we are still using an alliance but I wouldnt really have one if we didnt have to worry about fighting all of SA , since that isnt happening we will not ally with anymore kingdoms and even review allainces, or merely have short term goal alliances, instead of sweeping long term alliances.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Adriddae on April 26, 2012, 10:26:57 PM
The way I see it, SA priests should take the sides of their realm, and not stay neutral in any conflict. I would love to see priests on both side of the Summerdale/Libero war using the peasants to help win the war. Who's side is the Bloodstars on?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 26, 2012, 11:15:36 PM
I haven't seen a crusade called on any SA state that declares war on another one, so I don't see where this is coming from...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 26, 2012, 11:38:48 PM
I agree with Gustav. We've had two crusades called, and they we're Averoth and Thulsoma.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on April 26, 2012, 11:57:51 PM
I agree with Gustav. We've had two crusades called, and they we're Averoth and Thulsoma.

And we might see the third one....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Andrew on April 27, 2012, 12:11:28 AM
And we might see the third one....

On Kabrinskia? Cause that would be hilarious from my perspective.

It'll probably be on some realm I don't care about though. One of those eastern or northeastern ones prolly. Maybe on Luria? That'd be funny too.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on April 27, 2012, 12:34:07 AM
The issue lately is that no one on SA will fight another SA , and then if they do they try to get a crusade called on eschother. Its part of the reason why Asylon went to war with Kabrinskia, to show Astroists that its ok to fight. I know we are still using an alliance but I wouldnt really have one if we didnt have to worry about fighting all of SA , since that isnt happening we will not ally with anymore kingdoms and even review allainces, or merely have short term goal alliances, instead of sweeping long term alliances.

Libero and Summerdale are fighting, both faithful realms. And Morek isn't even taking sides, which is probably good because they would almost certainly swing it one way or the other. As for the rest, what do you want? We're all former colonies of Morek or Astrum, and so far those ties have been quite strong.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 27, 2012, 01:16:48 AM
So the Zuma declare war on Morek, but its ok for Kabrinskia to allow the Zuma passage? How long until the Zuma start using boats to Morek from Golden Farrow?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on April 27, 2012, 01:21:30 AM
So the Zuma declare war on Morek, but its ok for Kabrinskia to allow the Zuma passage? How long until the Zuma start using boats to Morek from Golden Farrow?

Next thing we know there will be a Daimon called "PatchyPatchy." I'm talking Pirate Daimons here, people.


(http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20101010003302/pirates/images/archive/9/96/20101231093026!Davy_Jones_Crew_DMC.jpg)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on April 27, 2012, 01:49:12 AM
On Kabrinskia? Cause that would be hilarious from my perspective.

It'll probably be on some realm I don't care about though. One of those eastern or northeastern ones prolly. Maybe on Luria? That'd be funny too.

Ain't nobody in Luria that's dumb enough to earn that, uh, honor.  Not anymore, at least.  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on April 27, 2012, 01:58:00 AM
On Kabrinskia? Cause that would be hilarious from my perspective.

It'll probably be on some realm I don't care about though. One of those eastern or northeastern ones prolly. Maybe on Luria? That'd be funny too.

A crusade is likely against a non-SA realm, which means a realm you probably care a lot about.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Andrew on April 27, 2012, 03:03:14 AM
A crusade is likely against a non-SA realm, which means a realm you probably care a lot about.

Oh, so Perdan then?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on April 27, 2012, 03:50:23 AM
A crusade is likely against a non-SA realm, which means a realm you probably care a lot about.

No, we would not declare a crusade on one of our own. Until there's a schism, that is. Then it will be time to burn those heretics who butter their bread on the bottom instead of the top.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on April 27, 2012, 08:12:02 AM
No, we would not declare a crusade on one of our own. Until there's a schism, that is. Then it will be time to burn those heretics who butter their bread on the bottom instead of the top.

Did you read what I wrote?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on April 27, 2012, 11:38:46 AM
It's nice to see a Summerdale/Libero war; it breaks the status quo of 'SA theocracies do not fight one another!!!'

(And yes, Summerdale/Libero can be considered theocracies right now. Does it even have other religions other than SA?)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 27, 2012, 01:38:01 PM
Neither of them are theocracies by any means.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 27, 2012, 02:05:04 PM
Neither of them are theocracies by any means.

Theocracy: m.n., a realm that does what the other theocracies tells them to do.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 27, 2012, 02:47:41 PM
Which does not, in any way, apply here. I don't think I've ever heard any of the theocracies telling LE or Summerdale what to do.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 27, 2012, 03:04:18 PM
Which does not, in any way, apply here. I don't think I've ever heard any of the theocracies telling LE or Summerdale what to do.

They do most of what I want them to do.

So do you, in fact.  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 27, 2012, 03:43:11 PM
Asylon, Libero and Summerdale are not theocracies. They merely lean that way because of history or environment.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 27, 2012, 04:14:07 PM
Asylon, Libero and Summerdale are not theocracies. They merely lean that way because of history or environment.

That's pretty much what I wanted to say, yes.

Libero is much, much more of a theocracy than Averoth ever was. And, according to game mechanics, Averoth was a theocracy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on April 27, 2012, 04:39:39 PM
That's pretty much what I wanted to say, yes.

Libero is much, much more of a theocracy than Averoth ever was. And, according to game mechanics, Averoth was a theocracy.

Originally, but the people who created Averoth were very quickly supplanted, first by refugees from Everguard, and then again by Sextus Severus and his faction who led a rebellion and converted it to a tyranny. Moreover, the original colonists never had the blessing of the Church; far from it. They acted on their own and then announced that they intended to take in the Everguardians who were technically enemies of the Church at the time. As I recall, the Church didn't care for that one bit and we set out to deliberately sabotage them. We settled that before Sextus Severus and his friends showed up though and by the time he was in power I think we were completely prepared to leave Averoth alone.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 27, 2012, 06:52:39 PM
Originally, but the people who created Averoth were very quickly supplanted, first by refugees from Everguard, and then again by Sextus Severus and his faction who led a rebellion and converted it to a tyranny. Moreover, the original colonists never had the blessing of the Church; far from it. They acted on their own and then announced that they intended to take in the Everguardians who were technically enemies of the Church at the time. As I recall, the Church didn't care for that one bit and we set out to deliberately sabotage them. We settled that before Sextus Severus and his friends showed up though and by the time he was in power I think we were completely prepared to leave Averoth alone.

So what do you think makes a theocracy, then?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on April 27, 2012, 07:02:20 PM
So what do you think makes a theocracy, then?

Well, I dunno about any Astroists, but I'd say what makes a realm a theocracy is...being a Theocracy. Y'know, actually having that government type? Remember that?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on April 27, 2012, 07:12:50 PM
Well, I dunno about any Astroists, but I'd say what makes a realm a theocracy is...being a Theocracy. Y'know, actually having that government type? Remember that?

I think vonGenf was getting at whether a realm can be a nominal theocracy in the way that realms are nominal tyrannies, monarchies, and republics.  I do think that theocracies are a special case, perhaps. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on April 27, 2012, 07:13:35 PM
SA has never actually really had classical theocracies in my opinion. They do not practice direct rule by the Church for one thing; no Elder of SA has any power over any theocracy unless he's first been granted that power through secular channels. It's more the other way around. The theocracies as a group control the Church, and it tends to serve primarily their interests with only minimal protest from relatively pure ecclesiastics like Constantine and Labell. High rank in a theocracy can be translated into power within the Church far more readily than the other way around.

I will be very keen to see how power structures in the Church begin to shift now that high ranking members of non-theocracies are joining in droves. People like Solari and Vellos occupy a very interesting position. They have secular influence as much as any theocratic ruler, and I'm certain they will display a penchant for playing politics within the Church. Things are likely to get very interesting if power starts to shift away from the theocracies as a result, especially since Bustoarsenzio is stepping back and Allison is potentially leaving.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 27, 2012, 07:16:10 PM
Well, I dunno about any Astroists, but I'd say what makes a realm a theocracy is...being a Theocracy. Y'know, actually having that government type? Remember that?

Yes, I do, it's why I mentioned Averoth in the first place.

Note that it is not my aim to complain about the government types here, they're fine with me. I just want to say that Feylonis had a point: it makes sense to consider Summerdale and Libero as "SA realms". In practice, the church has as much to say about the behaviour of Libero than it does about the behaviour of, say Astrum.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on April 27, 2012, 07:21:40 PM
Yes, I do, it's why I mentioned Averoth in the first place.

Note that it is not my aim to complain about the government types here, they're fine with me. I just want to say that Feylonis had a point: it makes sense to consider Summerdale and Libero as "SA realms". In practice, the church has as much to say about the behaviour of Libero than it does about the behaviour of, say Astrum.

This I agree with.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on April 27, 2012, 07:41:46 PM
I don't consider Asylon to be an SA realm/theocracy because it has at least 3 other religions in it. Libero and Summerdale only have SA, as far as I know.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lorgan on April 27, 2012, 08:08:34 PM
Government types are outdated.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 27, 2012, 08:22:27 PM
Government types are outdated.
I must say I agree, D'hara is a monarchy according to government type but we are ran as a republic.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 27, 2012, 08:28:32 PM
it makes sense to consider Summerdale and Libero as "SA realms". In practice, the church has as much to say about the behaviour of Libero than it does about the behaviour of, say Astrum.
This, I would agree with. They are SA realms. They are not] SA theocracies. That is a very important distinction. The Elders/Regent/Holy Prophet can make some demands of the theocracies, and expect compliance, as long as it doesn't get too wacky. The same cannot be said of Summerdale and LE.

My character, Brance, has always opposed enshrining the theocracies into the power structure of the church. This could lead to interesting times as the faith spreads more and more to non-theocracies. However, unless the non-theocratic members have some *very* good power blocs among the theocracies, they will most likely not find themselves moving into high-power positions, as many people still vote realm-centric when electing elders. Now, the non-theocratic members  could bring more of their realm-mates with them, of course. But then, the faith spreads from that, and crowds out other faiths anyway. So we still end up spreading.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 27, 2012, 09:38:03 PM
Asylon isnt a theocracy its a monarchy with an Astroist king and a secular constitution. We lean whichever way the king and council lean. Right now our council is heavily mIxed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Broose on April 27, 2012, 10:35:23 PM
Summerdale is an SA realm that wishes people wouldn't call it an SA realm. No luck getting new religions over here, yet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on April 27, 2012, 11:25:58 PM
Summerdale is an SA realm that wishes people wouldn't call it an SA realm. No luck getting new religions over here, yet.

I'm surprised it bothers you. It's probably the best thing for Summerdale that it be perceived as an SA realm. It's never good being the odd man out. Take it from the guy who currently rules a realm that, prior to the BT Invasion, was on the wrong side of a 4 on 1 beat down.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Brant on April 27, 2012, 11:36:27 PM
My char has been pushing hard to have Summerdale seen as an SA realm, or at least as a realm where SA is welcome :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 28, 2012, 12:07:15 AM
Asylon is not an Astroist state. We are an Astroist cultured state. Because of history we are now Astroist/Elementalist/Truinist and perhaps a bit of Cordatus, but their church is now dead. I think I prefer being a cross-roads kingdom. We are a frontier kingdom, a place destiny mixes with the blood of fate.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Andrew on April 28, 2012, 05:15:24 AM
Asylon is not an Astroist state. We are an Astroist cultured state. Because of history we are now Astroist/Elementalist/Truinist and perhaps a bit of Cordatus, but their church is now dead. I think I prefer being a cross-roads kingdom. We are a frontier kingdom, a place destiny mixes with the blood of fate.

I think Brom needs to go to Asylon. I'm sure he could stir that up into something toxic. It'd definitely make it more interesting at least.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on April 28, 2012, 07:18:59 AM
Summerdale is an SA realm that wishes people wouldn't call it an SA realm. No luck getting new religions over here, yet.

That will change soon. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 28, 2012, 08:37:24 PM
What's that? Did someone grab the red shirt and prepare to stand up?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on April 28, 2012, 08:49:53 PM

What actually happens in the Order of the Palm?

Right now, nothing; nominally, it's a holy order that works to spread Sanguis Astroism, but when I first wrote the Charter it was too restrictive and limiting and I didn't get much interest.  I'm going to re-draft it without the limitations but the first step is to get Turin to promise Samhain to me; once I have that I can try and bring in other nobles and go from there.

The goal at the time was diplomacy targeted at Caerwyn, but they wardec'd us while the Order was still forming.  Now it'll probably target rogue regions and focus on diplomacy with Barca; mostly I want to have a non-realm lay power within the Church, instead of the Theocratic rulers deciding everything themselves or in-Council.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 28, 2012, 09:06:27 PM
Right now, nothing; nominally, it's a holy order that works to spread Sanguis Astroism.

The goal at the time was diplomacy targeted at Caerwyn, but they wardec'd us while the Order was still forming.  Now it'll probably target rogue regions and focus on diplomacy with Barca;
1.) "works to spread Sanguis Astroism." Through military, preaching, or both?
2.) Is this Iashulur centric since you speak of targetting rogue regions and your character is in Iashulur?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 28, 2012, 09:43:17 PM
That will change soon. ;)

Pshawww... Without Allison Astroism will become a globby love-in retirement home.  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 28, 2012, 10:46:03 PM
Hmmm, I thought of an interesting idea. What if Sanguis Astroism went on a purge all other religions crusade thing so it would be like the entire north attacking the rest of Dwilight until all members of that realm follow Sanguis Astroism. I see it as a player vs player combined with the invasion on BT kind of thing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on April 29, 2012, 12:19:39 AM
Hmmm, I thought of an interesting idea. What if Sanguis Astroism went on a purge all other religions crusade thing so it would be like the entire north attacking the rest of Dwilight until all members of that realm follow Sanguis Astroism. I see it as a player vs player combined with the invasion on BT kind of thing.

You mean that isn't whats been going on for several years now?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 29, 2012, 12:23:20 AM
You mean that isn't whats been going on for several years now?

Actually, no we haven't. We've been relatively content to take the slow but steady route of converting nobles peacefully. If you want, we could actively target out all the heathens and declare war on them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on April 29, 2012, 12:24:19 AM
You mean that isn't whats been going on for several years now?

Not in any organized fashion, no.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on April 29, 2012, 03:04:46 AM
Actually, no we haven't. We've been relatively content to take the slow but steady route of converting nobles peacefully. If you want, we could actively target out all the heathens and declare war on them.

Not in any organized fashion, no.


Don't get your panties in a bunch, it was a joke.  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 29, 2012, 03:18:48 AM
Hmmm, I thought of an interesting idea. What if Sanguis Astroism went on a purge all other religions crusade thing so it would be like the entire north attacking the rest of Dwilight until all members of that realm follow Sanguis Astroism. I see it as a player vs player combined with the invasion on BT kind of thing.

No one seems to notice that the SA realms are now some of the least populated and the more moderate SA realms and non-SA realms more populated? I think the days of SA powerhouse are on their way out unless they can muster more nobles. The fundamentalist realms are going to either have to continue their alliance or hope that the more moderate realms join in sometimes.

SA Theocracies   :)
Moderate SA Tolerant kingdoms   ;)
Intolerant kingdoms   >:(
Neutral   :-\

Astrum      28  :)
Asylon      40     ;)
Aurvandil      45     >:(
Barca      22     >:(
Corsanctum   17     :)
D'Hara   32          ;)
Grand Duchy of Fissoa   22  :-\
Iashalur   16     :)
Kabrinskia      29     :)
Libero Empire   20     ;)
Luria Nova   25     :-\
Luria Vesperi   10     :-\
Madina   3    >:(
Morek Empire   29    :)
Pian en Luries      8    :-\
Solaria   19    ;)
Summerdale      39    ;)
Terran      21    ;)


Total Theocracy noble population: 119
Tolerant kingdoms: 171
Intolerants: 70
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 29, 2012, 03:40:59 AM
Without the fundamentalists, the island would be way boring.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 29, 2012, 04:37:07 AM
Totally agree, we need the fundamentalists. But, I would rather just see every kingdom at each others throats with limited short-term goal oriented alliances, instead of long-term sweeping alliances that never end. If everyone limited themselves to one ally the game would be more fun. Its impossible to control or change though and the future of Dwilight is more and more large powerblocs. Unless we go about cracking apart, rebuilding, cracking apart, rebuilding ever so often.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 29, 2012, 04:46:46 AM
I must say I agree, D'hara is a monarchy according to government type but we are ran as a republic.

Poor Dragon King Cenarious, always be so alone in his palace.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on April 29, 2012, 10:16:40 AM
SA has become largely irrelevant. They've come to the point that no one in their right mind would dare block the church, so nobles would just accept and ignore it rather than actually deal with it. Even if the fundamentalists made sweeping demands, most realms would just agree to it rather than face the combined military of Astrum-Morek-Summerdale-Libero-Iashalur-Corsanctum-Kabrinskia. See: recent declaration of 'all lands are open to SA'. It's a pretty monotonous powerblock, like AT's CE alliance.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on April 29, 2012, 10:35:43 AM
It's a pretty monotonous powerblock, like AT's CE alliance.

Though not half as give-along-to-get-along.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on April 29, 2012, 10:47:20 AM
1.) "works to spread Sanguis Astroism." Through military, preaching, or both?
2.) Is this Iashulur centric since you speak of targetting rogue regions and your character is in Iashulur?

1) The idea was both, as well as dialogue with foreign non-believing nobles to convince them of the virtues of SA (or how harmless we are, really!)

2) Honestly I'm not sure yet; I'd like to gather warrior members together in Iashalur to create one army that can get sent out easily.  If I can get Turin to give me the duchy of Samhain (I wanted Gaston but that went to Aram >.<), that'd be the plan, while having nominal priest members who just go about preaching.  Maybe give people assignments to open dialogue with nobles in XYZ realm.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 29, 2012, 01:58:13 PM
Irrelevant? *chuckles*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on April 29, 2012, 04:47:48 PM
Irrelevant? *chuckles*

Mhmm. SA was nice when its 'controversial' edicts were challenged by people both in and out of the church. Now, people outside the church just pretty much roll with whatever SA wants, and seeing as the population in the Church is dwindling down, they won't be enough to bring interesting things about.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 29, 2012, 05:35:54 PM
You do realize that the population of the church is *not* dwindling, don't you? In fact we are still growing. I'm not sure why you think we are shrinking.

And if we are not controversial enough, then perhaps we will just have to get more radical. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 29, 2012, 05:45:14 PM
Mhmm. SA was nice when its 'controversial' edicts were challenged by people both in and out of the church. Now, people outside the church just pretty much roll with whatever SA wants, and seeing as the population in the Church is dwindling down, they won't be enough to bring interesting things about.

I'm of the philosophy of "let SA get what it wants for long enough for them to bore themselves and start breaking apart".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 29, 2012, 06:10:11 PM
Quote
Important Event for "Sanguis Astroism"   (21 hours, 52 minutes ago)
200th member has joined the order.
Also check the Guild Log for recent events.

 ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on April 29, 2012, 08:58:58 PM
That number seems to be all characters that have ever joined Sanguis Astroism, rather than the number we had when the 200th joined.  In-game it says we have 107 members (+23 paused, or is that 23 of which are paused?).

It's pretty hard to call something irrelevant when people just roll over and do what it wants, eh?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on April 29, 2012, 10:19:57 PM
That number seems to be all characters that have ever joined Sanguis Astroism, rather than the number we had when the 200th joined.

Yep, that's it.

In-game it says we have 107 members (+23 paused, or is that 23 of which are paused?).

It's 107 unpaused plus 23 paused members, afaik.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 30, 2012, 12:24:32 AM
SA is far from irrelevant. A bit jammed up and without direction at the
Moment but far from irrelevant.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 30, 2012, 12:26:05 AM
A bit jammed up and without direction at the Moment

As it should be.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on April 30, 2012, 08:03:28 PM
Mhmm. SA was nice when its 'controversial' edicts were challenged by people both in and out of the church. Now, people outside the church just pretty much roll with whatever SA wants, and seeing as the population in the Church is dwindling down, they won't be enough to bring interesting things about.

We have 80+ people in the full membership alone. With aspirants I think the recipient list when sending to all members is 170+. Add in the paused people and there over 200 characters in the Church as of right now, which is more than we've ever had.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on May 04, 2012, 12:33:47 PM
It's nice to be back in the Elder Council; feels like we'll have this new charter done by the end of Summer (in-game Summer, even), which will leave plenty of time for being dissatisfied with whatever Morek decides to do about the Bohai incident before Allison gets me kicked out of the Consulate again. 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on May 04, 2012, 05:10:28 PM
Bohai incident?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on May 04, 2012, 05:25:19 PM
Creed Avon sacked the temple in Bohai (which he is Count of), which caused quite a stir; apparently it was the result of a cell-phone miss-click (or so I'm told), but the in-game consequences should be interesting regardless.  Within the Church, Eoghan was calling for him to be declared an Enemy of the Faith but his Duke, and the High Inquisitor of Morek, and the Grandmaster of Morek, and another Morekian Duchess all spoke up in his defense demanding we let them handle it.  Could lead to some interesting shenanigans, especially since Creed is already an excommunicated heretic.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on May 04, 2012, 08:15:54 PM
Bohai incident?

Interested? There is a temple near you where you can subscribe to hear all the latest news and gossip!!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lorgan on May 04, 2012, 08:19:55 PM
Interested? There is a temple near you where you can subscribe to hear all the latest news and gossip!!

Where?! *grabs torch*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on May 04, 2012, 08:30:58 PM
Where?! *grabs torch*

Everywhere! That's the beauty of it!

You're practically already surrounded!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lorgan on May 04, 2012, 08:36:44 PM
Gonna need more torches...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 04, 2012, 08:39:48 PM
*sets up a stand, the words "Sanguis Astroism donations" crossed out and replaced with "Get your torches"* Get your torches here! Lots of torches! Absolutely no chance they'll leak oil onto you and cause you to catch fire on the way to a temple...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on May 11, 2012, 12:37:27 PM
So, how 'bout them Crusades?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on May 11, 2012, 07:17:05 PM
About that.

Quote
The Daimon is an enemy of man, an enemy of the Faith, and an enemy of the Bloodstars. For such a beast does shun the Stars, and indeed its mind is with the force of fear and the frightful fangs which it uses to rend flesh and Realm alike.

I myself have seen the horrors spilling out of the mountains, ravaging all in their path, caring nothing but to consume. I have seen them turn the tide of battle - to the woe indeed of those who allied with them. Friends and enemies alike are but victims to their murderous rage. It is a tricky thing indeed when some have tried to make friends with these things. With such friends, I would rather be friendless!

If it is the Prophet's will, then I say, so be it, and let the armies of the realms of the Church go forth and make an end of these monstrous terrors we call the Zuma! (Though I admit to be desiring to hear our Prophet's blessing himself - I pray none take offense at that!)

To those who say the Vision received in Golden Farrow was not a Prophecy - these are but differences of words. When we speak of that which the Prophet sees, we speak of Prophecy, for that is the gift his Bloodstar-attuned and enlightened nature works. To those who question the Prophecies in general - woe to you, and shame, for you are like the very beast which shuns the stars yourself! Not all who shun the stars may be Daimon in form, after all. A shadow of infidelity, wherever the source, darkens.

Now, as ever, is the time where a man's Faith shall decide his fate. We should all give serious contemplation, and meditate upon the Prophet's words, and pray to the Divine Bloodstars for guidance. And ask ourselves: is my faith like that of a stone, placed in a sacred field by our Most Holy Prophet? Or is it like some shallow thing, a mask to be worn, a hollow suit of armor to be worn at a tournament, a robe to be wrapped upon our shoulders and then discarded secretly when we are alone?

Rabisu Daycryn of Kabrinskia, Priest of Sanguis Astroism
Luminary of Sanguis Astroism
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kellaine on May 11, 2012, 07:30:26 PM
So, how 'bout them Crusades?

I am still waiting to hear from the Holy Profit himself.  Until then it is all conjecture and wishful thinking.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telrunya on May 11, 2012, 07:44:15 PM
I am still waiting to hear from the Holy Profit himself.  Until then it is all conjecture and wishful thinking.

1. Declare a Crusade against the Zuma.
2. March all Armies to Nightmarch.
3. ? ? ?
4. Holy Profit!

No offence meant, just light-hearted joke ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on May 11, 2012, 07:50:12 PM
Yes, the prophet in D'Hara declares religious war, Allison declares war on the Zuma, and the Zuma attack Kabrinskia. Perfect!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kellaine on May 11, 2012, 08:11:21 PM
Yes, the prophet in D'Hara declares religious war, Allison declares war on the Zuma, and the Zuma attack Kabrinskia. Perfect!

You see that is a problem... the Zuma are helping Kabrinskia, so why would we want to declare war upon them.

I believe that Allison will be able to get temples built in Zuma lands soon as well.... At least that is what we are hoping for.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on May 11, 2012, 08:32:44 PM
You see that is a problem... the Zuma are helping Kabrinskia, so why would we want to declare war upon them.

Because Allison is a fanatic.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 11, 2012, 08:43:03 PM
Because Allison is a fanatic.

Fanatic about her personal worship of the Maddening Star perhaps. About following the pronouncements of the Prophet? Not in the least. She has little, if any, respect for him.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on May 11, 2012, 08:54:46 PM
Because Allison is a fanatic.

If people think Allison is the only—or even the most powerful—hard liner in SA, that misperception is gonna result in some serious lulz in the future.  Some characters are just less overt about it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 11, 2012, 10:29:11 PM
Holy Profit

I'm not in SA.... but these seems like good grounds for some excommunication to me!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 12, 2012, 12:25:31 AM
If people think Allison is the only—or even the most powerful—hard liner in SA, that misperception is gonna result in some serious lulz in the future.  Some characters are just less overt about it.

There's also this.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on May 12, 2012, 07:40:55 AM
Yeah, I hear that Malus guy is a real bad egg!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on May 12, 2012, 07:51:23 AM
Yeah, I hear that Malus guy is a real bad egg!

As are all Lurians  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on May 12, 2012, 07:56:01 AM
Bah, there's barely any real Lurians left... We've been taken over by softies!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 12, 2012, 08:03:06 AM
BROM!!!????
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 12, 2012, 08:04:29 AM
Bah, there's barely any real Lurians left... We've been taken over by softies!

How about all of those Lurians who have hated each other in the past, unite and win?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on May 12, 2012, 08:31:39 AM
A lot of those aren't Lurians as well ;) Brom's a self-admitted serial rebel... I'd be surprised (and impressed) if he ever manages to return there peacefully :p
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 12, 2012, 09:31:33 AM
BROM!!!????

You're catching on...

A lot of those aren't Lurians as well ;) Brom's a self-admitted serial rebel... I'd be surprised (and impressed) if he ever manages to return there peacefully :p

Shoot, I'm surprised Brom managed to return to Luria peacefully this past time. Not to mention being handed a realm council position almost right off the bat once arriving.

Brom probably could have had a chance at returning peacefully again if it wasn't for Alice now that he's joined SA. SA bring him some new friends, and I believe will give him the chance to rectify himself (somewhat) in the eyes of those of Luria who are members of SA. Not that they'll ever trust him, but there are ways for Brom to return peacefully since he does still hold many friends in Luria. (Not that anyone will publicly admit to it). Sadly, there are over 3x as many people who consider him an enemy. And those people talk a lot more.

So essentially, SA is the answer to all of the problems in the world.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 12, 2012, 05:44:31 PM
So essentially, SA is the answer to all of the problems in the world.

It's about time people started to admit it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on May 12, 2012, 07:40:25 PM
Brom has been enlightened by the Stars!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on May 16, 2012, 05:22:42 PM
Some fascinating new developments in SA lately. Crusade against the Zuma? Allison says she's more enlightened than anyone except "perhaps" the Prophet? Rabisu starts to lose his !@#$? All this and more.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on May 16, 2012, 07:20:44 PM
Rabisu shouldnt bite the hand that feeds him...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 17, 2012, 03:36:43 AM
I noticed that. Hehehe.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on May 17, 2012, 04:01:57 AM
It depends on what the dish consists of, no?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 17, 2012, 05:23:03 AM
Rabisu shouldnt bite the hand that feeds him...

Cmon!!! I'm losing my touch. I mean there is a rebellion/dissident in Brom's realm and he's not part of it?

The world is truly ending.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on May 17, 2012, 04:27:42 PM
Cmon!!! I'm losing my touch. I mean there is a rebellion/dissident in Brom's realm and he's not part of it?

The world is truly ending.

Unless this rebellion or dissent in Kabrinskia is fabricated. As I've said ICly - while I don't always agree with what Rabisu says or how he says it, Alaron will stand by his right to say what he likes.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 17, 2012, 04:33:06 PM
Unless this rebellion or dissent in Kabrinskia is fabricated. As I've said ICly - while I don't always agree with what Rabisu says or how he says it, Alaron will stand by his right to say what he likes.

Of course it's fabricated. Allison is completely ruthless, especially when it comes to discarding broken tools. She has no use for followers who won't follow.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on May 17, 2012, 05:02:05 PM
Of course it's fabricated. Allison is completely ruthless, especially when it comes to discarding broken tools. She has no use for followers who won't follow.

Well, yes. I know it's a load of tripe OOCly. ICly though I don't have evidence to support that assertion, bar suspecting Allison's nature and her past issues, which is probably not going to be enough to help. Hence why Alaron's called for some kind of evidence to be presented. Heck, even if Rabisu were accused of witchcraft, I think he'd want to see some degree of proof before a trial commenced.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 17, 2012, 05:13:37 PM
Actually, Gustav has been openly critical of Allison's decisions. Haven't seen many repercussions for him. Probably because he doesn't vehemently oppose every single thing she says, just those he disagrees with.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 17, 2012, 05:54:02 PM
Actually, Gustav has been openly critical of Allison's decisions. Haven't seen many repercussions for him. Probably because he doesn't vehemently oppose every single thing she says, just those he disagrees with.

Not when it comes to anything that matters, and not where I have been able to see it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kellaine on May 17, 2012, 05:57:12 PM
Not when it comes to anything that matters, and not where I have been able to see it.

I have seen it.

And Katayanna has not supported Allison or been against her. Katayanna believes that Allison can defend herself in most cases. and is trying to remain impartial as she is a consul.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 17, 2012, 05:57:59 PM
Well, yes. I know it's a load of tripe OOCly. ICly though I don't have evidence to support that assertion, bar suspecting Allison's nature and her past issues, which is probably not going to be enough to help. Hence why Alaron's called for some kind of evidence to be presented. Heck, even if Rabisu were accused of witchcraft, I think he'd want to see some degree of proof before a trial commenced.

Interfere with the sovereign affairs of Kabrinskia at your own peril  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 17, 2012, 06:00:04 PM
I have seen it.

And in fairness, I see only a small fraction of their total interaction.

However, offering constructive criticism or voicing respectful disagreement in a small council, or even a larger audience, is very different than what Rabisu just did in front of the entire full membership of the Church  :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kellaine on May 17, 2012, 06:02:14 PM
And in fairness, I see only a small fraction of their total interaction.

However, offering constructive criticism or voicing respectful disagreement in a small council, or even a larger audience, is very different than what Rabisu just did in front of the entire full membership of the Church  :)

What you say is true. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on May 17, 2012, 06:10:15 PM
Well you can't expect a guy to be polite and respectful to someone who's just accused him of treason and rebellion.

 I mean, you could, but you'd be disappointed most of the time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on May 17, 2012, 06:22:12 PM
Interfere with the sovereign affairs of Kabrinskia at your own peril  ;)

I read that as "Interfere with Allison's sovereign imperative at your own peril" personally. ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 17, 2012, 06:38:58 PM
I don't understand why people think Rabisu would be the one on trial. Heck, even Rabisu seems to think that. But Rabisu isn't accused of doing anything against the church. If anything gets tried, which I am not convinced needs to happen, it would be Allison or Khari.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kellaine on May 17, 2012, 07:24:42 PM
I don't understand why people think Rabisu would be the one on trial. Heck, even Rabisu seems to think that. But Rabisu isn't accused of doing anything against the church. If anything gets tried, which I am not convinced needs to happen, it would be Allison or Khari.

I think the point is to hold a secular trial and find impartial judges from outside the realm... but I could be wrong
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 17, 2012, 07:43:41 PM
Then it shouldn't be being discussed in SA channels.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kellaine on May 17, 2012, 08:39:24 PM
Then it shouldn't be being discussed in SA channels.

I agree with you and I did say as much when it started
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on May 17, 2012, 09:01:32 PM
This is all made up and khari and rabizu know about it.  Trying to include the church for some rp fun...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 17, 2012, 09:12:43 PM
Nothing wrong with RP fun. It just needs to be church-related. 86 people all don't want to be included in an internal Kabrinskia squabble. Our biggest complaint in SA is that we have too much arguing about non-church stuff. If we let one situation go, then we open the doors for more...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on May 17, 2012, 09:13:28 PM
Well OOC I know about it. IC, it's a surprise, or would be if Rabisu weren't already rather cynical about Allison these days.

Yes the trial regarding Rabisu's treason is a secular matter, I'm not sure why that got mentioned since Rabisu requested a trial only in discussion to the realm, except however that it's tangentially relevant because if Allison is using her secular power to interfere with the church, to put pressure (i.e., legal punishments) on priests for what they say in SA discussions then it's an example of that. If he were guilty of rebellion though, it wouldn't be an example. So it's a bit of a puzzle. Fun times though!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kellaine on May 18, 2012, 05:42:12 AM
Brother Glaumring has finally pissed off Katayanna
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 18, 2012, 05:47:49 AM
So, I guess that's everyone then. You were the last one...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on May 18, 2012, 06:56:44 AM
So, I guess that's everyone then. You were the last one...

My character rather enjoys his letters.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on May 18, 2012, 07:12:34 AM
Glaumring is kind of like toe fungus.

He grows on you. ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Darksun on May 18, 2012, 01:56:47 PM
I prefer to think of him as the drunk uncle at Christmas.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 18, 2012, 02:12:08 PM
Wah? Gfvbbczssfvbnnncxseggh...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on May 20, 2012, 07:15:58 AM
What happened to YASMAT? Did it get deleted?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on May 20, 2012, 07:36:33 AM
What happened to YASMAT? Did it get deleted?
What is YASMAT?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 20, 2012, 09:12:31 AM
What happened to YASMAT? Did it get deleted?

Seems so...

What is YASMAT?

Yet Another SMA Thread...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 20, 2012, 11:42:36 AM
I believe that the OP, Scarlett, deleted it. I didn't know they could do that...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kellaine on May 25, 2012, 09:31:42 AM
SA now under attack by Asylon.

They have attacked Priestess Allison in her own lands while she was preaching to her own realms region.

Is this a indication that they wish to be at war with the SA....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 25, 2012, 09:59:25 AM
Is this a indication that they wish to be at war with the SA....


Uh... No.. I'm pretty sure it just means they want to be at war with Allison...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on May 25, 2012, 01:10:34 PM
Still, crazy as she is, she's still an SA figurehead and a sovereign ruler... I'd expect little sympathy for Asylon from now on... You'll either win, or die ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on May 25, 2012, 02:20:57 PM

No, the Infiltrator attacked the Ruler of an enemy realm, in attempt to spare the lives of thousands. It has nothing to do with religion. OR since the infiltrator belongs to SA aswell, maybe it is religious.

There you go, with all your "facts" and "logic". Can't you see that katayanna really needs SA to get involved in the war, and that you aren't helping her? Shame on you!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 25, 2012, 04:33:50 PM
Attacking Allison isn't a provocation for SA.

But it is rather barbaric.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on May 25, 2012, 04:39:02 PM
Attacking any priest of SA is looked down upon...  Realms have been destroyed for inflicting injuries to priests.  Ive needed just one more thing to help turn the SA Theocracies against Asylon and I think I got it now...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 25, 2012, 06:07:46 PM
There are so many things I want to say about this, but it's entirely too soon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on May 25, 2012, 06:09:03 PM
Like I've said before, whoever thought SA wasn't going to jump in to defend Allison was kidding themselves, heh.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: T Strike on May 25, 2012, 06:20:52 PM
Honestly, I wouldn't defend Allison...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 25, 2012, 06:44:19 PM
SA now under attack by Asylon.

They have attacked Priestess Allison in her own lands while she was preaching to her own realms region.

Is this a indication that they wish to be at war with the SA....

Oh god, fight your own battles already.... So boring, you'd be dead without your entangled cowardly alliances. Come fight us alone, leave Terran and Astrum , the Zuma , SA out of it... Oh I forgot because you would lose so bad. Hubris , cowardice and clueless...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 25, 2012, 07:07:28 PM
Oh god, fight your own battles already.... So boring, you'd be dead without your entangled cowardly alliances. Come fight us alone, leave Terran and Astrum , the Zuma , SA out of it... Oh I forgot because you would lose so bad. Hubris , cowardice and clueless...

To be fair, I'm sure they'd be happy to have Terran out of it, but I don't think Terran is giving them that option.  :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on May 25, 2012, 07:28:08 PM
Having Terran in the war gives Kabrinskia the excuse to pull in Astrum and the other SA realms into the fight. I honestly haven't seen a war where SA participated that did not involve gangbanging the enemy realm. See: Springdale vs Virovene, Morek; Thulsoma vs SA; Averoth vs SA; Caerwyn vs SA; Summerdale vs Libero, Morek.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on May 25, 2012, 07:36:20 PM
This war is just getting better and better. It won't be a gangbang since Asylon, Barca and Terran are fighting theocracies.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lorgan on May 25, 2012, 07:43:29 PM
1 realm vs 2 isn't a gangbang.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kellaine on May 25, 2012, 07:53:21 PM
1 realm vs 2 isn't a gangbang.

but one realm vs three is

but now it is two vs three a little more even.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on May 25, 2012, 08:31:51 PM
I'm personally waiting for the Libero-Morek-Corsanctum-Astrum-Iashalur declarations. 6 v 3 seems more like a gangbang.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 25, 2012, 08:39:17 PM
Libero wouldn't declare, they aren't a theocracy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 25, 2012, 08:41:47 PM
Quote
Feylonis: Having Terran in the war gives Kabrinskia the excuse to pull in Astrum and the other SA realms into the fight.
This is just so wrong. Have you been paying attention to what's happening at all?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on May 25, 2012, 08:50:20 PM
I'm personally waiting for the Libero-Morek-Corsanctum-Astrum-Iashalur declarations. 6 v 3 seems more like a gangbang.

Any "gangbang" will be entirely Asylon's fault for burning their SA bridges (and stabbing an SA priest).  They're trying to bring it back together but Glaumring has very successfully pissed off a lot of people and completely alienated Astrum, who is now practically guaranteed to jump into the war (IMO).  Whether this does turn into a "gangbang" will hinge on two things, I think:  the S-LM war in the north (all nominally allied with Astrum, IIRC), and how bored Corsanctum is.  Even then, if the S-LM war continues on, 4-3 is hardly a gangbang.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on May 25, 2012, 08:50:29 PM
Uh Astrum don't care about Terran. We do however care deeply about Asylon.

You should really read what Asylon's king has been telling the church. You will like it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on May 25, 2012, 08:54:24 PM
This is just so wrong. Have you been paying attention to what's happening at all?

Kabrinskians were poaching in Terran lands, Terran declares war. Barca and Asylon join Terran as allies. Kabrinskia brings in Zuma, war halts to a standstill. Asylon declares its own war against Kabrinskia and attack Mech Alb, Kabrinskia and Astrum priests surge into Mech Alb. Allison wounded by Asylonian infiltrator.

Anything I miss?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on May 25, 2012, 08:57:47 PM
Any "gangbang" will be entirely Asylon's fault for burning their SA bridges (and stabbing an SA priest).  They're trying to bring it back together but Glaumring has very successfully pissed off a lot of people and completely alienated Astrum, who is now practically guaranteed to jump into the war (IMO).  Whether this does turn into a "gangbang" will hinge on two things, I think:  the S-LM war in the north (all nominally allied with Astrum, IIRC), and how bored Corsanctum is.  Even then, if the S-LM war continues on, 4-3 is hardly a gangbang.

Aforementioned SA priest is also the leader of the realm we are at war with. I am amused how deeply people want to turn this into a religious war when it's all about whether Mech Alb / Elets are part of Itau/Via or Golden Farrow. SA priests are already swarming to the battlefield, heh.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on May 25, 2012, 09:02:05 PM
Asylon will burn that is for certain. Yep.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Darksun on May 25, 2012, 09:11:09 PM
I've got to say, this whole predicament makes Summerdale look very classy by comparison.

Brant & Co - Good on you! At least you waited to control the region before you abused the priest/ruler.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 25, 2012, 09:23:33 PM
Actually, Kabrinskia still controls the region. So they attacked the priest on Kabrinskian lands...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Darksun on May 25, 2012, 09:24:47 PM
Actually, Kabrinskia still controls the region. So they attacked the priest on Kabrinskian lands...

That was my point. Summerdale waited until they had control of Torrents Breath before arresting Light Elsebeth.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 25, 2012, 09:27:08 PM
@feylonis: your sequence of events is mostly correct. Yet your assertion that Terran's war is a reason for SA realms to get involved is completely incorrect.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Brant on May 25, 2012, 09:32:02 PM
Quote
I've got to say, this whole predicament makes Summerdale look very classy by comparison.

Brant & Co - Good on you! At least you waited to control the region before you abused the priest/ruler.

Yeah... people tend to get touchy when you stick steel in 'em, not nearly as much about a forced vacation :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: mikm on May 25, 2012, 09:50:08 PM
The player of that character who attacked the Kabriskan ruler/priest misscliked. I saw the OOC mesage miself. Amasing!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on May 25, 2012, 09:52:18 PM
The player of that character who attacked the Kabriskan ruler/priest misscliked. I saw the OOC mesage miself. Amasing!

Now that's funny.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: mikm on May 25, 2012, 10:07:15 PM
We were dicusing a little brutality should be used regarding those pesky priests and king clarly said the priests are not to be harmed.
All this happned after the actual stabing ocured. ;D

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on May 25, 2012, 11:09:07 PM
The player of that character who attacked the Kabriskan ruler/priest misscliked. I saw the OOC mesage miself. Amasing!

How do you "accidentally" stab someone?  Don't you have to click "stab a fellow" and then click "stab that fellow over there" (which is how you arrest adventurers)?  That'd be like saying "I meant to convoy to BEL, but my pen slipped and I wrote BRE!  My bad; we're still friends, right?"  Who was he trying to stab in Mech Alb, if he wasn't trying to stab Allison?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: mikm on May 25, 2012, 11:31:59 PM
You can use the assult comand to view all characters in your area, as long as you don't click from the list.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 26, 2012, 12:07:15 AM
You can use the assult comand to view all characters in your area, as long as you don't click from the list.

That may be true, but it doesn't matter. It happened. It's IC now, you roll with it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 26, 2012, 12:30:33 AM
How do you "accidentally" stab someone?  Don't you have to click "stab a fellow" and then click "stab that fellow over there" (which is how you arrest adventurers)?  That'd be like saying "I meant to convoy to BEL, but my pen slipped and I wrote BRE!  My bad; we're still friends, right?"  Who was he trying to stab in Mech Alb, if he wasn't trying to stab Allison?

I love you right now for making a Diplomacy reference.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: T Strike on May 26, 2012, 12:45:23 AM
That is until they TO your city that you are duke of. How would that make you feel about him? huh Perth! Tell me!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on May 26, 2012, 02:20:12 AM
How do you "accidentally" stab someone?  Don't you have to click "stab a fellow" and then click "stab that fellow over there" (which is how you arrest adventurers)?  That'd be like saying "I meant to convoy to BEL, but my pen slipped and I wrote BRE!  My bad; we're still friends, right?"  Who was he trying to stab in Mech Alb, if he wasn't trying to stab Allison?

I accidentally stabbed a realm-member instead of the enemy--I didn't recognize his name.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: T Strike on May 26, 2012, 02:39:35 AM
Imagine cutting your own ruler on accident.  :'(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 26, 2012, 02:46:52 AM
Imagine cutting your own ruler on accident.  :'(

How do you think I feel? I accidentally rebelled against them over and over again...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on May 26, 2012, 02:52:01 AM
Don't you just hate it when you accidentally execute five people.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 26, 2012, 02:54:18 AM
Don't you just hate it when you accidentally execute five people.

Isn't that the kind of thing that makes you a hero?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: T Strike on May 26, 2012, 03:13:08 AM
 It does? I'd like to execute my plots then. If you know what I mean.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 26, 2012, 03:30:45 AM
Back in 06 or so, there was a judge that executed the wrong guy. Had a similar name or something. Maybe Lorgan remembers it?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on May 26, 2012, 06:33:02 AM
Isn't that the kind of thing that makes you a hero?

No. Doing something accidentally is never heroic. On purpose, however... opinions differ.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Brant on May 26, 2012, 06:40:59 AM
That looked like a good battle, nice!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 26, 2012, 06:50:30 AM
It was good, and messy. It was also very close. Round 2 is coming up.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 26, 2012, 06:51:40 AM
No. Doing something accidentally is never heroic. On purpose, however... opinions differ.

The key is, after your accident, striking a pose and then, of course, the snappy one-liner.

"Looks like those villagers lost their heads!"

 8) YEEEEEAAAAH!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: mikm on May 26, 2012, 08:09:38 AM
Good battle. Archers' panic and retreat move is so usefull.
 Also amazing prison escapes!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 26, 2012, 01:47:37 PM
And Terran hasn't even come in from the south yet to massacre the survivors.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on May 26, 2012, 01:49:07 PM
Well, having your ally's ruler imprisoned does tend to make you think twice before doing something rash ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 26, 2012, 01:58:32 PM
I escaped, they tried to tie me up. I jump kicked a guy in the face, grabbed a dagger and stabbed a Kabrinskian in the face. And then jumped out a 25 story window and slid down a ship sail with my dagger. The dastardly Kabrinskians came at me with swords, but I found a torch and fought off like 25 bumbling guards and started a fire. While fire was raging I grabbed a Golden Farrow maiden and started making out with her while fighting through the streets. Jumped on a horse and made a long speech to the peasants of Golden Farrow and then made off into the night and hid in the swamps and the local peasantry of Kabrinskia took care of me and told of how they yearned to join Asylon and be free... Huzzahhh!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on May 26, 2012, 02:18:09 PM
Glaumring isn't in prison.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 26, 2012, 02:27:38 PM
As in "never went to prison"? Lysander was going to release him right away.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 26, 2012, 02:41:29 PM
Ironically captured by Geronus... I was chained like an animal! And escaped like houdini!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on May 26, 2012, 02:50:33 PM
As in "never went to prison"? Lysander was going to release him right away.

Moot point, since he's not in prison anymore, anyway.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 26, 2012, 03:01:55 PM
I was in their dank mobile Prisons, they have hundreds if them stuffed to the gills with captured orphans!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 26, 2012, 03:47:11 PM
It's really a shame. You totally deprived me of my chance to gloat, which I am extremely upset about. The guards will be flogged! We were going to release you anyway though, just, you know, AFTER I got a good chuckle out of it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on May 26, 2012, 03:55:41 PM
I was in their dank mobile Prisons, they have hundreds if them stuffed to the gills with captured orphans!

I thought Sundar had all of those over on FEI?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on May 26, 2012, 06:08:20 PM
Moot point, since he's not in prison anymore, anyway.
Not moot if its due to a bug since he was supposed to have gone to prison based on the battle report.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telrunya on May 26, 2012, 06:47:11 PM
He's a Hero. He probably just escaped right after getting captured.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: mikm on May 26, 2012, 06:53:40 PM
Both characters I am refering to escaped almosted imediately after capture, one being the staber.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 26, 2012, 07:06:54 PM
He escaped within hours of being captured.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: mikm on May 26, 2012, 07:18:30 PM
Seemed like almost imediatly to me when I read the mesages.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 26, 2012, 08:38:59 PM
And Terran hasn't even come in from the south yet to massacre the survivors.

I wouldn't count on it to much, my army doesn't like to cooperate with me.   :-\
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on May 27, 2012, 12:09:58 AM
The Allison Defense Team is working overtime!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 27, 2012, 12:16:31 AM
It's all good, let's see if the latest event in SA will spice things up some.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 27, 2012, 12:27:57 AM
You can keep dreaming. Learn to fight your own battles. Everyone knows it wasnt an attack on SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 27, 2012, 12:37:10 AM
You can keep dreaming. Learn to fight your own battles. Everyone knows it wasnt an attack on SA.

Just wait and see. Everyone knows Glaumring could care less about what SA thinks about him anyway, so that can come back to bite him.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 27, 2012, 01:14:55 AM
Says the guy who has been in SA for a few weeks.

And if it takes the entire map to take down Glaumring it only shows how large I truly am. What I discovering is that Kabrinskia cant fight its own battles. Its the little snotty kid constantly making trouble.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 27, 2012, 01:17:49 AM
Says the guy who has been in SA for a few weeks.

And if it takes the entire map to take down Glaumring it only shows how large I truly am. What I discovering is that Kabrinskia cant fight its own battles. Its the little snotty kid constantly making trouble.

To be fair it was getting ganged up on two to one. Of course it can't take Terran and Asylon together. With Astrum in the picture it's basically even.

As for the other characterization, Allison personifies trouble. However, Kabrinskia means much  more to Astrum than just Allison. We're not defending her, we're defending what we've built and ensuring our own security from aggressive realms like Asylon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 27, 2012, 01:30:15 AM
Says the guy who has been in SA for a few weeks.

Ad Hominem means nothing. And Brom being in SA for a few weeks and STILL having enough influence to bring you down just shows how weak you are.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 27, 2012, 01:43:53 AM
We whooped your butt with our crappiest army. And now we are going to go to Our capital and drink wine out of your skulls.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 27, 2012, 02:09:29 AM
We whooped your butt with our crappiest army. And now we are going to go to Our capital and drink wine out of your skulls.

The pen is mightier than the sword, and I will prove it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 27, 2012, 02:26:29 AM
Ad Hominem means nothing. And Brom being in SA for a few weeks and STILL having enough influence to bring you down just shows how weak you are.

Uh, really? What exactly have you done?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 27, 2012, 02:36:07 AM
Uh, really? What exactly have you done?

I usually don't do anything. I just get others to do it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 27, 2012, 02:42:40 AM
Wrote a fancy letter. That, really, only Katayanna likes.

The many politically motivated attacks lately have really undermined the legitimacy of the accusations.

The thing that really makes me chuckle is seeing the people that are attempting to manipulate the church into going to war, thinking it will be the clever way to do it. In reality, it is the very slow and uncertain way to do it. It is also completely unecessary. This is the situation where personal contacts, a well-known name, and knowing your audience are what is needed. And it has already been done. (And no, it wasn't me that did it.) All the soapboxing in SA is redundant and probably won't amount to anything anyway.

(Sorry Brom, you're way too new to the church, and lacking of knowledge of church dynamics to do what you're trying to do.)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 27, 2012, 02:43:59 AM
It shows in your sloppy handiwork. (to Brom)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 27, 2012, 02:56:32 AM
Wrote a fancy letter. That, really, only Katayanna likes.

The many politically motivated attacks lately have really undermined the legitimacy of the accusations.

The thing that really makes me chuckle is seeing the people that are attempting to manipulate the church into going to war, thinking it will be the clever way to do it. In reality, it is the very slow and uncertain way to do it. It is also completely unecessary. This is the situation where personal contacts, a well-known name, and knowing your audience are what is needed. And it has already been done. (And no, it wasn't me that did it.) All the soapboxing in SA is redundant and probably won't amount to anything anyway.

(Sorry Brom, you're way too new to the church, and lacking of knowledge of church dynamics to do what you're trying to do.)

Of course I'm new, but you also have absolutely no idea what I'm trying to do. There are a few people in the church though that probably know.

It shows in your sloppy handiwork. (to Brom)
Yep, gotta work on that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 27, 2012, 03:41:38 AM
Of course I'm new, but you also have absolutely no idea what I'm trying to do.
Don't be too sure.  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on May 27, 2012, 03:56:34 AM
Wrote a fancy letter. That, really, only Katayanna likes.

The many politically motivated attacks lately have really undermined the legitimacy of the accusations.

The thing that really makes me chuckle is seeing the people that are attempting to manipulate the church into going to war, thinking it will be the clever way to do it. In reality, it is the very slow and uncertain way to do it. It is also completely unecessary. This is the situation where personal contacts, a well-known name, and knowing your audience are what is needed. And it has already been done. (And no, it wasn't me that did it.) All the soapboxing in SA is redundant and probably won't amount to anything anyway.

(Sorry Brom, you're way too new to the church, and lacking of knowledge of church dynamics to do what you're trying to do.)

Exactly. And Katayanna is from Kabrinskia herself - while it's most likely bad form to do so, her supporting any accusations by her own ruler and Brom is probably going to be looked upon and laughed. Alaron practically did that when he saw all the requests for Magistrata (is that the correct plural of "Magistratum?). And then he denounced all three as political claptrap as you well know even though there may be merit to any or all of the cases presented.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on May 27, 2012, 04:26:49 AM
What I see is:

1. Jonsu brings accusations against Allison in hopes of a Magistratum.

2. Then suddenly Katayanna brings accusations against (some non-SA infiltrator who attacked Allison) for a Magistratum. That seems to fail (?) and so Katayanna demands a crusade against Asylon.

3. Then Brom brings accusations against Glaumring in hopes of a Magistratum.

The result  is that the latter two requests (both brought by Team Allison) look petty, and political, and annoy everyone involved; who then conclude that all three requests are petty and political and dismiss them all and the first request is barely remembered thanks to the primacy effect. Ye olde tyme "flood the courts with countersuits" strategy.

Result? Allison avoids a Magistratum, by virtue of essentially overloading the SA legal framework and the patience of elders. Successful defense by Team Allison!

Really quite brilliant when you think about it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 27, 2012, 04:35:43 AM
Result? Allison avoids a Magistratum, by virtue of essentially overloading the SA legal framework and the patience of elders. Successful defense by Team Allison!

Really quite brilliant when you think about it.
Like I said, Brom doesn't know the dynamics of the church, and he's too new to be in the inside loop. Being in Allison's camp, he also doesn't have access to members of the church that are not sympathetic with Allison's situation. Allison may or may not face a Magistratum trial. But whether she does or not will have absolutely nothing to do with Brom's proposed case, or any attempt to overload the system.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 27, 2012, 04:47:33 AM
Like I said, Brom doesn't know the dynamics of the church, and he's too new to be in the inside loop. Being in Allison's camp, he also doesn't have access to members of the church that are not sympathetic with Allison's situation. Allison may or may not face a Magistratum trial. But whether she does or not will have absolutely nothing to do with Brom's proposed case, or any attempt to overload the system.

Brom had absolutely NO idea that a case had been brought against Allison, or of any of the other cases set forth. He did it all of his own accord.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on May 27, 2012, 05:27:49 AM
Like I said, Brom doesn't know the dynamics of the church, and he's too new to be in the inside loop. Being in Allison's camp, he also doesn't have access to members of the church that are not sympathetic with Allison's situation. Allison may or may not face a Magistratum trial. But whether she does or not will have absolutely nothing to do with Brom's proposed case, or any attempt to overload the system.

Katayanna however is in the inside loop, and definitely in the Allison camp too, and has successfully steered all discussion to the matter of priests and infiltrators whereas the charges of heresy against Allison have now zero part in discussion. Rather convenient, no?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 27, 2012, 05:34:43 AM
I honestly don't know how Gustav is seen by the rest of the church. I know that some anti-Allison don't differentiate him from Allison's camp.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on May 27, 2012, 06:10:13 AM
I am rather anti-Allison and don't really know what to think of Gustav.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 27, 2012, 06:33:39 AM
I am rather anti-Allison and don't really know what to think of Gustav.

Same here. Pretty anti-Allison, no clue who Gustav is.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on May 27, 2012, 06:55:58 AM
Same here. Pretty anti-Allison, no clue who Gustav is.
I know about him just not sure what to decide about him, and aren't you married to Allison so I don't see how you can be anti-Allison. This is another flaw of being so new to the church, Gustav was a consul not too long ago.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 27, 2012, 07:11:08 AM
I know about him just not sure what to decide about him, and aren't you married to Allison so I don't see how you can be anti-Allison. This is another flaw of being so new to the church, Gustav was a consul not too long ago.

Ahh oops...

;)

It's a very 'loving' relationship of course.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 27, 2012, 07:48:19 AM
Ya'll think this is the final blow on Glaumring... No no lads this is the threshing bee, where the wheat is seperated from the chaff.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on May 27, 2012, 08:14:39 AM
Ahh oops...

;)

It's a very 'loving' relationship of course.
I forgot about the saying "You fight like a married couple." Of course you are anti-Allison now that I remember that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 27, 2012, 09:37:39 AM
Ya'll think this is the final blow on Glaumring...

I for one would be vastly disappointed if it was. :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 27, 2012, 09:51:25 AM
I love Dwilight.

It sometimes amazes me the kind of things I can make happen.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 27, 2012, 12:51:27 PM
It is pretty nice when half the realms aren't tied together by multiple characters from the same family.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on May 27, 2012, 01:45:57 PM
I love Dwilight.

It sometimes amazes me the kind of things I can make happen.

You're telling me. I didn't expect Alaron to be elected as General in Astrum. Though in all fairness I think that was due to the fact his opponent tried to run without even so much as posting a letter with a manifesto. But at least his career is off to a good start - and there is nothing like jumping in the deep end with regards to high-level communications with other Generals.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Foundation on May 27, 2012, 03:30:05 PM
It is pretty nice when half the realms aren't tied together by multiple characters from the same family.

It's a combination of this and also vast lands with long travel distances. :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 27, 2012, 04:17:52 PM
@ravier: Adrian runs in most/all elections without ever saying anything at all. It's kind of like a tradition by now.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on May 27, 2012, 06:01:20 PM
Good point, actually. I do recall him running in some previous elections.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 27, 2012, 06:28:56 PM
The power of the combined SA alliances is actually not as powerful or as useful as it was during the Caerwyn debacle. Lady Allison acts like its still valid, judging from noble counts I'd say its not. Distance, coordination and low populations has made it into a paper tiger. Hubris has made it obsolete. Asylon will not bow nor break fold nor follow. We will be the harbringers of a new dawn.

Grasping fear has motivated their strategy. In the end Asylon will prevail. Our kingdom is like a mountain that cannot be broken.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on May 27, 2012, 06:40:09 PM
But they can be hollowed out and plundered for resources!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on May 27, 2012, 07:21:07 PM
But they can be hollowed out and plundered for resources!

Piñata Tiger?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Darksun on May 27, 2012, 07:22:26 PM
Piñata Tiger?

Would that make them Candyland?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 27, 2012, 07:30:23 PM
Asylon will constructva candy town in Vakreno all are welcome!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: T Strike on May 27, 2012, 07:56:27 PM
If I go can I be Duke of a city?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on May 27, 2012, 08:04:19 PM
If I go can I be Duke of a city?

No, because those don't exist anymore.

You can be Duke of a Duchy or Margrave of a city. Or both. But duchies and cities no longer go together.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 27, 2012, 08:11:55 PM
Asylon will constructva candy town in Vakreno all are welcome!

Will the RCs spawn gummy bears?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on May 27, 2012, 08:21:10 PM
Will the RCs spawn gummy bears?

Only the good ones; the mediocre ones spawn marbits.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on May 27, 2012, 08:30:00 PM
Only the good ones; the mediocre ones spawn marbits.

Are those like Swedish Fish?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Uzamaki on May 27, 2012, 08:37:13 PM
Are those like Swedish Fish?

They are the marshmallows in Lucky Charms.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 27, 2012, 09:20:39 PM
The power of the combined SA alliances is actually not as powerful or as useful as it was during the Caerwyn debacle. Lady Allison acts like its still valid, judging from noble counts I'd say its not. Distance, coordination and low populations has made it into a paper tiger. Hubris has made it obsolete. Asylon will not bow nor break fold nor follow. We will be the harbringers of a new dawn.

Grasping fear has motivated their strategy. In the end Asylon will prevail. Our kingdom is like a mountain that cannot be broken.

There are wars going on in the North-East. Morek won't be coming to bash down on Asylon. I doubt they would have anyways, too. Nor are the other north-eastern realms in war. I really doubt that *anything* could bring more than Astrum to Kabrinskia's aid. This isn't a war against infidels, after all, and a good chunk of SA would really love to see Allison fail.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 27, 2012, 09:30:07 PM
There are wars going on in the North-East. Morek won't be coming to bash down on Asylon. I doubt they would have anyways, too. Nor are the other north-eastern realms in war. I really doubt that *anything* could bring more than Astrum to Kabrinskia's aid. This isn't a war against infidels, after all, and a good chunk of SA would really love to see Allison fail.

Never underestimate the power of boredom. It is a great tool for having people join wars on your side.

But on the whole you're correct.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 27, 2012, 09:31:28 PM
Never underestimate the power of boredom. It is a great tool for having people join wars on your side.

But on the whole you're correct.

If they didn't have any wars going on, I'd concern myself with that factor. But thankfully, it is not an issue.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 27, 2012, 10:27:44 PM
/me whistles innocently...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 27, 2012, 10:57:59 PM
There are wars going on in the North-East. Morek won't be coming to bash down on Asylon. I doubt they would have anyways, too. Nor are the other north-eastern realms in war. I really doubt that *anything* could bring more than Astrum to Kabrinskia's aid. This isn't a war against infidels, after all, and a good chunk of SA would really love to see Allison fail.

Meh, I could see Morek coming down, just to make themselves felt. Not for many campaigns, but maybe for one.

Also, never underestimate the power of a random Zuma rotflstomp.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 27, 2012, 11:10:58 PM
So nice that Asylon has wonderful relations with Summerdale. A small realm of 40 nobles right next to Astrum... Morek us tied up, Corsanctum is far away.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on May 27, 2012, 11:24:38 PM
Meh, I could see Morek coming down, just to make themselves felt. Not for many campaigns, but maybe for one.

Also, never underestimate the power of a random Zuma rotflstomp.

Or the power of big gang cliques... ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on May 27, 2012, 11:34:18 PM
But they can be hollowed out and plundered for resources!

LOL'ed
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 28, 2012, 02:31:08 AM
So nice that Asylon has wonderful relations with Summerdale. A small realm of 40 nobles right next to Astrum... Morek us tied up, Corsanctum is far away.

Erm... Summerdale is already at war with LE and Morek, aren't they?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 28, 2012, 02:44:16 AM
Yes they are. Im just saying.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 28, 2012, 03:20:27 AM
Yes they are. Im just saying.

Cmon, that's just a hollow threat then. It's almost as bad as Brom constantly saying he has friends everywhere...Almost.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 28, 2012, 04:44:21 AM
By incessantly disagreeing with every dumb thing I say only shows how important everything I say actually is.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 28, 2012, 04:45:47 AM
By incessantly disagreeing with every dumb thing I say only shows how important everything I say actually is.  8)

Ahh, I should use that one.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on May 28, 2012, 08:18:07 AM
Cmon, that's just a hollow threat then. It's almost as bad as Brom constantly saying he has friends

Fixed that for you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kellaine on May 28, 2012, 02:03:32 PM
Who will come to Kabrinskia's rescue now...... that the Zuma have left....

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 28, 2012, 06:47:15 PM
Who will come to Kabrinskia's rescue now...... that the Zuma have left....

Do we need rescue? Apparently Terran is just running small groups of men into our armies and letting them wipe them away with ease.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kellaine on May 28, 2012, 07:24:25 PM
Do we need rescue? Apparently Terran is just running small groups of men into our armies and letting them wipe them away with ease.

True, but I want them to continue to do that so let them think it is hurting us... lol
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 28, 2012, 08:07:08 PM
It's an ingenious strategy to fill your prisons so full of enemy soldiers, that you run out of places to put them, causing a crisis in the prison system budget. Eventually the financial strain of housing them will bankrupt you, you'll have to set them all free. The released prisoners will then rise up and takeover the entire realm all at once.

Pure genius.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 28, 2012, 08:15:22 PM
It's an ingenious strategy to fill your prisons so full of enemy soldiers, that you run out of places to put them, causing a crisis in the prison system budget. Eventually the financial strain of housing them will bankrupt you, you'll have to set them all free. The released prisoners will then rise up and takeover the entire realm all at once.

Pure genius.

That's why you privatize your prison system. Then the judge gets in bed with the corporations running it and you find yourself starting more and more wars so you can fuel your need for fresh inmates to keep your economy going.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 28, 2012, 08:19:23 PM
Do we need rescue? Apparently Terran is just running small groups of men into our armies and letting them wipe them away with ease.

Yeah... trying to launch a 19-hour move over memorial day weekend... maybe not our smartest move. We'll see how it all turns out.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 28, 2012, 08:22:54 PM
It's an ingenious strategy to fill your prisons so full of enemy soldiers, that you run out of places to put them, causing a crisis in the prison system budget. Eventually the financial strain of housing them will bankrupt you, you'll have to set them all free. The released prisoners will then rise up and takeover the entire realm all at once.

Pure genius.

Exactly, but to off-set those expenses we'll just take the gold that all of those nobles are carrying and use it to buy a bunch of gallows. Problem solved.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on May 28, 2012, 11:45:09 PM
Do we need rescue? Apparently Terran is just running small groups of men into our armies and letting them wipe them away with ease.

We call that maneuver the Pianese Wall.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Foundation on May 29, 2012, 12:12:18 AM
That sounds... -_-
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 29, 2012, 04:27:48 AM
Wait.

You mean it actually is painfully obvious that Terran simply doesn't fight wars? It just isn't what we do?


Can we please just go back to the whole "fight monsters and slowly expand into rogue areas" thing? We're good at that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 29, 2012, 04:36:24 AM
Wait.

You mean it actually is painfully obvious that Terran simply doesn't fight wars? It just isn't what we do?


Can we please just go back to the whole "fight monsters and slowly expand into rogue areas" thing? We're good at that.

Absolutely you can. There is this huge rogue area just to your west with some really big monsters for you to fight. Ask Glaumring how to do it. Apparently large archer armies work against small monsters, so perhaps they're effective against large monsters as well.

Kabrinskia won't even stop you or try to invade you in the meantime either.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 29, 2012, 04:37:43 AM
Absolutely you can. There is this huge rogue area just to your west with some really big monsters for you to fight. Ask Glaumring how to do it. Apparently large archer armies work against small monsters, so perhaps they're effective against large monsters as well.

Kabrinskia won't even stop you or try to invade you in the meantime either.

Silly Silverfire, the Zumalands are for GM's!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 29, 2012, 04:39:35 AM
Silly Silverfire, the Zumalands are for GM's!

Nope, pretty sure they're just rogue with a giant "Terrans eaten here" sign.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 29, 2012, 04:45:19 AM
Nope, pretty sure they're just rogue with a giant "Terrans eaten here" sign.

... AND 50k of daimons. You forgot that part.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on May 29, 2012, 04:48:05 AM
... AND 50k of daimons. You forgot that part.

Those guys? Naw, those are just SA priests traveling in disguise. Ask the Prophet or the Regent, they'll tell you so.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 29, 2012, 05:03:44 AM
Shush. The new daimon priests are supposed to be a secret.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on May 29, 2012, 05:47:36 AM
Those guys? Naw, those are just SA priests traveling in disguise.

A mod really ought to wipe this, wouldn't want it taken IC...   ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on May 29, 2012, 06:16:00 AM
It's already widely known that Zuma are now SA. To get to the Zumalands, Allison had to go past Asylon and Terran. The Zuma defended Kabrinskia. 1+1 = the Zuma are now SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 29, 2012, 06:41:28 AM
It's already widely known that Zuma are now SA. To get to the Zumalands, Allison had to go past Asylon and Terran. The Zuma defended Kabrinskia. 1+1 = the Zuma are now SA.

I think it's just a wee bit more complicated than that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 29, 2012, 06:44:34 AM
Omg the Zuma are SA? Quick to the game to tell my realm!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on May 29, 2012, 07:43:18 AM
Omg the Zuma are SA? Quick to the game to tell my realm!
I really hope your joking.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on May 29, 2012, 08:25:47 AM
I really hope your joking.

Yes, they are joking. Come on!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Foundation on May 29, 2012, 02:14:07 PM
Unless they like to joke IC too. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 29, 2012, 03:13:08 PM
I think that by saying "I hope you're joking", Penchant is referring to Glaumring's self-admitted habit of taking things from the forum and using them IG.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 29, 2012, 04:17:46 PM
Habit? I did it once. Indirik=Karl Rove
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Foundation on May 29, 2012, 04:57:00 PM
Whaaaaat I thought Indirik=Indirik!!!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 29, 2012, 06:29:10 PM
I r Dik...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 29, 2012, 08:53:54 PM
Ok then:

I think that by saying "I hope you're joking", Penchant is referring to Glaumring's self-admitted willingness of taking things from the forum and using them IG.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 29, 2012, 09:32:56 PM
It was from a private PM actually :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on May 29, 2012, 11:26:14 PM
I think that by saying "I hope you're joking", Penchant is referring to Glaumring's self-admitted habit of taking things from the forum and using them IG.
That would be what I was referring to.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ehndras on June 01, 2012, 08:54:41 AM
Hey all, just saw this topic.

Yeah, Memorial-Day weekend hit... Not good. Sad part is, we were told to delay with our move orders. I moved as directed and delayed, yet still arrived early with a few people, which makes me think the army's main mass was actually late. I was actually quite confused as to how the hell we all left the same exact region, and delayed, yet some arrived early. I mean, I'd understand if others were early and I was late like last time, but I delayed and was part of the early arrivals if I'm not mistaken.

Bah, hell if I know. Memorial Day was a drunken, sunburn-filled haze.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: mikm on June 02, 2012, 08:00:48 PM
Astrum is becoming masive! :'(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 02, 2012, 08:49:32 PM
What can I say, we rock! 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on June 02, 2012, 08:56:16 PM
At this rate, Astrum will become the biggest realm in BM. Hehe. Hopefully no more region will join until I return from the tournament... tax rate is killing my region.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on June 02, 2012, 09:13:48 PM
They're taking over Wallershire right now. Might as well count Vynar, too, since it's only adjacent to Wallershire.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 02, 2012, 09:53:17 PM
Let Astrum deal with a bloated mass of traitorous unkown nobles.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on June 03, 2012, 03:11:40 AM
Let Astrum deal with a bloated mass of traitorous unkown nobles.

You would do yourself a real good favor by not posting anymore in this sub-forum.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on June 03, 2012, 04:18:04 AM
You would do yourself a real good favor by not posting anymore in this sub-forum.
+1
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Foundation on June 03, 2012, 04:29:27 AM
Astrum doesn't seem that big to me... Maybe my standards are outdated. :-/
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: GoldPanda on June 03, 2012, 05:02:23 AM
You would do yourself a real good favor by not posting anymore in this sub-forum.

I am shocked, SHOCKED, that people would let what was said on the forums affect them in-game!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 03, 2012, 05:14:25 AM
 You can go eat a bowl of hotdogs!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on June 03, 2012, 05:31:37 AM
I am shocked, SHOCKED, that people would let what was said on the forums affect them in-game!

That's like being shocked that people take information from RP's and use it IC for their characters even if they shouldn't know about it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: GoldPanda on June 03, 2012, 10:05:59 AM
Context: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjbPi00k_ME
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Foundation on June 03, 2012, 02:49:15 PM
Hahahaha, good one. :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kellaine on June 05, 2012, 01:03:53 AM
You can go eat a bowl of hotdogs!

Now that is a terrible insult... lol
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on June 05, 2012, 05:20:33 PM
You have successfully bought the "Sceptre of the Maddening Star" from Haktoo. Congratulations.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arrakis on June 05, 2012, 05:24:12 PM
Interesting. So it is possible to have religion-related unique items in the game? I always wondered whether this could be arranged.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 05, 2012, 05:29:45 PM
Interesting. So it is possible to have religion-related unique items in the game? I always wondered whether this could be arranged.

Allison renamed the Duchy of Golden Farrow to the Duchy of the Maddening Star a while ago, so it's possible that the code that generates unique item names picked that up somehow.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on June 05, 2012, 05:33:00 PM
Allison renamed the Duchy of Golden Farrow to the Duchy of the Maddening Star a while ago, so it's possible that the code that generates unique item names picked that up somehow.

So could we ever get the I Can't Believe It's Not Butter Knife?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 05, 2012, 05:47:19 PM
So could we ever get the I Can't Believe It's Not Butter Knife?

Haha, you know I have no idea. I have no idea at all how those names are generated, so what I said earlier has no basis in fact, it's just speculation.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on June 05, 2012, 05:50:41 PM
I had to cut a deal to get this one made.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 05, 2012, 05:59:18 PM
I had to cut a deal to get this one made.

Now that is interesting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arrakis on June 05, 2012, 06:00:14 PM
I just hoped it was done IC.  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 05, 2012, 06:06:29 PM
I just hoped it was done IC.  ;D

It was, she traded the Aegis of the Zuma for it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on June 05, 2012, 07:43:35 PM
It was, she traded the Aegis of the Zuma for it.

And her soul...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on June 05, 2012, 07:49:11 PM
And her soul...

Nah, that leaked out through the hole in her head some time ago.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on June 05, 2012, 07:58:40 PM
I thought the Aegis was traded for assistance in the Terran war?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 05, 2012, 08:37:42 PM
He he he ... this is almost like the Big Reveal in one of those makeover shows. But this isn't the end yet. Oh no... there is still more to come!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 05, 2012, 10:47:06 PM
She didn't need to trade for that. There was a unit of Zuma's led by Fang Fang that needed to go home, and the Zuma didn't like Terran at all, and so decided to spoil their tea party.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kellaine on June 05, 2012, 11:11:33 PM
She didn't need to trade for that. There was a unit of Zuma's led by Fang Fang that needed to go home, and the Zuma didn't like Terran at all, and so decided to spoil their tea party.

You mean the whole thing with  the daimons was just a ploy?  I knew she was sneaky, but that was awesome.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on June 05, 2012, 11:26:56 PM
He he he ... this is almost like the Big Reveal in one of those makeover shows. But this isn't the end yet. Oh no... there is still more to come!

Yes, the Sceptre has the ability to throw lightning bolts!!!! mwahahaha!

(JK)

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Galvez on June 06, 2012, 12:15:58 PM
Yes, the Sceptre has the ability to throw lightning bolts!!!! mwahahaha!
Only Tom wield that kind of power!  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ehndras on June 06, 2012, 04:44:41 PM
It could be a golden mushroom-shaped scepter of the gods that spills forth a tempestuous torrent of flying dildoes for all I care, though I do believe that would be equally... Shocking.



...Sorry, I had to.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on June 06, 2012, 04:53:01 PM
Nah, I think it looks more like this one (http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lnvhel9VWT1qcu0is.jpg).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 06, 2012, 04:55:08 PM
Nah, I think it looks more like this one (http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lnvhel9VWT1qcu0is.jpg).

Out of curiosity, what is that an image of? When I saw it I immediately thought of the Queen of Hearts from Alice in Wonderland. Just wondering if it is in fact related, or if it's just some random image of a scepter you found online.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on June 06, 2012, 05:00:35 PM
Out of curiosity, what is that an image of? When I saw it I immediately thought of the Queen of Hearts from Alice in Wonderland. Just wondering if it is in fact related, or if it's just some random image of a scepter you found online.

Heh, it's actually the Garnet Rod that Sailor Pluto uses in Sailor Moon ;D

This based on a whimsical conversation I had on IRC with Dustole about finding additional unique items for the other two Stars, and combining them to form the Holy Grail.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on June 06, 2012, 05:51:48 PM
So it's actually possible to get items named how you want them? But only by doing deals with Zuma or, presumably, daimons?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 06, 2012, 06:01:53 PM
So it's actually possible to get items named how you want them? But only by doing deals with Zuma or, presumably, daimons?

Well, with Tom's support anything is possible... I imagine that it would be quite difficult to get yourself into a position where an NPC owed you this sort of favor though.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Uzamaki on June 06, 2012, 06:02:57 PM
Well, with Tom's support, anything is possible... I imagine that it would be quite difficult to get yourself into a position where an NPC owed you this sort of favor though.

World domination perhaps! Or maybe just simply giving them Asylon/Terran lands?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 06, 2012, 06:09:40 PM
World domination perhaps! Or maybe just simply giving them Asylon/Terran lands?

I doubt the Zuma would care about any of those things. If they were in the world domination racket, you'd know it by now. Also, most of the 'Moot would probably be a smoking wasteland.

If this is something you actually want to pursue IG, then you probably need to delve much deeper than I have into who the Zuma are and what they want. Allison found something they wanted badly, which is how she got her boon. You would have to discover something of comparable value to the Zuma to reap a similar reward. I'm not aware of anything else that fits that bill at this time, but then I also know very little about the Zuma and have not interacted with them IG at all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on June 06, 2012, 06:12:32 PM
Kosht and Echiur are going to the Zuma, while Via/Itau go to Kabrinskia.

*drains Uppervia resources to D'Hara*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on June 06, 2012, 06:19:05 PM
I didnt get to name it myself.  I just asked if they had any items relating to the bloodstars.  So now SA has its first relic.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Graeth on June 06, 2012, 08:36:46 PM
Kosht and Echiur are going to the Zuma, while Via/Itau go to Kabrinskia.

*drains Uppervia resources to D'Hara*

They could have had both (and even held Kosht for awhile) but gave them away freely to Asylon.  They seem to have little interest in acquiring new lands.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 06, 2012, 08:41:49 PM
Kosht and Echiur are going to the Zuma, while Via/Itau go to Kabrinskia.

*drains Uppervia resources to D'Hara*

The war is not done yet. Aurvandiil is yet to crash into Astrum...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Foundation on June 07, 2012, 01:04:53 AM
Tim + Sailor Moon = Holy Grail.  Am I understanding this thread correctly?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on June 07, 2012, 02:06:43 AM
Tim + Sailor Moon = Holy Grail.  Am I understanding this thread correctly?
I don't see the connection between Tim, Sailor Moon and Holy Grail... :o
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on June 07, 2012, 02:47:24 PM
I don't see the connection between Tim, Sailor Moon and Holy Grail... :o

go to page 78.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on June 08, 2012, 05:12:24 AM
go to page 78.

Oh... Now I get it. Thanks :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: ^ban^ on June 08, 2012, 01:13:04 PM
Heh, it's actually the Garnet Rod that Sailor Pluto uses in Sailor Moon ;D

This based on a whimsical conversation I had on IRC with Dustole about finding additional unique items for the other two Stars, and combining them to form the Holy Grail.

I'll never understand why so many conversations with you lead to Sailor Moon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ehndras on June 08, 2012, 03:22:40 PM
Its best not to understand, my friend.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on June 08, 2012, 03:40:37 PM
I'll never understand why so many conversations with you lead to Sailor Moon.

Everyone has their dream girl...or planet/deity/whatever, I don't feel like looking it up on wikipedia.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 26, 2012, 01:36:13 AM
Can't wait for the item to be lost when sent for repairs.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 26, 2012, 06:02:54 AM
Wow, conversation about SA is dying it seems.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on June 26, 2012, 07:28:45 AM
Wow, conversation about SA is dying it seems.

Well, you know, we've got wars to fight, people to kill, cities to burn; we've got a lot on our plates as it is.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on June 27, 2012, 12:04:24 AM
So a schism has begun!!! Or has it?

My guess is Asylon chickens out when they realize they'll provoke a Crusade. Thoughts?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on June 27, 2012, 12:16:27 AM
Well I have to say that for our long-awaited first "schism", it is a bit of a let down. Not only was Allison not involved but apparently its now not a schism, but an unrelated faith that just so happens to include similar beliefs... >:(

Oh well, I'm pretty sure a crusade is still on the way ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 27, 2012, 12:18:04 AM
It's not a schism, it's a heresy. A schism implies legitimacy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 27, 2012, 12:18:56 AM
Well I have to say that for our long-awaited first "schism", it is a bit of a let down. Not only was Allison not involved but apparently its now not a schism, but an unrelated faith that just so happens to include similar beliefs... >:(

Oh well, I'm pretty sure a crusade is still on the way ;D
The thing is if it was Allison there would be no crusade and you know it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on June 27, 2012, 12:21:24 AM
It's not a schism, it's a heresy. A schism implies legitimacy.

I disagree. A schism is never legitimate. If it was, there would be no schism. Schism's are always looked at as heresy by the other side. That's what makes them fun, interesting, and that's why the winner determines who was the true heretic.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on June 27, 2012, 12:42:05 AM
The thing is if it was Allison there would be no crusade and you know it.

It might not be a very effective one (depending on who takes what side), but as long as Mathurin remains Prophet, an Allisonite schism is pretty much guaranteed to cause a crusade.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 27, 2012, 12:44:07 AM
And is therefore likely not to occur. Allison may be crazy, but she isn't stupid.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 27, 2012, 12:54:07 AM
I disagree. A schism is never legitimate. If it was, there would be no schism. Schism's are always looked at as heresy by the other side. That's what makes them fun, interesting, and that's why the winner determines who was the true heretic.

Which is why there is an obvious orthodox, non-heretical, non-schismatic form of Islam or Christianity.

No; schism's are defined by the presence of 2 factions with strong legitimizing claims and strong political power. And usually schisms don't end with one side winning. The only demographically major schism of a major religion I can think of where one faction has well and truly died is Arian Christianity; but I'll admit I'm not extremely well versed in Hindu and Buddhist history.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Norrel on June 27, 2012, 12:55:20 AM
Which is why there is an obvious orthodox, non-heretical, non-schismatic form of Islam or Christianity.

No; schism's are defined by the presence of 2 factions with strong legitimizing claims and strong political power. And usually schisms don't end with one side winning. The only demographically major schism of a major religion I can think of where one faction has well and truly died is Arian Christianity; but I'll admit I'm not extremely well versed in Hindu and Buddhist history.

From what I understand, the catholic church stomped out heresy with some efficiency.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 27, 2012, 01:06:48 AM
lol yeah tell that to the myriads of protestant faiths..
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on June 27, 2012, 01:12:57 AM
Which is why there is an obvious orthodox, non-heretical, non-schismatic form of Islam or Christianity.

No; schism's are defined by the presence of 2 factions with strong legitimizing claims and strong political power. And usually schisms don't end with one side winning. The only demographically major schism of a major religion I can think of where one faction has well and truly died is Arian Christianity; but I'll admit I'm not extremely well versed in Hindu and Buddhist history.

Christianity has had a schism and it quite clearly involved both sides considering the other heretics in their beliefs.Alternatively, the presence now of sects in Christianity at least still consists of the various sects vehemently disagreeing with the others. Just because war isn't apparent between them recently due to modern times doesn't mean that its wasn't very divisive.

At any rate, this is somewhat off topic.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Norrel on June 27, 2012, 03:23:23 AM
lol yeah tell that to the myriads of protestant faiths..

Martin Luther was very late medieval. For the vast majority of european history the catholic church stamped down pretty effectively on most heresy. And in the case of protestantism, they certainly tried. They weren't very nonchalant about the whole thing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on June 27, 2012, 03:32:19 AM
...Do you really think that the Protestant Reformation was the first major schism in the Christian Church?

If so, you really need to read up more on things like Oriental Orthodoxy and Eastern Orthodoxy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Norrel on June 27, 2012, 04:34:22 AM
...Do you really think that the Protestant Reformation was the first major schism in the Christian Church?

If so, you really need to read up more on things like Oriental Orthodoxy and Eastern Orthodoxy.

I never said I thought it was a first, I was responding to someone else's example.

And again, those were not "friendly" separations. The catholic church was in no way consenting to or even recognizing the creation of the orthodox church. What's more, the amount of heresies squashed out by the church outnumbers the few times where (major) opposing churches were successfully established.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 27, 2012, 05:22:02 AM
And I never said they'd be friendly. Certainly they labelled each other heretics and in some cases even killed each other.

But they were only schismatic because they represented a separation of the existing, legitimate powers of the church. Consider the difference between Jan Hus and Martin Luther. One ended up martyred, with his followers eventually having what, today, we would call autocephalous powers: heretical, but not, ultimately, schismatic. The other did not end up martyred, and he founded Protestantism: heretical and schismatic.

Schism without heresy is also possible.

Canon law is not a field which admits of loose definitions. Schism and heresy are different. Anybody can commit heresy. Only legitimate authorities can commit schism. Jan Hus never really got any major church authorities on his side; just some wicked good generals and good luck. Martin Luther got powers both secular and religious to come around to him (as did Anglicanism, Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy too).

Schism is defined by its legitimate claim to some kind of authority, but rebelling against the perceived "traditional" authority (though schismatics might see themselves as "traditionalists" as often as not). Heresy is defined by its teaching of doctrines which are contrary to church dogma.

If you want another example of differences between schism and heresy, observe the many nuances of responses in Christian communities to donatism, montanism, novatianism, and, the earliest example of maybe a real knock-down drag-out fight for the heart and soul of Christianity post-Hellenizing/Latinizing of the faith: Arianism. Arianism would have been schismatic had they not been so darned confident that they were going to win the fight for authority. They, unfortunately, miscalculated the tenacity of anti-Arian leaders– as well as the price of boat-tickets across the Empire.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on June 27, 2012, 05:23:09 AM
Things are getting a bit interesting.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 27, 2012, 05:42:50 AM
No its getting annoying and not what I intended. Just another excuse to gank Asylon...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on June 27, 2012, 05:46:05 AM
Well, take a break, don't get so emotionally involved. Remember it's just a game. Of course characters are going to go after Asylon. Characters are all bastards, with a few exceptions, and they're all political, with no exceptions.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on June 27, 2012, 05:56:34 AM
No its getting annoying and not what I intended. Just another excuse to gank Asylon...

"Everyone" (Astrum/Iashalur [and I don't even know if Corsanctum's really in this]) was already attacking Asylon, that's what happens when you smack everyone around you in the nose; you can't just backpedal off a hyper-aggressive war declared off a truce while simultaneously denouncing the claims they consider theirs by right of blood, it just isn't diplomatically possible.  Give it a rest.

Speaking of the Bloodmoon Cult, in character, you have Eoghan convinced that every bloodmoon tree on Dwilight needs to be burned to the ground; he believes the fruit addles you to the point where you can no longer act rationally (he perceives Glaumring the character to be excessively paranoid, irrational and prone to fits of rage, which he attributes to extended consumption of bloodmoon fruit).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 27, 2012, 06:02:50 AM
This singular drive to destroy Asylon will create a hundred new Asylons to sprout from the earth like fruit trees.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on June 27, 2012, 06:08:07 AM
This singular drive to destroy Asylon will create a hundred new Asylons to sprout from the earth like fruit trees.

AFAIK that's not the plan, though.  Pretty sure they just want Itau duchy, but I could be wrong; Eoghan's ruler at least isn't sharing much.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 27, 2012, 06:33:43 AM
They wont get it. And if they do they'll never hold it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on June 27, 2012, 09:16:25 AM
The thing is if it was Allison there would be no crusade and you know it.

You're wrong; the world would burn.

The difference, though, is that while I know which side I would be on, I'm not sure on which side I would bet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 27, 2012, 09:26:01 AM
She doesnt need a schism anymore she's got SA right in her hand finally. Its the others who have lost SA. Not the other way around.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on June 27, 2012, 03:32:04 PM
She doesnt need a schism anymore she's got SA right in her hand finally. Its the others who have lost SA. Not the other way around.


I only wish Allison had as much power as you claim!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 27, 2012, 04:59:24 PM
Oh don't be so humble.  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Darksun on June 27, 2012, 06:32:28 PM
Speaking of the Bloodmoon Cult, in character, you have Eoghan convinced that every bloodmoon tree on Dwilight needs to be burned to the ground; he believes the fruit addles you to the point where you can no longer act rationally (he perceives Glaumring the character to be excessively paranoid, irrational and prone to fits of rage, which he attributes to extended consumption of bloodmoon fruit).

You're not the first to come to this conclusion. The Storm Lands are being stripped as we speak.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 27, 2012, 07:14:29 PM
Oh don't be so humble.  ;D

Please, Allison couldn't marshal this kind of response all by herself. She's got far too many enemies to build an alliance like the one against Asylon.  8)

That's not to say she's not capable of manipulating other people to do it for her, though. You could argue that she did so in this case. That depends on how much of what happened she anticipated. I think she's crafty enough that she probably was banking on something like what happened to occur.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 27, 2012, 07:20:47 PM
Allison has given an oath to the prophet not to schism the church. She knows that if she did, it would bring an instant Crusade against her.

Whether or not this results in a crusade has yet to be determined. What we have seen so far is that the Glaumring character has lost all semblance of credibility that he may still have had. The continual waffling, backtracking, and changing of positions has really driven home to pretty much the entire church that he simply can't be trusted.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 27, 2012, 08:11:18 PM
Perhaps it is the church that cannot be trusted and my actions a mere symptom of its sickness. I had just as many secretly congratulating me as condeming me. And the few who openly defended me. I also discovered some very very very surprising cracks in the churches loyalty from some very important people. You say Lady Allison is hated. The hate will build soon enough and boil over. SA has made more enemies than Glaumring ever has. Hell im just another Brom, Garrett, Allison of the week. Someone else will truly do a better job than I and send the house of cards toppling. This war, this chaos has been planned for ages. Its not done yet by any means.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 27, 2012, 09:03:33 PM
Perhaps it is the church that cannot be trusted and my actions a mere symptom of its sickness.
Or... not.

Quote
I had just as many secretly congratulating me as condeming me.
Yeah, I've played that game before, too.

Quote
And the few who openly defended me.
I don't think anyone openly defended the Glaumring character. There were several that said a Crusade was not called for, and that we should investigate the faith before we wipe it out. But I don't think anyone personally defended Glaumring.

Quote
You say Lady Allison is hated. The hate will build soon enough and boil over.
We've planned for that.

Quote
This war, this chaos has been planned for ages. Its not done yet by any means.
Great. We need a good war.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 27, 2012, 10:19:29 PM
Oh Indirik are you one of those computers in a 50's sci-fi movie that has an answer for everything?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 27, 2012, 10:23:00 PM
Nah, I don't have any of those cheesy, flashing lights.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Darksun on June 27, 2012, 10:30:35 PM
Nah, I don't have any of those cheesy, flashing lights.

Just one glowing red one, Dave.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 27, 2012, 10:33:49 PM
"Glaumring... What ae you doing Glaumring? I wouldn't do that if I were you..."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 27, 2012, 10:39:38 PM
"Daisy, Daisy, give me your answer, do..."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on June 27, 2012, 11:23:21 PM
Hell im just another Brom, Garrett, Allison of the week.

That's not true. You see, you can't claim to be on our level yet, because even though people hate us, we still manage to retain power at the end of everything and still have a group that trusts us.

Although most of that doesn't apply to Garret.

If people are smart, the best way to topple SA, is to just help them conquer the entirety of Dwilight. With no where left to take, the bickering will grow until a schism does occur. At that point, both sides will kill each other, while all the false converts promote the chaos.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 27, 2012, 11:39:15 PM
Brom, you were kicked out of your old realm. I wouldnt call it massive support.


Plus your topple SA idea is ludicrous. I'd fly a horse down a trench and fire an arrow down its intake shaft and then watch SA blow up from a distance. Im choosing the Luke Skywalker way to go out fighting, you can go the Darth way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 28, 2012, 12:11:59 AM
Brom, you were kicked out of your old realm. I wouldnt call it massive support.
But once he was in Kabrinskia he soon got a realm council position. And he didn't say he has massive support in Lurias but he does have some from what I have heard. Also you aren't quite an Allison or Brom, they are schemers and successful ones at that, so far I haven't seen you scheme or manipulate others successfully.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on June 28, 2012, 12:19:26 AM
Brom, you were kicked out of your old realm. I wouldnt call it massive support.

I left of my own free will. I have both times. Granted, each time I left I had very little support at the time anyway, but still. I do have some minor support though still there. Probably just enough so that when I get back I am still sentenced to death, but I avoid having my head placed on a stake.

Plus your topple SA idea is ludicrous. I'd fly a horse down a trench and fire an arrow down its intake shaft and then watch SA blow up from a distance. Im choosing the Luke Skywalker way to go out fighting, you can go the Darth way.

See that's your problem. You insist on "going out fighting". I don't plan on "going out" at all. I intend to continue to hold power with small spurts of downtime in between. I've got a reputation to keep up anyway.

But, in all seriousness my way is likely the only way SA would lose, other than everyone just losing interest, which is unlikely because so many people in SA are greedy and they use SA for power.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 28, 2012, 12:33:05 AM
Quick question I will learn in a few days anyways but is the tournament your wedding ceremony?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on June 28, 2012, 12:35:52 AM
Quick question I will learn in a few days anyways but is the tournament your wedding ceremony?

Yes. The wedding will take place a day or two preceding the ceremony itself which is to be RP'ed to everyone, and then the tournament is the celebration.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 28, 2012, 12:49:10 AM
But once he was in Kabrinskia he soon got a realm council position. And he didn't say he has massive support in Lurias but he does have some from what I have heard. Also you aren't quite an Allison or Brom, they are schemers and successful ones at that, so far I haven't seen you scheme or manipulate others successfully.

Aye, because I am not a schemer or manipulator at all really.  :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Darksun on June 28, 2012, 01:59:56 AM
I thought you were done with posting on the forums and talking in the SA channel and all that? Veil of silence or cultural wall or somesuch?

I remember those few days, when life was pretty sane.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 28, 2012, 03:36:54 AM
I came back to annoy you.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 28, 2012, 04:59:21 AM
I came back to annoy you.  8)
Just saying the constant, I will never again talk in these halls and then 5 min later your sending out some huge message doesn't help when everyone thinks you can't be trusted because you change your mind so often.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 28, 2012, 05:04:39 AM
My favorite:

"Asylon has founded its own variant of the bloodstars faith 'the Cult of Bloodmoon'...."

4 hours later:

"... the word 'Variant' was wrong and 'Bloodstars' was wrong"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on June 28, 2012, 05:39:06 AM
We found "variant of the Bloodstars" didn't focus test well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on June 28, 2012, 07:57:29 AM
We found "variant of the Bloodstars" didn't focus test well.

It really just depends how you define the word "of".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 28, 2012, 08:01:48 AM
lol, its not about trust... Its about awesome and knowing that out if the 3 or so years I've played here I have been a lying double faced untrustful prick to one person only... Allison Kabrinski, cry me a river. I have run two kingdoms, elected twice in Asylon and once by coup. Im trusty rusty, got a memory that goes back to Melodia baby. I aint perfect but you cant play up the untrust too much or you come up looking like a fuddy dud.. Yo, word up


Im drunk wtf...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 28, 2012, 02:40:29 PM
Plus your topple SA idea is ludicrous. I'd fly a horse down a trench and fire an arrow down its intake shaft and then watch SA blow up from a distance. Im choosing the Luke Skywalker way to go out fighting, you can go the Darth way.

I love this quote.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: West-[Addridae] on June 29, 2012, 12:46:18 PM
Dang. Reading the last couple pages make me wish I was in on this whole thing earlier.  I have a feeling I'm missing out on a lot, especially the part where Allison's departure was already accounted for. SA and their plots! And to be honest, I still haven't figured out how Asylon managed to piss off every theocracy on Western Dwilight.

Gonna be tough to nudge my way back into the old boy's networks haha.

For the record, Glaumring, you should stay in SA! Averyl need an Allison to look after!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 29, 2012, 04:56:10 PM
Yeah but its so much more fun doing something new. Been in SA for years. I dont want to see a homogenized SA map. I want to see little kingdoms fighting like mad about faith and land. The huge SA alliance is boring. They spend more time arguing in the church than just stabbing eachother to see who is right. Like c'mon its called battlemaster. Not talkmaster!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 29, 2012, 06:46:16 PM
I enjoy the talking part too. Besides, we have a war at the moment.  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 29, 2012, 07:08:31 PM
 ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on June 29, 2012, 07:10:26 PM
Heh . . . "Glaumring is the true embodiment of the Maddening!"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 29, 2012, 07:18:25 PM
I swear the more I want to leave this church the harder they try to pull me back in...  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 29, 2012, 07:30:22 PM
You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on June 29, 2012, 07:30:49 PM
You can take the noble out of SA, but you cannot take SA out of the noble!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 29, 2012, 07:31:43 PM
We should have warning labels.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 29, 2012, 07:32:33 PM
Someone call OSHA!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on June 29, 2012, 07:34:35 PM
We should have warning labels.

"Warning: Using SA may result in sudden loss of sanity, widespread civil warfare and auto-trepanations."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 29, 2012, 10:58:36 PM
Whack-a-Saxon anyone?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on June 29, 2012, 11:12:32 PM
Whack-a-Saxon anyone?

But Chenier, Thulsoma long since went.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 29, 2012, 11:40:42 PM
Maybe, but you're doing a great impression.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on June 29, 2012, 11:59:40 PM
Maybe, but you're doing a great impression.

Feel free to elaborate that statement Magistrate
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 30, 2012, 12:24:44 AM
Feel free to elaborate that statement Magistrate

And what exactly does me being a Magistrate have to do with anything?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on June 30, 2012, 12:29:22 AM
And what exactly does me being a Magistrate have to do with anything?

It is a title, which I chose to address you by, as you could address a doctor as "Doctor Bob" or simply "Bob" or even "Doctor".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 30, 2012, 05:03:46 AM
It is a title, which I chose to address you by, as you could address a doctor as "Doctor Bob" or simply "Bob" or even "Doctor".

I don't think it should be used. We aren't "special" outside of the courtroom. We are players like everyone else who happen to participate in rules violation reviews. Addressing one of us by that title outside of the courtroom seems inappropriate to me.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on June 30, 2012, 05:16:24 AM
I don't think it should be used. We aren't "special" outside of the courtroom. We are players like everyone else who happen to participate in rules violation reviews. Addressing one of us by that title outside of the courtroom seems inappropriate to me.

Then I'll not use it again. But back on topic please do elaborate Geronus
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 30, 2012, 05:37:56 AM
Then I'll not use it again. But back on topic please do elaborate Geronus

Please do, I have no idea what the comments below mine meant...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on July 01, 2012, 12:24:54 AM
Please do, I have no idea what the comments below mine meant...

Have fixed typo..
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 01, 2012, 03:47:05 AM
But Chenier, Thulsoma long since went.

Went... to Aurvandil?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on July 01, 2012, 07:00:51 PM
Went... to Aurvandil?

No.

I seem to recall more went to Barca, D'Hara and Madina than went to Aurvandil.

Aurvandil has maybe two nobles who had characters in Thulsoma, until we gained two more from Barca, and only a handful of players who used to have a character in Thulsoma. This nonsense that Aurvandil is Thulsoman is getting quite annoying.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on July 01, 2012, 07:28:00 PM
Went... to Aurvandil?

They didn't. Though thank you for once again confirming magistrate bias against Aurvandil.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 01, 2012, 07:37:05 PM
It's very hard to track them. We know that several of them just abandoned old accounts and created new ones. The fact that few/none of the player histories show a Thulsoma connection is a poor indicator.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on July 01, 2012, 08:04:23 PM
They didn't. Though thank you for once again confirming magistrate bias against Aurvandil.

Huh?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on July 01, 2012, 08:05:16 PM
No.

I seem to recall more went to Barca, D'Hara and Madina than went to Aurvandil.

Aurvandil has maybe two nobles who had characters in Thulsoma, until we gained two more from Barca, and only a handful of players who used to have a character in Thulsoma. This nonsense that Aurvandil is Thulsoman is getting quite annoying.

I don't have the time at this exact moment to check the facts on this; but I'm pretty sure this is factually not the case. But maybe I'm wrong. Will check later tonight.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 01, 2012, 08:06:32 PM
Huh?
Confirmation bias. When you're convinced everyone hates you, then everything you see proves how right you are.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Uzamaki on July 01, 2012, 08:13:59 PM
Confirmation bias. When you're convinced everyone hates you, then everything you see proves how right you are.

AH HA! I KNEW YOU HATED ME!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on July 01, 2012, 08:40:47 PM
Well, I'll fact check for you.

The characters who were in Thulsoma are: Raviel, scyhtherion and Sothcynning.
The characters who were in Thulsoma but joined from Barca are: Tostig (Who was a Summerdalian), Alyssa (Who was an Astrumite).

So for a total of five characters who were in Thulsoma are now in Aurvandil, so less than a tenth of the noble count of Aurvandil. As for players who have had characters in Thulsoma, that would be: Infaustus Godhelm (Caerwynite), Vahanian, Herousmalswyrd, and that's it. Completely combined, that's eight players who have had characters in Thulsoma that we know of. Not even a sixth of the player count of Aurvandil, yes, because Aurvandil is totally Saxons.

As for any possible players who deleted and made new accounts, well fair enough, they would to in order to escape the curse of being called a Saxon, and Saxon is only really an I.G. definition, or at least I hope it is and this isn't an OOC vendetta against any and all players who ever were in Saxon Thulsoma, because it would certainly suck to have all of Aurvandil branded as Saxons because a few players have an OOC hunch some of us might actually have been in Thulsoma at some point in the past. At any rate, the nobles holding power in Aurvandil, aren't Saxon, the nobles who founded Aurvandil aren't Saxon (They're Orvandeaux) and the majority of nobles aren't Saxon, they are a mismatch of nobles from all over the continents.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 01, 2012, 08:55:53 PM
At any rate, the nobles holding power in Aurvandil, aren't Saxon, the nobles who founded Aurvandil aren't Saxon (They're Orvandeaux) and the majority of nobles aren't Saxon, they are a mismatch of nobles from all over the continents.
Good to hear.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on July 01, 2012, 09:05:35 PM
Good to hear.

Very.

Mendicant would be quite pissed if the Saxons he spent his youth slaughtering took over his Kingdom and culture. The Saxons are after all, simple northern barbarians living in wooden huts and stone caves they call a stronghold. Whereas Aurvandil is a sprawling metropolis of stone and marble and civilised nobles dressed in the finery of vast wealth and success.

Kind of like the difference between Aurvandil and Asylon actually, which Glaumring pointed out. But then I don't think anyone takes opulence and displaying wealth as seriously as Aurvandil does.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on July 01, 2012, 09:59:14 PM
Well, I'll fact check for you.

The characters who were in Thulsoma are: Raviel, scyhtherion and Sothcynning.
The characters who were in Thulsoma but joined from Barca are: Tostig (Who was a Summerdalian), Alyssa (Who was an Astrumite).

So for a total of five characters who were in Thulsoma are now in Aurvandil, so less than a tenth of the noble count of Aurvandil. As for players who have had characters in Thulsoma, that would be: Infaustus Godhelm (Caerwynite), Vahanian, Herousmalswyrd, and that's it. Completely combined, that's eight players who have had characters in Thulsoma that we know of. Not even a sixth of the player count of Aurvandil, yes, because Aurvandil is totally Saxons.

As for any possible players who deleted and made new accounts, well fair enough, they would to in order to escape the curse of being called a Saxon, and Saxon is only really an I.G. definition, or at least I hope it is and this isn't an OOC vendetta against any and all players who ever were in Saxon Thulsoma, because it would certainly suck to have all of Aurvandil branded as Saxons because a few players have an OOC hunch some of us might actually have been in Thulsoma at some point in the past. At any rate, the nobles holding power in Aurvandil, aren't Saxon, the nobles who founded Aurvandil aren't Saxon (They're Orvandeaux) and the majority of nobles aren't Saxon, they are a mismatch of nobles from all over the continents.

Families with connections in Thulsoma or Averoth (not considering Nivemus, Arcachon, or Thalmarkin connections):

Chambers
Umpeta Perticta
Griffirtaen
Yusuke
Metisette
Brythonic
Gryffine
House of Drakon
Lyirchtsars
Azul
Mnemic
Armityle
Cordon D'Anerville
Cedillo
Principe
Lurdigala
Sutherland
Godwin
Blint


Naturally, many of them are rather distant ties.

But this is why many of us call it a Saxon realm. Because, from an outsider perspective, there are about 20 families dating back to either Thulsoma or Averoth. And when you say there are only 5 "characters," that isn't very reassuring.

ICly too, those families surely date back to Saxon areas, so claiming their whole ethnic background changed seems... implausible.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on July 01, 2012, 11:44:49 PM
Families with connections in Thulsoma or Averoth (not considering Nivemus, Arcachon, or Thalmarkin connections):

Chambers - Thulsoma and Averoth and Thalmarkin
Umpeta Perticta - Averoth
Griffirtaen - Averoth
Yusuke - Astrumite, No relation to either realms
Metisette - Thulsoman
Brythonic - Thulsoman
Gryffine - Averoth
House of Drakon - Astrum then Averoth
Lyirchtsars - Thulsoman / Averothian
Azul - Averoth
Mnemic - Thulsoman / Averothian
Armityle - Thulsoman
Cordon D'Anerville - Averothian
Cedillo -  Averothian
Principe - Thulsoman
Lurdigala - Thulsoman... After being an experienced player for serveral years
Sutherland - Thulsoman
Godwin - Thulsoman
Blint - Thulsoman

Updated for fact checking / clarifications
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on July 01, 2012, 11:49:40 PM
16 Nobles from Averoth or Thulsoma, 1 from Astrum and non of these names I reconise as being particularly influential in Aurvandil, except Blint.

On a side note, his title on his family page has the grammar all wrong.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on July 02, 2012, 01:04:59 AM
Yeah, I don't know how important they all are; I'm just saying how it can appear to an outsider.

But we're not talking about SA now. So.

SA! How 'bout them stars?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 02, 2012, 01:48:33 AM
Maddening is bright tonight, with Austere superior, but dark. Sounds like a great omen for a forum flamefest!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 02, 2012, 06:57:14 AM
Hay guyz whats going on? 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 09, 2012, 05:02:29 PM
Oh noes! We're screwed now. Brom Silverfire is an elder...

/me shudders

Congratulations, Brom. You have a strong backing in Kabrinskia. :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on July 09, 2012, 07:08:10 PM
Oh noes! We're screwed now. Brom Silverfire is an elder...

/me shudders

Congratulations, Brom. You have a strong backing in Kabrinskia. :)

:o... What happened to the church while I was struggling in Solaria?!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Foundation on July 09, 2012, 07:19:29 PM
Using struggle is not recommended until you deplete all your PP, Zak.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on July 09, 2012, 07:54:47 PM
:o... What happened to the church while I was struggling in Solaria?!

It's basically a guarantee that one noble from Kabrinskia will be a Consul no matter what, just based on the number of followers there and the % of them that vote.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on July 09, 2012, 11:49:54 PM
Oh noes! We're screwed now. Brom Silverfire is an elder...

/me shudders

Congratulations, Brom. You have a strong backing in Kabrinskia. :)

I can't help it but take advantage of my resources.

And seriously, its not like no one saw this coming right? I mean really....What'd you think he was gonna do?

:o... What happened to the church while I was struggling in Solaria?!

What doesn't kill you makes you stronger. That's why Brom said if you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 10, 2012, 12:27:29 AM
And then kill them?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on July 10, 2012, 08:17:58 AM
And then kill them?

Poison them, then run away. Its a Silverfire thing, you wouldn't understand  :P.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on July 10, 2012, 11:42:35 PM
Poison them, then run away. Its a Silverfire thing, you wouldn't understand  :P.

Naw, its a Brom thing. The rest of the Silverfire's don't plot at all... *crossing fingers behind back*...

Plus its more like, poison them, run towards then, try and help, fail at stealing wife, crown, titles, and land, repeat, fail again, run away, and start over.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on August 04, 2012, 07:24:56 PM
1. Allison asks the Elders what's the deal is with the Magistratum voting process.
2. Rabisu informs her the Elders are currently voting on whether to hold one.
3. Allison urges the Elders to have a vote on the Magistratum.
4. Brance replies that the Elders are voting and won't be rushed.

REPEAT STEPS 1 THROUGH 4 UNTIL EXPLODE.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Foundation on August 04, 2012, 09:05:52 PM
WHat is Magistratum?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 04, 2012, 09:16:05 PM
A Magistratum trial is the court for Sanguis Astroism. People accused of heresies and other serious crimes against the faith are tried by the three members of the Magistratum.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on August 04, 2012, 09:19:13 PM
A Magistratum trial is the court for Sanguis Astroism. People accused of heresies and other serious crimes against the faith are tried by the three members of the Magistratum.


my goal is to slowly perfect the process so that I can use it against others in the future...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on August 09, 2012, 03:51:47 AM
So it begins!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 09, 2012, 04:30:58 AM
Weeeeeee!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on August 09, 2012, 09:17:53 AM
If you want only the Astroists to know what you are talking about (the Magistratum trial opened against Allison), why do you post in here instead of through the SA channel, OoC?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on August 15, 2012, 08:22:13 PM
Well, the Magistratum is happening behind closed doors if it's happening at all. Of far more interest now is the most recent declaration of war...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ross on August 15, 2012, 08:28:23 PM
Oh, but it's a war that is not war, it seems it's different and shouldn't affect diplomatic relations. More hugs soon.

We should call it instead:

A momentarily friendly warfare preventive administration procedure with foreign diplomacy reduction for global safety.

I heard it's more accurate.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 15, 2012, 08:42:25 PM
I'm having a very hard time getting certain of the elders to participate in selecting magistrates. Elsebeth's player has been very busy and not had time to play. (And has been on vacation for a week, or something.) Chrisxan is being IC belligerent and not participating. So that's two of the three Lights that are not helping move things along. Selection of one of the Magistrate's is the task of the Lights and the Regent, and we're trying to be careful that we follow the rules as best we can with this trial. But with two of four not working, the entire process is worse than pulling teeth. It actively sucks.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on August 15, 2012, 11:07:54 PM
Heh maybe it is time to create a new church with active people :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on August 15, 2012, 11:16:36 PM
I'm having a very hard time getting certain of the elders to participate in selecting magistrates. Elsebeth's player has been very busy and not had time to play. (And has been on vacation for a week, or something.) Chrisxan is being IC belligerent and not participating. So that's two of the three Lights that are not helping move things along. Selection of one of the Magistrate's is the task of the Lights and the Regent, and we're trying to be careful that we follow the rules as best we can with this trial. But with two of four not working, the entire process is worse than pulling teeth. It actively sucks.

Allison, your plan is working!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Uzamaki on August 15, 2012, 11:56:50 PM
Heh maybe it is time to create a new church with active people :)

I vote that the Astrocracies all attack each other and the winner lays claim to all the land of the SA nations.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on August 16, 2012, 12:16:58 AM
We could only dream.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on August 16, 2012, 07:51:29 AM
I'm having a very hard time getting certain of the elders to participate in selecting magistrates. Elsebeth's player has been very busy and not had time to play. (And has been on vacation for a week, or something.) Chrisxan is being IC belligerent and not participating. So that's two of the three Lights that are not helping move things along. Selection of one of the Magistrate's is the task of the Lights and the Regent, and we're trying to be careful that we follow the rules as best we can with this trial. But with two of four not working, the entire process is worse than pulling teeth. It actively sucks.

That's what you get for following rules.....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on August 16, 2012, 04:47:05 PM
I'm having a very hard time getting certain of the elders to participate in selecting magistrates. Elsebeth's player has been very busy and not had time to play. (And has been on vacation for a week, or something.) Chrisxan is being IC belligerent and not participating. So that's two of the three Lights that are not helping move things along. Selection of one of the Magistrate's is the task of the Lights and the Regent, and we're trying to be careful that we follow the rules as best we can with this trial. But with two of four not working, the entire process is worse than pulling teeth. It actively sucks.

You should make Hireshmont a Light.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on August 16, 2012, 05:35:14 PM
You should make Hireshmont a Light.

Are you a priest?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on August 16, 2012, 05:36:55 PM
Are you a priest?

Yes.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 16, 2012, 07:25:48 PM
That's one of the things those folks who wrote the charter left out. Important things like how to pick new Lights. How to remove Lights. Or, well, how to remove *anyone*. We're saddled with higher-ups who, for the most part, don't seem to really give a crap about djaily functioning of the church, and only pay attention when their own little world is impinged on.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on August 16, 2012, 07:27:12 PM
That's one of the things those folks who wrote the charter left out. Important things like how to pick new Lights. How to remove Lights. Or, well, how to remove *anyone*. We're saddled with higher-ups who, for the most part, don't seem to really give a crap about djaily functioning of the church, and only pay attention when their own little world is impinged on.

You could try just demoting them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 16, 2012, 07:30:42 PM
I actually plan to do that very soon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on August 16, 2012, 07:33:50 PM
A Magistrate doesn't have to be a Light, though. It could be anyone, like, even a Luminary.

Just saying.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on August 16, 2012, 07:35:05 PM
Food for thought you could make Creed a elder of the church  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 16, 2012, 07:44:34 PM
A Magistrate doesn't have to be a Light, though. It could be anyone, like, even a Luminary.

A Magistrate could be anyone in good standing in the church. Highly secular ranked nobles preferred. I think we have settled on three, but we need confirmation, or at least a comment, by more of the Elders. If it doesn't happen soon, though, Brance will just go ahead with it, and consequences be damned.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 17, 2012, 02:18:03 AM
No more Mr. Nice Guy.  >:(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on August 17, 2012, 03:40:06 AM
The Regency needs to a be more powerful.  Its good to see decisive action. 

Im trying to figure out my next move with Allison.  I kind of want to plant a new realm in the ashes of D'hara.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on August 17, 2012, 03:42:23 AM
Im trying to figure out my next move with Allison.  I kind of want to plant a new realm in the ashes of D'hara.
We aren't dead yet, but sounds like an interesting idea.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on August 17, 2012, 04:06:45 AM
The Regency needs to a be more powerful.  Its good to see decisive action. 

Im trying to figure out my next move with Allison.  I kind of want to plant a new realm in the ashes of D'hara.

Then you'll need to deal with Solaria's colonists.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 17, 2012, 04:18:09 AM
Dustole wants a strong Regent?! Isn't this the same guy who claimed the Regency was deliberately set up as a powerless figurehead? :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on August 17, 2012, 04:22:15 AM
Dustole wants a strong Regent?! Isn't this the same guy who claimed the Regency was deliberately set up as a powerless figurehead? :P
Probably but Allison is much less obvious with her contradictions than Glaumring. This is how I see it, Allison changes her mind on what she wants depending on the situation where Glaumring often can't make his mind.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on August 17, 2012, 04:30:57 AM
Dustole wants a strong Regent?! Isn't this the same guy who claimed the Regency was deliberately set up as a powerless figurehead? :P


I think it was made that way because they feared Allison would get it. As I remember it, Constantine and Varchilde wanted a figurehead and I argued for more and then Brance became the first Regent.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on August 17, 2012, 05:28:32 AM
Probably but Allison is much less obvious with her contradictions than Glaumring. This is how I see it, Allison changes her mind on what she wants depending on the situation where Glaumring often can't make his mind.

We are two peas in a pod indeed... Ye shall see.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on August 18, 2012, 01:50:05 AM
Im trying to figure out my next move with Allison.  I kind of want to plant a new realm in the ashes of D'hara.

You could call it Allisonland. Then maybe it would ally with Kabrinskia, and it'd be called the Allisonland Kabrinskia alliance?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 18, 2012, 02:44:22 AM
I still want to see her start a realm named Wonderland.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on August 18, 2012, 05:11:26 AM
And the fortifications of the capital would be called the Wonderwalls.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on August 18, 2012, 07:42:53 AM
And the fortifications of the capital would be called the Wonderwalls.

And they would grow Wonder bread!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ehndras on August 18, 2012, 08:03:46 AM
Smeared with hearty bloodmoon jam!

Quote
"Madness never tasted quite so delicious!"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on August 22, 2012, 04:05:53 AM
It occurs to me that "Crusade" might be a bit of a misnomer. The word comes from the word "cross," right, or "crucifix," neither of which are prominent at all in Sanguis Astroism. But then, "Starade" sounds like a sports drink.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on August 22, 2012, 05:25:05 AM
It occurs to me that "Crusade" might be a bit of a misnomer. The word comes from the word "cross," right, or "crucifix," neither of which are prominent at all in Sanguis Astroism. But then, "Starade" sounds like a sports drink.

Quote
"Coming soon to a keep near you, Starade is what your servants bodies need after a long day of beatings. Starade will also let you push your men to march 13 hours a day instead of 12."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on August 22, 2012, 09:14:12 AM
It occurs to me that "Crusade" might be a bit of a misnomer. The word comes from the word "cross," right, or "crucifix," neither of which are prominent at all in Sanguis Astroism. But then, "Starade" sounds like a sports drink.

They're the Bloodstars. Surely we can make something out of that.

Bloodrage?
Bloodrade?
General Bloodiness targeted on this area?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on August 22, 2012, 09:57:18 AM
Bloodquest.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on August 22, 2012, 01:51:42 PM
Astrade - "astro", storm
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on August 22, 2012, 03:31:34 PM
If you actually start looking at the English language, so much of it is influenced by the prominence of Christianity through Europe's history that we'll never get anywhere if we stop to try and rewrite the language to excise its influence.

"Crusade" is just fine. Everyone understands it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 22, 2012, 03:37:17 PM
"Astrade" sounds too much like "Ass Trade".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on August 22, 2012, 04:15:25 PM
If you actually start looking at the English language, so much of it is influenced by the prominence of Christianity through Europe's history that we'll never get anywhere if we stop to try and rewrite the language to excise its influence.

"Crusade" is just fine. Everyone understands it.

+1
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on August 22, 2012, 05:18:29 PM
This Magistratum trial is coming along very quickly. Of course, when you have virtually no evidence to consider, that tends to speed things up.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on August 22, 2012, 05:22:37 PM
This Magistratum trial is coming along very quickly. Of course, when you have virtually no evidence to consider, that tends to speed things up.

It is indeed looking as though it will be over before the end of the week.

Then again, evidence shmevidence.... you should expect the Spanish Inquisition after all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on August 22, 2012, 05:29:55 PM
It is indeed looking as though it will be over before the end of the week.

Then again, evidence shmevidence.... you should expect the Spanish Inquisition after all.

I thought you were talking about the actual magistrates then :(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Uzamaki on August 22, 2012, 06:07:41 PM
Astroturf, Dwilight edition.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on August 22, 2012, 06:10:14 PM
If you actually start looking at the English language, so much of it is influenced by the prominence of Christianity through Europe's history that we'll never get anywhere if we stop to try and rewrite the language to excise its influence.

"Crusade" is just fine. Everyone understands it.

Well everyone understands "Bible" too, but we don't call the holy writings that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Uzamaki on August 22, 2012, 06:11:44 PM
Well everyone understands "Bible" too, but we don't call the holy writings that.

For obvious as well as game related reasons.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on August 22, 2012, 06:14:30 PM
Well everyone understands "Bible" too, but we don't call the holy writings that.

Yeah, and?

"Crusade", in English, is much less Christianity-connotated than "Bible" is.

I don't know whether you're a native English speaker or not, but if you are, then you're being unnecessarily—and somewhat annoyingly—pedantic about this.

Please, don't try and rewrite half the English language just to excise the influence of Christianity from it. It's way, way more trouble than it's worth, and will confuse people if you start using your new words like they're supposed to know what they mean.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Uzamaki on August 22, 2012, 06:16:57 PM
and will confuse people if you start using your new words like they're supposed to know what they mean.

We do have some non-English speakers in Battlemaster. They would 'lolwut' at Starade.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on August 22, 2012, 06:20:21 PM
Well everyone understands "Bible" too, but we don't call the holy writings that.

That's because it's a proper noun, for which there are easily understood generic English equivalents (scripture, holy text, sacred text, etc.). Crusade is not a proper noun. It also does not have any synonyms that carry the same religious connotation other than jihad. Of the two terms, I prefer crusade.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on August 22, 2012, 06:23:11 PM
It also does not have any synonyms that carry the same religious connotation other than jihad. Of the two terms, I prefer crusade.

"Holy War"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 22, 2012, 06:28:08 PM
There could be evidence in the trial if anyone had saved any ot Allison's messages. But unless the Magistrates make a public call for it, I doubt any will surface.

But, meh... IG trials are mostly a sham anyway. Everyone goes into already knowing what they believe. The trials don't change anyone's mind on anything.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on August 22, 2012, 06:30:10 PM
I have some letters.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on August 22, 2012, 06:31:33 PM
"Holy War"

Fair enough. I still prefer Crusade.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on August 22, 2012, 06:37:34 PM
I have some letters.  8)

Argh, yes, and you did say so 11 days and 23 hours ago.

Do we want to read them? Gut feelings are so much easier.....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on August 22, 2012, 06:40:31 PM
Argh, yes, and you did say so 11 days and 23 hours ago.

Do we want to read them? Gut feelings are so much easier.....

I don't know, they're kind of heretical, and reading them gives me a heresy-y feeling. It might be better just to burn them so the ideas don't contaminate others. Especially when we're most likely about to have a.... BLOODY HOLY WAR OF THE BLOODSTARS. WITH BLOOD.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on August 22, 2012, 06:42:53 PM
I don't know, they're kind of heretical, and reading them gives me a heresy-y feeling. It might be better just to burn them so the ideas don't contaminate others. Especially when we're most likely about to have a.... BLOODY HOLY WAR OF THE BLOODSTARS. WITH BLOOD.

There, I threw you a line. Bite, or burn them, as you wish.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on August 22, 2012, 09:42:58 PM
I have some letters.  8)

I'm sure I can manufacture some letters. They're from around 42 days ago. Who can prove me wrong?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on August 22, 2012, 10:06:39 PM
Anyone who also received them, has a fairly decent memory, and can be trusted.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on August 22, 2012, 10:07:52 PM
and can be trusted.

So... nobody?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on August 22, 2012, 10:11:05 PM
...If you're that paranoid. I think there's a fine line between a healthy respect for characters' motivations and the fact that people lie sometimes, and not trusting anybody ever.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ehndras on August 22, 2012, 10:15:31 PM
Crusade also exists in many other languages. Cruzada, Croisade, Crusada, Crusad, etc. Its pretty universal and not even the original term...

Quote
Origin of CRUSADE
blend of Middle French croisade & Spanish cruzada; both ultimately from Latin cruc-, crux cross
First Known Use: circa 1708

I'm pretty sure the Crusades were long, long before 1708 and thus Crusade is not even the original term used at the time of the actual Crusades. It has been called by many, many names, Crusade simply being the 'modern' Christian equivalent of the same universal idea.

It is a military Campaign shadowed by religious connotations. Simple enough for anyone to understand.

I also don't see the issue with using Crusade since that's a very Catholic term and SA is so heavily reminiscent of Catholicism that its not even funny anymore. Just go with the flow, folks. Crusade, Jihad, Purge, Holy War, Campaign, Divine Cleansing, Hammering, Smiting, blitz, movement, call it what you will.

It doesn't matter who does or doesn't speak English as their first language (mine was Portuguese, just for the record), what matters is whoever is running the RP and what THEY wish to call it. If I want to call my religion's military campaign the Divine Hammering or the Cleaning or Blitzkrieg or Crusade or Inquisition, what does it matter as long as we're RPing and having fun. ;-) They all mean the same exact thing anyway: military campaign with religious rather than strategic leanings. In other words, war for faith rather than gold or territory, though in the end it usually comes out to the same exact thing really.

C'mon, lighten up and have your fun RPing folks :-)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on August 22, 2012, 10:25:15 PM
...If you're that paranoid. I think there's a fine line between a healthy respect for characters' motivations and the fact that people lie sometimes, and not trusting anybody ever.

Is it really paranoid to assume that someone sending a letter to Allison or receiving a letter from Allison cannot be trusted?

Think on that for a second...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on August 22, 2012, 10:25:49 PM
I also don't see the issue with using Crusade since that's a very Catholic term and SA is so heavily reminiscent of Catholicism that its not even funny anymore. Just go with the flow, folks. Crusade, Jihad, Purge, Holy War, Campaign, Divine Cleansing, Hammering, Smiting, blitz, movement, call it what you will.

Catholicism? SA? Really?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on August 22, 2012, 10:29:32 PM
Is it really paranoid to assume that someone sending a letter to Allison or receiving a letter from Allison cannot be trusted?

Think on that for a second...

Well, when the letter sent (from Allison) was also sent to all full members of Sanguis Astroism, it's really kind of a stretch to imagine that everyone was in on some conspiracy. Not that such a theory won't, in fact, come into play. I'm sure Allison herself will make the argument soon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ehndras on August 22, 2012, 11:28:49 PM
Catholicism? SA? Really?

Are you kidding me? Totally! You can draw many parallels between SA's attitude and political style and medieval Catholicism, if not the Holy Roman Empire itself. I find the whole current crusade discussion comedic in that regard. Like with the actual Crusades, nothing will ever happen unless someone else with power bands together to attack SA because without significant reward and threat, the SA nations won't band together for jack sh*t.

I'm talking style and attitude, not meaningless phluff Lore. I don't care that SA worships stars and all this. I'm talking about politics, theocratic interaction, and so forth. When I first joined Dwilight and researched (and was a member of) SA, it almost seemed as if SA was specifically designed to mirror Medieval Catholicism while deviating into Fantasy territory to better fit the game. There are so many parallels that it'd be a huge coincidence if it wasn't consciously or otherwise inspired by it. I think it'd do them a lot of good to keep that up, anyway, as medieval Catholicism/HRE was a massive powerplayer and had one hell of a solid sociopolitical structure that gave it the power it held. Its not about the beliefs itself - its never about the beliefs - its about how the religion is administered and structured.

Anyone can make a fluff-Lore for a fantasy religion. Few can do what SA did and create a theocratic EMPIRE.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on August 22, 2012, 11:33:00 PM
Are you kidding me? Totally! You can draw many parallels between SA's attitude and political style and medieval Catholicism, if not the Holy Roman Empire itself. I find the whole current crusade discussion comedic in that regard. Like with the actual Crusades, nothing will ever happen unless someone else with power bands together to attack SA because without significant reward and threat, the SA nations won't band together for jack sh*t.

I'm talking style and attitude, not meaningless phluff Lore. I don't care that SA worships stars and all this. I'm talking about politics, theocratic interaction, and so forth. When I first joined Dwilight and researched (and was a member of) SA, it almost seemed as if SA was specifically designed to mirror Medieval Catholicism while deviating into Fantasy territory to better fit the game. There are so many parallels that it'd be a huge coincidence if it wasn't consciously or otherwise inspired by it. I think it'd do them a lot of good to keep that up, anyway, as medieval Catholicism/HRE was a massive powerplayer and had one hell of a solid sociopolitical structure that gave it the power it held. Its not about the beliefs itself - its never about the beliefs - its about how the religion is administered and structured.

Anyone can make a fluff-Lore for a fantasy religion. Few can do what SA did and create a theocratic EMPIRE.

I think you are very confused about SA, medieval Catholicism, and the religio-political significance of specific doctrines.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ehndras on August 22, 2012, 11:44:33 PM
I don't see what there is to be confused about.

SA's play-style and general attitude reminds me of medieval Catholicism. I adore medieval history and come from a heavily-Christian family so I've been heavily exposed to all the typical truths and half-truths regarding the subject. I feel that SA reminds me of medieval Catholicism in its power-mongering religious monopoly, fractured city-states, internal conflict, and inability to band together for a military cause unless the entirety of SA is threatened.

The first real-world religion that comes to mind when I think of SA is medieval-era Catholicism. I'm not trying to make any assumptions or assertions about SA - I'm simply stating my opinion on behalf of the vague connotations my mind connected betwixt the two.

Not trying to start a discussion (or argument) here :P There's nothing to defend on either part, either my opinion or the perceived integrity (or lack) of an SA-Catholicism ideal.

SA =/= Catholicism. They're as far apart as one can possibly imagine. Their doctrines, dogma, internal structure are nothing like one another. In order to avoid someone drumming up an excuse to start an argument I will once again state that the sole point of my comment was to state SA reminds me of medieval Catholicism due to the whole Crusade talk, how ridiculously dense it is at times, how its going through similar internal issues as the HRE/Cath did pre-Crusade era, and I find it altogether comedic how my mind drew this parallel. I've spoken to another of others who giggled upon making the same connections but again, its only an opinion.

Please don't use this as an excuse to declare holy war on me ;-)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on August 23, 2012, 12:01:11 AM
SA =/= Catholicism. They're as far apart as one can possibly imagine. Their doctrines, dogma, internal structure are nothing like one another. In order to avoid someone drumming up an excuse to start an argument I will once again state that the sole point of my comment was to state SA reminds me of medieval Catholicism due to the whole Crusade talk, how ridiculously dense it is at times, how its going through similar internal issues as the HRE/Cath did pre-Crusade era, and I find it altogether comedic how my mind drew this parallel. I've spoken to another of others who giggled upon making the same connections but again, its only an opinion.

Any large organization with a diffuse power structure will face similar issues of collective action. I don't think it's a Catholic thing. As for the theological debates, a parallel could be drawn to the process if not the content, but again I think that you'd find that similar processes occur in any religion that is early (or really anywhere) in its development.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 23, 2012, 12:23:35 AM
The SA religion has a very strong policy to NOT try and band the realms together into a unified force. This has some OOC and IC reasons. For IC, we recognize that it would be pretty much impossible. And if you tried and failed, it could destroy the religion. For OOC, that would make things ridiculously boring. All the realms not at the front lines would die off due to boredom. (F.ex.: LE and Summerdale, even though they aren't theocracies.)

BattleMaster needs wars to keep people interested. That's why we run SA like so many people have wanted to do with realms: a group of realms that are free to fight amongst themselves, but band together against external threat. We just didn't try to turn it into city-states like so many claim they want to do with that kind of thing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Darksun on August 23, 2012, 12:30:12 AM
Then again, evidence shmevidence.... you should expect the Spanish Inquisition after all.

NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ehndras on August 23, 2012, 01:45:07 AM
+1 For Indirik

And that's right. Everyone knows its coming, but Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition. ;-)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on August 23, 2012, 06:31:29 AM
You're trying to spread the light of the Bloodstars, right? How about, "The Haemorrhaging". :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on August 23, 2012, 07:25:36 AM
Allison skates through another Magistratum trial?  Didn't expect that.   

New strategy:  Punish those who accuse you and who testify against you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on August 23, 2012, 08:56:40 AM
Begin the purge Allison!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 23, 2012, 01:55:51 PM
Skates through the trial? It's not over yet. Although the Magistrates are debating in private. (Boo!) If they clear Allison that fast, there's going to be a lot of pissed off people.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on August 23, 2012, 03:44:36 PM
Hehehehehehe! You shouldn't have waited so long to get it going. Now there's practically no evidence to consider, so even if there were messages significantly more incriminating than the ones we've seen produced so far it's too late now. We can't (won't) rule on hearsay.

I am sure there will be quite the fuss in the Church when we unveil our judgment, but I am very good at talking. I think I can get Allison out of this one without much more than a slap on the wrist. Why would I do that, you ask? Because it's fun. That and I look forward to seeing what she does next.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 23, 2012, 03:56:45 PM
Yeah, the delay was unfortunate. There were a lot of circumstances that delayed us getting started several times. Even had we gone significantly faster, the 30 day message limit ensures that quite a bit of stuff will be gone before we start.

How come the Magistrates never sent out a call for evidence? I am really at a loss as to how things worked. Did you all just sit down behind closed doors and say "Anyone have any evidence? No? Well, I don't feel like bothering to ask anyone for any, so let's just call it a day and go hit the beach!" If you guys don't at least put on a show of attempting to investigate and holding a trial, it's really going to suck.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on August 23, 2012, 04:08:09 PM
holding a trial

We won't hold a modern day trial with witnesses calling the Fifth and lawyers objecting to every other question and a burden of proof without a reasonable doubt. There's a similar debate in Morek right now and I hate the idea. I don't think it would be SMA.

There are many model of judgments in the middle ages. The Spanish Inquisition is one (I wasn't joking!). Trial by combat and trial by ordeals are others. These are what I want to base the Magistratum upon.

We're just waiting for Rurik's imprimatur and you'll see what we have in mind. Don't worry, it's not just throwing our hands in the air and giving up.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on August 23, 2012, 04:14:45 PM
Yeah, the delay was unfortunate. There were a lot of circumstances that delayed us getting started several times. Even had we gone significantly faster, the 30 day message limit ensures that quite a bit of stuff will be gone before we start.

How come the Magistrates never sent out a call for evidence? I am really at a loss as to how things worked. Did you all just sit down behind closed doors and say "Anyone have any evidence? No? Well, I don't feel like bothering to ask anyone for any, so let's just call it a day and go hit the beach!" If you guys don't at least put on a show of attempting to investigate and holding a trial, it's really going to suck.

Ask Von Genf, he's the one leading the show. Since Rurik hasn't said a word, it's pretty much just been Pierre and Lysander reaching a consensus between them. Lysander is so far happy with the way things are going, so he's not going to rock the boat by putting out a call for evidence that might derail his agenda. Either way, Pierre's approach is actually a good one in my opinion, considering the circumstances.

Don't worry, there will be a public aspect to the proceedings soon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on August 23, 2012, 05:39:29 PM
Hehehehehehe! You shouldn't have waited so long to get it going. Now there's practically no evidence to consider, so even if there were messages significantly more incriminating than the ones we've seen produced so far it's too late now. We can't (won't) rule on hearsay.

I am sure there will be quite the fuss in the Church when we unveil our judgment, but I am very good at talking. I think I can get Allison out of this one without much more than a slap on the wrist. Why would I do that, you ask? Because it's fun. That and I look forward to seeing what she does next.  8)

It's y'alls fault for not picking Brom. Its doubtful I'd have been as good at getting Allison off the hook as Lysander. Plus, no one would even listen to me.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on August 23, 2012, 06:02:24 PM
It's true, this isn't a trial like in the modern sense: there's no such thing as double jeopardy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 23, 2012, 06:10:26 PM
I'm not expecting a modern trial. But I did expect the Magistrates to at least call for anyone with evidence or information to come forward.

I can't wait to see what they have planned.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on August 23, 2012, 09:35:45 PM
I'm not expecting a modern trial. But I did expect the Magistrates to at least call for anyone with evidence or information to come forward.

I can't wait to see what they have planned.

Option 1: "After seeing the evidence presented at this Magistratum, we the Magistrates declare that Allison Kabrinski is henceforth co-Prophet of Sanguis Astroism."

Option 2: "In punishment for heresy, Allison Kabrinski must henceforth begin 6 months of penance. She will be the Holy Prophet's bedchamber maid for that course of time."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 23, 2012, 10:09:02 PM
Option #3: Allison will begin a penance period that will last as long as it takes her to overthrow the government of Aurvandil and turn it into the newest theocracy of the faith.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on August 23, 2012, 10:31:27 PM
Option #3: Allison will begin a penance period that will last as long as it takes her to overthrow the government of Aurvandil and turn it into the newest theocracy of the faith.

Now, that would be what I call a win!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 23, 2012, 10:35:11 PM
Then go for it, Mr. Lead Magistrate. :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ehndras on August 23, 2012, 11:01:48 PM
I must say, Option #3 looks mighty fine.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on August 24, 2012, 12:08:55 AM
Just let me off scot free!  Would be more fun that way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on August 24, 2012, 03:34:46 PM
Not really.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on August 24, 2012, 03:37:17 PM
Then go for it, Mr. Lead Magistrate. :D

Well, it would only be fun if it's short, really.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on August 24, 2012, 05:21:02 PM
If anyone wonders:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compurgation
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on August 24, 2012, 06:14:54 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_by_burning
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Uzamaki on August 24, 2012, 06:25:01 PM
If anyone wonders:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compurgation

Make the number of people to swear they believe her 100. I want to see if she can do it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on August 24, 2012, 06:29:19 PM
If anyone wonders:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compurgation

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if she were later found guilty of heresy, doesn't compurgation imply they are all guilty of heresy then? i.e. you take a risk in supporting the accused?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on August 24, 2012, 06:52:51 PM
Yeah, it might be medieval but it was still a slap on the wrist in my opinion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on August 24, 2012, 07:22:05 PM
Yeah, it might be medieval but it was still a slap on the wrist in my opinion.

Royals didn't usually get more than that without a bloody uprising either before or immediately after.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on August 24, 2012, 07:26:42 PM
Well, that would be true if the trial was simply done by Kabrinskian nobles within Kabrinskia. But when you leave a realm you no longer keep that ranking, (game mechanics wise anyways). RP-wise I can kinda see calling Allison a royal I guess though.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on August 24, 2012, 07:52:19 PM
They never told Allison she has to get supporters.  She just has to make a statement in a temple.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on August 24, 2012, 08:40:05 PM
They never told Allison she has to get supporters.  She just has to make a statement in a temple.

Yeah, Pierre didn't seem to care about that part.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on August 24, 2012, 08:49:20 PM
The way Lysander described it, it seemed way worse than what Pierre said.  I think I just got a "good cop/bad cop" .  Annoy the hell out of me with tedious dumb things and then Pierre swoops in and lays out a simple procedure.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 24, 2012, 09:09:29 PM
She just has to make a statement in a temple.

No, she has to swear an oath disavowing her supposedly heretical statements. That is much different than simply making a statement. If you swear the oath, and then repeat your statements, you will have no defense at all. You can be freely kicked out, executed, etc.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on August 24, 2012, 09:09:50 PM
The way Lysander described it, it seemed way worse than what Pierre said.  I think I just got a "good cop/bad cop" .  Annoy the hell out of me with tedious dumb things and then Pierre swoops in and lays out a simple procedure.

Haha, Pierre pitched it as a softball. It should have been a bit more detailed in my opinion, but hey, he gave me the opportunity to amend it. I was just too busy going back and forth with Allison  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on August 24, 2012, 09:26:26 PM
No, she has to swear an oath disavowing her supposedly heretical statements. That is much different than simply making a statement. If you swear the oath, and then repeat your statements, you will have no defense at all. You can be freely kicked out, executed, etc.
So instead of a slap on the wrist, it is more like pointing the gun at Allison and saying, "Do anything wrong and we shoot, or atleast we will throw you out of our building!"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on August 24, 2012, 09:37:54 PM
They never told Allison she has to get supporters.  She just has to make a statement in a temple.

Bah!

Lame.

Woulda loved to have seen Allison's supporters forced to swear oaths on her behalf, binding themselves utterly, body and soul, to her cause.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on August 24, 2012, 09:50:43 PM
Bah!

Lame.

Woulda loved to have seen Allison's supporters forced to swear oaths on her behalf, binding themselves utterly, body and soul, to her cause.


That would have been easy I think.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on August 24, 2012, 10:10:00 PM
Roleplay from Allison Kabrinski   (just sent)
Message sent to all full members of "Sanguis Astroism" (80 recipients)
Allison traveled to the temple in Port Nebel to make her public statement and to rid herself of this annoying Magistratum trial.  She knelt at the front of the temple.


"I, Allison Kabrinski swear that I have not made the statements that I am accused of.  Further, even though I helped to write it and I have already sworn an oath by it, I would like to reaffirm the Creed."


Looking up at the priests she stood up and walked over to them.

"Let it be known that I have yet to see any of the evidence against me nor have I seen letters in which I supposedly dismiss the Holy Prophet's prophetic nature as mere guesswork or that I claim that the Prophet has not reached Enlightenment.  I wish to be done with this foolish trial.  Only 1 Magistrate even bothered to talk to me about the charges and even then their tone was assumtive of my guilt.  I was not allowed to call witnesses even though others were called as witnesses against me.  If the accused is not allowed to see what evidence is against them or to call witnesses then what kind of trial is that?  I was not even allowed to face my accuser."

On her way out the door she turned and made one more passing remark.


"If you happen to see Sister Jonsu tell her to watch her back.  I will have my vengeance with her soon enough."



That should cover what I was required to do.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on August 24, 2012, 10:10:30 PM

That would have been easy I think.

But if she'd ever messed up, it would have meant that she and all her supporters could be found guilty in the aggregate.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 25, 2012, 01:55:01 AM
Meh, less than impresssed with the trial. It was actually a rather disappointing anti-climax. But we still have one way left to generate some excitement out of it. Let's cross our fingers and hope that Elsebeth and Medugnatos are sticklers for procedure.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on August 25, 2012, 03:16:19 AM

That should cover what I was required to do.

Objectively speaking, no I don't think it does. And it's only given more ammunition to the people who are most likely to use it. But then, you're smart enough to know that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ehndras on August 25, 2012, 11:41:38 PM
D'aww, those on trial demanding rights.

"Trials", in the Medieval era, were a bloody joke. :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on August 26, 2012, 03:33:45 AM
D'aww, those on trial demanding rights.

"Trials", in the Medieval era, were a bloody joke. :P

Emphasis on the blood?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on August 26, 2012, 04:32:11 AM
D'aww, those on trial demanding rights.

"Trials", in the Medieval era, were a bloody joke. :P
Bring on the Star Chamber!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on August 26, 2012, 04:33:17 AM
Meh, less than impresssed with the trial. It was actually a rather disappointing anti-climax. But we still have one way left to generate some excitement out of it. Let's cross our fingers and hope that Elsebeth and Medugnatos are sticklers for procedure.
Oh, when it suits her interests, Elsebeth can be quite a stickler.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 26, 2012, 04:38:18 AM
Well, get on it then!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Uzamaki on August 26, 2012, 04:40:47 AM
Well, get on it then!

Bang a gong! Get it on!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on August 26, 2012, 04:42:02 AM
Objectively speaking, no I don't think it does. And it's only given more ammunition to the people who are most likely to use it. But then, you're smart enough to know that.

Have to agree on this one.

If you wanted to make sure you were "good to go" you should have abased yourself in public. Cried out your love and devotion to the stars and the prophet. Actually tried to look sincere.

Although...coming from Allison, I'm not sure many ppl would believe that. They'd just call it an act.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on August 26, 2012, 04:48:18 AM
In the criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups. The Magistrates who investigate crimes and the Elders who prosecute the offenders. These are their stories. DUNK DUNK.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on August 26, 2012, 04:53:56 AM
In the criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups. The Magistrates who investigate crimes and the Elders who prosecute the offenders. These are their stories. DUNK DUNK.

Looks like our victim was star struck.  8) YEEEEEEEEEAAaaah
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on August 26, 2012, 05:27:23 AM
Well, get on it then!

"When it suits her interests."

Which is not to say that she's going to do nothing.  But she has rather mixed feelings about Alison.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on August 26, 2012, 05:34:43 AM
Notably, the Magistratum hasn't technically delivered a judgement.  They asked Allison to defend herself, and said they would deliver a judgement based on that.

Elsebeth is deciding if she wants to point this out, or just turn it into the verdict that she wants, which is similar (but, you know, an actual verdict and sentence, rather than telling Allison to 'tell us you didn't do it').
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on August 26, 2012, 05:42:39 AM
In the criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups. The Magistrates who investigate crimes and the Elders who prosecute the offenders. These are their stories. DUNK DUNK.
That was great.  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on August 27, 2012, 05:04:30 AM
*whistles innocently*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on August 30, 2012, 09:34:32 PM
Well, this is interesting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on August 30, 2012, 11:25:06 PM
Well, this is interesting.


Whats that?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on August 30, 2012, 11:28:29 PM
Something interesting is happening, and dustole doesn't konow about it? You're losing your touch.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Uzamaki on August 30, 2012, 11:48:13 PM

Whats that?

I think they are talking about how the Astrocracies and the 'moot are joining up to kill Aurvandil.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on August 31, 2012, 03:00:29 PM
stuff

If that's true, then maybe you should reconsider the spoiler? Or do you enjoy ruining someone else's IC fun through the OOC forums?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on August 31, 2012, 03:50:25 PM
If that's true, then maybe you should reconsider the spoiler? Or do you enjoy ruining someone else's IC fun through the OOC forums?

Fortunately for all, it's not true.  :)

There are some interesting things happening that involve internal Church politics. They should not concern anyone outside the Church for the most part, except in so far as people are interested in the ups and downs of Allison's career.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Peri on August 31, 2012, 04:05:57 PM
They should not concern anyone outside the Church for the most part, except in so far as people are interested in the ups and downs of Allison's career.

*raises hand*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on September 02, 2012, 07:25:23 PM
So, yeah. Allison getting attacked. Interesting stuff right there. *halo*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 02, 2012, 07:28:04 PM
/me wonders if it was staged
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on September 02, 2012, 08:11:22 PM
The last time this happened it was also very conveniently timed..
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on September 02, 2012, 08:30:51 PM
Wouldn't it be awesome if the membership of the church got to participate and hear about these things.

That'd be rad.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on September 02, 2012, 08:38:35 PM
It's slightly complicated by the fact of who is accused of doing it...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on September 02, 2012, 08:46:08 PM
It's slightly complicated by the fact of who is accused of doing it...

psshhhh.... just send us a message anyways... let this thing explode a little bit...

It's miserable knowing these things OOC and not getting to participate at all IC!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on September 03, 2012, 01:23:32 AM
So, yeah. Allison getting attacked. Interesting stuff right there. *halo*

Too bad you got caught.  Your sword skill must be bad to lose to Allison.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on September 03, 2012, 01:25:30 AM
The last time this happened it was also very conveniently timed..


What are you talking about?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on September 03, 2012, 04:19:07 AM
When the charges were first brought against Allison, an infiltrator attacked her. Then the discussion in the church switched from whether to hold a Magistratum, to what to do about those bad guys attacking poor Allison. The vote was postponed... long enough for all the evidence to fall out of the 30 day message limit and everyone to have mostly forgotten it. Turned out pretty well to someone's advantage...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on September 03, 2012, 05:00:14 AM
When the charges were first brought against Allison, an infiltrator attacked her. Then the discussion in the church switched from whether to hold a Magistratum, to what to do about those bad guys attacking poor Allison. The vote was postponed... long enough for all the evidence to fall out of the 30 day message limit and everyone to have mostly forgotten it. Turned out pretty well to someone's advantage...


I don't remember this.  Plus a few nobles kept copies of the letters.  So what "evidence"  they had back then is still around now.  It would be hard to stage this attack when the attacker is known and I am trying to cause him as many problems as possible.   The trial was held up the first time because the right people knew that Lysander was going to become Grandmaster of Kabrinskia.  I believe it was delayed so that could be accomplished.  People seem apprehensive when Allison wields a significant amount of power.  Luckily, secular power means little to Allison.  I just put people in positions of power and make friends.   :)   its done me well so far.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on September 03, 2012, 12:16:12 PM
Too bad you got caught.  Your sword skill must be bad to lose to Allison.

Yeah. Should have worked on that a bit more. Though the Infil skill level isn't too bad if he got to the point of attacking, at least.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on September 07, 2012, 11:43:40 AM
Meh, less than impresssed with the trial. It was actually a rather disappointing anti-climax. But we still have one way left to generate some excitement out of it. Let's cross our fingers and hope that Elsebeth and Medugnatos are sticklers for procedure.
I'm just going to point out -- you asked for this.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on September 07, 2012, 02:52:12 PM
I'm just going to point out -- you asked for this.

Add a minor resignation and a call for a revolution of sorts.. and let's see where it takes us. Though now the Full Members are involved, this should be interesting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 09, 2012, 07:21:28 PM
Llewellyn Cryfdwr (Noble) is now a Aspirant of "Sanguis Astroism".

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?!?!?!?!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 09, 2012, 07:23:43 PM
I'm just going to point out -- you asked for this.
Yeah, I wasn't really all that worried about it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on September 09, 2012, 07:39:43 PM
Llewellyn Cryfdwr (Noble) is now a Aspirant of "Sanguis Astroism".

Wow....that..... wow.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 09, 2012, 07:51:27 PM
Quote
"Wouldn't a real prophetess have seen this coming?"

ouch.... :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telrunya on September 09, 2012, 08:06:36 PM
So this guy is just a new character. What's his background story? :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on September 09, 2012, 08:17:51 PM
I'd like to buy a vowel...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 09, 2012, 08:22:03 PM
Deverka Cryfdwr was the original founder of Morek, and creator of the Bloodstars religion. Jesse (the player of Deverka) was one of the four winners of the Dwilight Realm Banner Competition, and got a free hero character on Dwilight who was one of the first characters on the island, and thus was the first Duke of Donghaiwei, and first ruler of Morek. He also married Allison. :D The player disappeared after Deverka was killed by monsters in Unterstrom, I think.

I always wondered what he would think if he came back and saw the sprawling megalith that SA has become while he was gone.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on September 09, 2012, 08:30:33 PM
The player disappeared after Deverka was killed by monsters in Unterstrom, I think.

In Nifel, actually. I built a shrine there, it's still in the region description. Bustoarsenzio then had the body exhumed and moved to Unterstrom when he held the first festival there.

That was when Morek swore eternal friendship to Summerdale.... somehow, I seem to have forgotten about that at some point. Oh, well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on September 09, 2012, 09:11:56 PM
Deverka Cryfdwr was the original founder of Morek, and creator of the Bloodstars religion. Jesse (the player of Deverka) was one of the four winners of the Dwilight Realm Banner Competition, and got a free hero character on Dwilight who was one of the first characters on the island, and thus was the first Duke of Donghaiwei, and first ruler of Morek. He also married Allison. :D The player disappeared after Deverka was killed by monsters in Unterstrom, I think.

I always wondered what he would think if he came back and saw the sprawling megalith that SA has become while he was gone.

F..... This is the guy I just greeted?

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on September 09, 2012, 09:14:23 PM
F..... This is the guy I just greeted?

Nice.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on September 09, 2012, 09:16:41 PM
F..... This is the guy I just greeted?

You knew you were not her first, right?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on September 09, 2012, 09:42:07 PM
You knew you were not her first, right?

No clue.

You have to remember, Luria is kind of a vacuum...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on September 09, 2012, 09:43:52 PM
No clue.

You have to remember, Luria is kind of a vacuum...

lulz.

Seriously? It was kinda widely known. And kinda a big reason she got powerful, if I remember right.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on September 09, 2012, 09:46:23 PM
lulz.

Seriously? It was kinda widely known. And kinda a big reason she got powerful, if I remember right.

Really, all I knew about Allison came from the forums.

And I didn't even start paying attention until I went to Caerwyn for the first time.

My knowledge of any of the founding realms backgrounds outside of Pian's is shaky at best.

Certainly explains his response to my letter.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on September 09, 2012, 09:49:06 PM
Really, all I knew about Allison came from the forums.

And I didn't even start paying attention until I went to Caerwyn for the first time.

My knowledge of any of the founding realms backgrounds outside of Pian's is shaky at best.

Certainly explains his response to my letter.

I would have thought she would have clued you in on wedding night, at least.

Do you know you have a dead son-in-law?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on September 09, 2012, 09:52:50 PM
Do you know you have a dead son-in-law?

Nope.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on September 09, 2012, 09:57:45 PM
Nope.

At times, I have seen BM has a fantasy epic, as an horror movie, as a semi-historical fiction, but it is the first time that it works as a sitcom!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on September 09, 2012, 10:04:05 PM
At times, I have seen BM has a fantasy epic, as an horror movie, as a semi-historical fiction, but it is the first time that it works as a sitcom!

So....I shouldn't just ban him from Kabrinskia then?

haha. Too bad Brom's now a good guy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on September 09, 2012, 10:04:19 PM
At times, I have seen BM has a fantasy epic, as an horror movie, as a semi-historical fiction, but it is the first time that it works as a sitcom!

+1
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Devercia on September 09, 2012, 10:44:49 PM
Oh hey, there are forums now. I thought Tom despised forums. :o

So far I am enjoying my comeback immensely. It has been constant and often maniacal laughter for about 3 hours.  8)

...
....


...

Was he better than me?

I'd like to buy a vowel...

In Welsh, Y and W are vowels. Used to be that way in English too. W being literally a double U. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on September 09, 2012, 11:41:00 PM
In Welsh, Y and W are vowels. Used to be that way in English too. W being literally a double U.

Oh I was just joshin' ya. Trying to build up my post count so I can be a Mighty Duck like Dante and Vellos. :D

Anything new happening in Kab is pretty refreshing after clawing our way back from the Great Famine.

Edit: WHAT
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 10, 2012, 03:31:28 AM
F..... This is the guy I just greeted?
Did you pull a Darth Vader?

[deep breathing]"I am your step-father, Llewellyn!"[/deep breathing]
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on September 10, 2012, 03:42:21 AM
Did you pull a Darth Vader?

[deep breathing]"I am your step-father, Llewellyn!"[/deep breathing]

More like....

Hi, welcome to the realm. If you have any questions feel free to ask?

Response: Like wtf "father"?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Devercia on September 10, 2012, 03:56:20 AM
It was more of the reluctance in calling a stranger "father" out of socially demanded respect. I had no expectation that you would know. Consider it an introduction to such knowledge. I'm going with him being a hidden relative, despite it was mentioned a long long time ago that he existed. However, neither of us remembered his name so I just made one up.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 10, 2012, 04:05:04 AM
Did Dustin know you were coming back?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on September 10, 2012, 04:48:17 AM
I got a message a day or two ago.  I did have a little forewarning.  It should be fun to have Devercia back.  Time to plan a big tournament.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on September 10, 2012, 05:33:07 AM
It was more of the reluctance in calling a stranger "father" out of socially demanded respect. I had no expectation that you would know. Consider it an introduction to such knowledge. I'm going with him being a hidden relative, despite it was mentioned a long long time ago that he existed. However, neither of us remembered his name so I just made one up.

Ya, I've already started trying to have Brom figure out what is all going on IC wise. Should be fun RP.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Devercia on September 10, 2012, 06:26:30 AM
It should be fun to have Devercia back.  Time to plan a big tournament.

Oh I have plans. Ambitious plans  :-X
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on September 10, 2012, 06:29:16 AM
Time for Gustav to make his move...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on September 10, 2012, 08:30:37 AM
Oh I was just joshin' ya. Trying to build up my post count so I can be a Mighty Duck like Dante and Vellos. :D

I have a higher post count than Silverfire, it's important to me.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on September 10, 2012, 09:03:18 AM
I'm going with him being a hidden relative, despite it was mentioned a long long time ago that he existed. However, neither of us remembered his name so I just made one up.

You mean Faust? Or someone else completely?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on September 10, 2012, 09:33:14 AM
I have a higher post count than Silverfire, it's important me.

Don't fool yourself. It's not like half of SA just got more interested in playing again just because your son-in-law popped out of nowhere.

Btw, its not like post count means anything. I mean at least half of my posts have to be pretty much garbage and/or OOC jokes.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Peri on September 10, 2012, 10:05:01 AM
So far I am enjoying my comeback immensely. It has been constant and often maniacal laughter for about 3 hours.  8)

Like discovering an entire realm named after allison? welcome back by the way :p
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on September 10, 2012, 10:35:40 AM
I have a higher post count than Silverfire, it's important me.

You and me both, amazingly almost all of mine are at least semi-serious...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Devercia on September 10, 2012, 07:52:37 PM
Like discovering an entire realm named after allison?
Or that I was beautified as a saint, and my bones fought over like relics. Damn 2-week character import delay. I missed it all. Apparently Llewellyn is the son of God and Satan. :P

You mean Faust? Or someone else completely?
No, way before that. Allyson mentioned, in passing if I remember correctly, that she was pregnant when she was still HI of Morek. There are still some things I need to iron out with Dustin before I delve too far into that. I'm not really aware what Faust was or did, so I am being conservative for now.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 10, 2012, 08:58:47 PM
Apparently Llewellyn is the son of God and Satan. :P
Yeah, that pretty describes it fairly well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on September 12, 2012, 04:19:14 AM
/Allison Dances/  "cant touch this"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on September 12, 2012, 05:32:26 AM
. . . huh.

Oh, when the news about this gets out. . . .

*runs off to cackle madly with secret knowledge*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on September 12, 2012, 06:24:30 AM
Rabisu prophesied this would happen.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on September 12, 2012, 07:58:31 AM
Cue infighting in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . .
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on September 12, 2012, 11:34:49 AM
Rise up, Brothers, rise up!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on September 12, 2012, 12:48:12 PM
Already did. Been waiting for a looooong time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on September 12, 2012, 03:20:20 PM
Cue infighting in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . .

Except, see, this kind of in-fighting... this is cabin fever. Astroism has gone too long without getting out into the world and killing some bad guys. We all need to go out and get some exercise together... find and occupation for these nobles with too much time on their hands besides luxuriant tournaments and religious bickering...

Sounds like 1096 Europe...

Oh, hi there Muslims sacking Eastern Christianity/Aurvandil attacking religion in the south. Wanna help us get some exercise?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 12, 2012, 04:12:33 PM
We're working on it Vellos. We're working on it. People just need to stop whining over irrelevant garbage and let us get on with business. Allison's trial is small potatoes, and not worth getting all twisted up about. We were never going to be able to kick her out, so it was always a non-issue. It's too bad people didn't realize that to begin with. The Magistrates had a !@#$ty job.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on September 12, 2012, 04:39:39 PM
I actually am not looking forward to what's (probably) coming.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 12, 2012, 05:10:55 PM
I think it's rather pointless, and will be quite embarassing. But I can only toss up so many roadblocks. People want it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on September 12, 2012, 05:14:22 PM
I think it's rather pointless, and will be quite embarassing. But I can only toss up so many roadblocks. People want it.

It'll be nice to see astrum fight a realm that can actually fight back rather than random city states
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 12, 2012, 05:20:05 PM
We fought Caerwyn.

And if the random city states didn't want to fight Astrum, they shouldn't have declared the war. They got what they asked for. Not our fault.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on September 12, 2012, 05:48:51 PM
I think it's rather pointless, and will be quite embarassing. But I can only toss up so many roadblocks. People want it.

Short-sighted people, though honestly I can understand that most of the SA realms really have nothing better to do.

I'm going to sabotage it as best I can, mostly for fun, but also because my nobles seem eminently uninterested in it, as am I. Unlike the rest of SA, we have more interesting opportunities to pursue.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on September 12, 2012, 07:14:48 PM
Cabin fever? I have just the solution. ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on September 12, 2012, 07:24:33 PM
We're working on it Vellos. We're working on it. People just need to stop whining over irrelevant garbage and let us get on with business.

Hence why one of Allison's most active secular political opponents, Hireshmont, has been mysteriously silent on the issue for a long time...

We've got heathens to kill, people! Let it go, and point Allison at Candiels!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on September 12, 2012, 08:33:02 PM
Short-sighted people, though honestly I can understand that most of the SA realms really have nothing better to do.

I'm going to sabotage it as best I can, mostly for fun, but also because my nobles seem eminently uninterested in it, as am I. Unlike the rest of SA, we have more interesting opportunities to pursue.

Exactly. Unlike Indirik's OOC assertion that the likes of Alaron and Norgard are whiners (thanks for that btw, ever thought about being civil to other players? No? Thought not), there are bigger schemes in play across the board. Alaron, for instance, has no interest in the upcoming crusade. He has a task to perform for someone.

As far as anyone actually knows (and can prove with evidence), he stepped down from the Elders because he considers them corrupt and far too political in nature, not helping the faithful. And of course, he's publicly said as much. However, as I've testified to on here, he did in fact assault Allison. Maybe it was convenient timing, but I assure you the only person who planned such a move was myself purely out of a little boredom. That's all.

However, what's now come out of that is now quite interesting. I'm looking forward to Allison's grand plan for it all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on September 12, 2012, 08:39:13 PM
Alaron, for instance, has no interest in the upcoming crusade. He has a task to perform for someone.

But it's going to be the biggest damn war Dwilight has ever seen.

How can that not be interesting?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 12, 2012, 08:47:18 PM
That was not an ooc claim. That is the way my character feels about it. Various people made a power play to try and get Allison tossed out of the church. It failed. Bitching and moaning about that failure IG will do no good. Especially those ridiculous claims that Allison bribed the Magistrates... either come up with some new claims, or move on.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on September 13, 2012, 05:46:43 AM
But it's going to be the biggest damn war Dwilight has ever seen.

How can that not be interesting?

Because it will be godawful slow? I just did the math. Travel estimates for a thirty man unit without siege engines point to it being about a week from Golden Farrow to the theoretical front lines in Maeotis. In autumn, that is. For Morek, it's over two weeks one way. Dwilight just isn't made for an island-wide war, at least not the one half versus the other half kind of war.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on September 13, 2012, 06:10:16 AM
Because it will be godawful slow? I just did the math. Travel estimates for a thirty man unit without siege engines point to it being about a week from Golden Farrow to the theoretical front lines in Maeotis. In autumn, that is. For Morek, it's over two weeks one way. Dwilight just isn't made for an island-wide war, at least not the one half versus the other half kind of war.

What, and you have something better to do, now that you've made peace with Asylon?

I guess you could attack Terran. That'd be lulzy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on September 13, 2012, 06:48:14 AM
That was not an ooc claim. That is the way my character feels about it. Various people made a power play to try and get Allison tossed out of the church. It failed. Bitching and moaning about that failure IG will do no good. Especially those ridiculous claims that Allison bribed the Magistrates... either come up with some new claims, or move on.

Could have fooled me. The power play failed as did the assassination attempt, yes. But people aren't going to just lay down and take it like that. People will grasp at straws to find anything to try and make it stick. And now, with Allison's promotion that's going to fuel things somewhat.

Though I cannot recall making a claim as Alaron regarding the Magistrates being bribed. The reason he's spouting his nonsense regarding the majority of the Elders being corrupt is more because he felt he had been judged to be guilty without a trial. The recent happenings just gave him supposed ammunition to spout more of it. But frankly speaking, if your character doesn't like it, then why hasn't he demoted Alaron to a penitent rank along with Norgard?

But it's going to be the biggest damn war Dwilight has ever seen.

How can that not be interesting?

I don't know, I just kind of feel warred-out for a bit after taking part in the latest conflict on EC as well as the stuff with Asylon when Alaron was General. Yeah, those weren't massive, but it's fed my appetite for a bit. And plus, Geronus is right. The travel times will be something evil. Besides, I can stay behind and do some work with making sure our regions are fed anyway. As well as training and lots of it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on September 13, 2012, 06:50:47 AM
It's Battlemaster, not Peacemaster!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on September 13, 2012, 07:53:45 AM
It's Battlemaster, not Peacemaster!

Pretty sure its "Plotmaster" or "Intriguemaster" if you're playing it right.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on September 13, 2012, 08:18:38 AM
Because it will be godawful slow? I just did the math. Travel estimates for a thirty man unit without siege engines point to it being about a week from Golden Farrow to the theoretical front lines in Maeotis. In autumn, that is. For Morek, it's over two weeks one way. Dwilight just isn't made for an island-wide war, at least not the one half versus the other half kind of war.

Two weeks is a lot.

But one week is not that bad at all. Atamara can easily see week long travel times to reach a battle front. How long do you think it took Darka to reach Hammarsett? Or for Cagilan troops to march to Eston? Or, hell, Suville to march to Minas Ithil?

They are long march times, surely. And maybe a bit boring at times, surely. But they aren't in any way characteristic to Dwilight alone.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 13, 2012, 02:08:19 PM
Brance dint put Alaron in a penitence rank because he didn't think anything Alaron said was that bad. I forget who said the bribe thing, but it wasn't Alaron. Lysander and a couple others jumped on him.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on September 13, 2012, 02:17:16 PM
What, and you have something better to do, now that you've made peace with Asylon?

I guess you could attack Terran. That'd be lulzy.

Sure I do. How about unmake peace with Asylon?  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on September 13, 2012, 02:19:07 PM
Brance dint put Alaron in a penitence rank because he didn't think anything Alaron said was that bad. I forget who said the bribe thing, but it wasn't Alaron. Lysander and a couple others jumped on him.

It was Andrew McManus.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on September 13, 2012, 03:05:11 PM
Dwilight just isn't made for an island-wide war, at least not the one half versus the other half kind of war.

That's correct. Quite deliberately so.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on September 13, 2012, 05:44:00 PM
That's correct. Quite deliberately so.

And we'll test and see how that works.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on September 13, 2012, 07:11:40 PM

Though I cannot recall making a claim as Alaron regarding the Magistrates being bribed. The reason he's spouting his nonsense regarding the majority of the Elders being corrupt is more because he felt he had been judged to be guilty without a trial. The recent happenings just gave him supposed ammunition to spout more of it. But frankly speaking, if your character doesn't like it, then why hasn't he demoted Alaron to a penitent rank along with Norgard?

And why should everyone get a trial?  Normally there would be no trial for something like that, the only reason he was going to get one originally was because he was an Elder.  If he hadn't been, it would have basically been Elsebeth checking to see if there was evidence to back it up, and once she found that there was, demoting him to non-full member and suggesting full expulsion.  Unless you're accused of something like heresy, only important people get trials.

Anyways, Elsebeth is the one that demoted Norgard, because he had explicitly violated her orders.  Alaron didn't, while she certainly dislikes him and wishes he would shut up, she's not going to demote him over that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 13, 2012, 08:27:50 PM
The evidence against Alaron was circumstantial, but convincing. I don't think anyone believed the story he made up. Brance thinks Alaron is making a fuss in order to distract from his own incident, and because he wants Allison out.

But, really, I did not expect Elsebeth or Aram to agree to making Allion a Luminary again. Talk about a soap opera plotline...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on September 13, 2012, 08:43:31 PM
But, really, I did not expect Elsebeth or Aram to agree to making Allion a Luminary again. Talk about a soap opera plotline...
Elsebeth, in general, thinks that Lights should get to choose and dismiss their Luminaries at will, and so will usually just say alright whenever another Light asks her to approve such a thing.

And in this particular case . . . well, she isn't sure if Rabisu is insane, but he made some good points as to why the appointment should be made.  She told him what the dangers to himself were, but said it was his choice.

And all in all, she thinks this is probably a good position for Allison.  Like her or not, Allison gets stuff done, and this way she can get stuff done without actually being in a position of full leadership.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 13, 2012, 08:58:35 PM
Well, it is a good office for her. Just, this is awfully quick. It's not quite what Brrance meant when he told Rabisu that Allison needed proper handling. :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on September 13, 2012, 09:33:15 PM
Yes, I was quite surprised. It's almost unseemly how quickly she went from being on trial for heresy to back in the ranks of the Elders. It's particularly surprising when one considers that Rabisu has given every appearance of being convinced that Allison is a heretic whether the Magistrates agree or not.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on September 13, 2012, 09:35:26 PM
Well, now he's her direct boss -- keep your friends close and your enemies closer, as they say.

In theory, he gets to order her around now.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on September 13, 2012, 09:35:54 PM
In theory...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 13, 2012, 09:36:36 PM
It appears that this is Rabisu's attempt to control or manage her. Since Allison wants Rabisu's place, Rabisu pulls her into her camp.

The really funny part is all the campaigning Allison did against Rabisu, both public and private. And here Rabisu offers Allison a job and she takes it. Under current charter rules, this means that if Allison finds a way to get rid of Rabisu, she becomes Light of the Maddening again.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on September 13, 2012, 09:36:50 PM
The evidence against Alaron was circumstantial, but convincing. I don't think anyone believed the story he made up. Brance thinks Alaron is making a fuss in order to distract from his own incident, and because he wants Allison out.

Sort of. He's attempting to distract from his incident, yes. Not trying to get Allison out any more, though. Though he's tried to do so in the past, something's happened which has caused an about-face on that. Though to the members who aren't Elders, he's just ranting about corruption and replacing the Elders. Pulling a bit of a Glaumring, though not yet quite as mad.

Anyway, on the topic of appointment.. yes. "In theory" - we all know Allison can't be ordered about. She'll do as she pleases, especially regarding that threat against Jonsu.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 13, 2012, 09:38:36 PM
It's as easy to get rid of a Luminary as it is to appoint one. Rabisu can basicly dismiss her at any time. If Rabisu is unhappy with what she des, he can kick her out.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on September 13, 2012, 10:50:48 PM
Indirik's signature is very appropriate for this situation.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on September 13, 2012, 11:59:54 PM
We're all just one big happy, dysfunctional family.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on September 14, 2012, 01:07:03 AM
It's as easy to get rid of a Luminary as it is to appoint one. Rabisu can basicly dismiss her at any time. If Rabisu is unhappy with what she des, he can kick her out.

1. Allison establishes sufficient evidence to win a magistratum against Rabisu.
2. Magistratum begins
3. Allison is immediately removed as Luminary
4. Magistratum succeeds.
5. Allison gets nothing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on September 14, 2012, 02:20:42 AM
6. Glaumring and Allison take over the world...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on September 14, 2012, 04:28:40 AM
1. Allison establishes sufficient evidence to win a magistratum against Rabisu.
2. Magistratum begins
3. Allison is immediately removed as Luminary
4. Magistratum succeeds.
5. Allison gets nothing.


I just have to get the charter amended to elect Lights. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 14, 2012, 05:01:41 AM
That shouldn't be too hard. I think that Elsebeth is the only one that thinks Luminaries should automatically become the Light. Election of Lights by the priesthood is quite possibly the most-favored idea.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on September 14, 2012, 05:05:37 AM
The question is: Can Allison get enough votes?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on September 14, 2012, 05:12:19 AM
That shouldn't be too hard. I think that Elsebeth is the only one that thinks Luminaries should automatically become the Light. Election of Lights by the priesthood is quite possibly the most-favored idea.
Elsebeth most certainly does not think that, in fact she is highly opposed to Luminaries automatically becoming Lights (and has said so several times, though usually while saying 'unfortunately, the rules currently say otherwise, so this is what we have to do right now, even though it is bad').

The question is what sort of election: Elsebeth is highly in favor of them being elected by the priesthood or simply by the elder council, she'll fight to her last breath to keep them from being elected by the whole church.  She will also fight to her last breath against it being a regular election, Lights, in her mind, serve for life, or until they get a Magistratum called against them, at least.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 14, 2012, 06:16:15 AM
Damn, I can't keep this straight...

The question is what sort of election: Elsebeth is highly in favor of them being elected by the priesthood
Election by the priesthood is what Brance will push for.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on September 14, 2012, 06:54:18 AM
Hireshmont will push for election by cavaliers.

Because really, they don't get enough love.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on September 14, 2012, 07:14:38 AM
Hireshmont will push for election by cavaliers.

Because really, they don't get enough love.

It's because they can't loot, they can't do civil work, and they can't do police work! Bloody useless! And uppity too!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on September 14, 2012, 07:14:47 AM
Hireshmont will push for election by cavaliers.

Because really, they don't get enough love.

Got my vote!!!

Brom: Light of the Maddening. Win. Best way to stop the wife from getting it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on September 14, 2012, 01:36:44 PM
Rofl... Wonder how many turns it'll take for Alaron's execution. I bet 5, tops.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on September 14, 2012, 02:22:52 PM
Rofl... Wonder how many turns it'll take for Alaron's execution. I bet 5, tops.  8)

I'll go with 7. ;D

EDIT: Though that said, things might change a little now. I don't reckon they will, but there is the possibility.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on September 14, 2012, 08:19:28 PM
Interesting move by Mathurin. I did not see that coming.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on September 14, 2012, 09:23:54 PM
No one ever sees anything he does coming.

. . .  mostly because people tend to forget he ever actually does anything.  I know I hadn't known he was paying any attention. . . .
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on September 14, 2012, 09:57:23 PM
What happened?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 14, 2012, 09:59:53 PM
Mathurin sent a public call for people to send him their thoughts and opinions about Allison privately.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on September 14, 2012, 10:08:45 PM
Well, Constantine was hoping that Mathurin would do something but a public call for opinions certainly wasn't exactly the "something" he had been hoping for or expecting.

It will be interesting to see exactly what comes of it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on September 14, 2012, 10:10:42 PM
Lysander finds the implications unsettling.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on September 14, 2012, 10:23:09 PM
Lysander finds the implications unsettling.

Hireshmont finds the unsettlement implicative.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on September 14, 2012, 10:46:22 PM
Mathurin sent a public call for people to send him their thoughts and opinions about Allison privately.
To be a little more specific, on whether or not they thought she was a true believer or just here for politics.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on September 14, 2012, 11:19:42 PM
I too am curious as to how this will play out.  Or what Mathurin hopes to gain by this.  He has stayed quiet for so long it is easy to forget he was there.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on September 14, 2012, 11:30:23 PM
I too am curious as to how this will play out.  Or what Mathurin hopes to gain by this.  He has stayed quiet for so long it is easy to forget he was there.

I don't know if he hopes to gain anything, exactly; I suspect that he has a few people whispering in his ear and has been persuaded by them to take action. It's likely that his statement is a sincere reflection of his beliefs.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on September 14, 2012, 11:33:13 PM
I told Mathurin that he should declare Allison a Prophet and give her a permanent Elder position.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on September 15, 2012, 12:26:11 AM
lolz
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on September 15, 2012, 04:07:28 AM
I agree.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on September 15, 2012, 06:49:12 AM
I told him he looks good in skinny jeans.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on September 17, 2012, 07:43:23 AM
1. Alaron gets put into Kabrinskia dungeons...The Judge of Kabrinskia just so happens to be the husband of a certain priestess
2. ???????
3. Profit!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on September 17, 2012, 08:07:57 AM
<.<

Check out my message...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on September 17, 2012, 01:38:08 PM
1. Alaron gets put into Kabrinskia dungeons...The Judge of Kabrinskia just so happens to be the husband of a certain priestess
2. ???????
3. Profit!

And that certain priestess wants to use Alaron to attack someone for her in the future. As he's said ICly.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 17, 2012, 01:42:21 PM
Does anyone believe him? He's lost most of his IC credibility recently.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on September 17, 2012, 01:53:46 PM
Does anyone believe him? He's lost most of his IC credibility recently.

Like credibility with the Astroists corrupt puppets matters...  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on September 17, 2012, 02:30:23 PM
Credibility always matters.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on September 17, 2012, 06:33:53 PM
Depending on who makes the rules. 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on September 17, 2012, 08:22:40 PM
Depending on who makes the rules. 8)

Ah, but see, the problems is that it is the Astroist corrupt puppet masters who make the rules..... ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on September 17, 2012, 09:54:03 PM
Well the corrupt puppet masters are losing credibility with Gustav...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on September 17, 2012, 09:58:42 PM
Does anyone believe him? He's lost most of his IC credibility recently.

Apart from Allison herself? Certainly not. He's most likely going for the gallows.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on September 17, 2012, 09:59:34 PM
Well the corrupt puppet masters are losing credibility with Gustav...

Did you not read my post?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on September 17, 2012, 11:15:33 PM
Did you not read my post?

So...you're arguing with yourself, now?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on September 17, 2012, 11:18:51 PM
So...you're arguing with yourself, now?
He should have done a double quote, but he was just showing the quote they didn't read.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on September 17, 2012, 11:39:44 PM
No, I read it. But I wasn't exactly sure what it had to do with Alaron, if anything. Unless Gustav's fighting his corner or something in Kabrinskia's circles.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on September 18, 2012, 02:58:26 AM
I don't know what it has to do with your post either but it seems the most logical versus it just being him arguing with himself.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 05, 2012, 08:36:57 PM
The Consul elections are complete and the Regent elections have begun.

Already looks like it will be a somewhat heated fight.

Let the lord of chaos rule election debates begin!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on November 05, 2012, 08:56:33 PM
I can't even remember what post I was talking about...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 06, 2012, 02:31:09 AM
Based on the horrible decline in voting participation, I think the vast majority of the church is simply fed up with the way things are going. We're at the lowest full member count I forever. The ridiculous arguments that are constantly running back and forth are a real killer for the church.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 06, 2012, 02:44:09 AM
Based on the horrible decline in voting participation, I think the vast majority of the church is simply fed up with the way things are going. We're at the lowest full member count I forever. The ridiculous arguments that are constantly running back and forth are a real killer for the church.

Very true.

I'm guessing as well that since your character hasn't been able to solve it thus far that you have no idea how.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Devercia on November 06, 2012, 03:28:01 AM
Were it not an election, and without the inevitable accusations of election fraud, I would suggest Brance start issuing censures. Censures with bite.

Mudslinging is largely a consequence of disenfranchisement, with the public more concerned about who is not elected than the virtues of an otherwise mediocre candidate that will be elected.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 06, 2012, 03:31:58 AM
WE NEED A CRUSADE!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Devercia on November 06, 2012, 03:38:33 AM
I hear Jonsu has binders full of crusades.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 06, 2012, 03:56:48 AM
I don't really have time to do anything about it. Several of the people involved won't respond to any kind of censure, short of expulsion. And we already have people in the priesthood that have threatened to use the fact that they are priests to prevent their removal. And then too many people are too disillusioned with the way things are going to be interested in doing anything at all to help fix it.

I know that some of you think that this bickering and the power-plays is the core of the game, but I really think you don't understand how many of the players consider that the ultimate buzz-kill for them.

*sigh* ... I had plans for things to do with this regency. Unfortunately RL took over and kicked my ass. I haven't had time to do much IG for months.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 06, 2012, 05:08:51 AM
I know that some of you think that this bickering and the power-plays is the core of the game, but I really think you don't understand how many of the players consider that the ultimate buzz-kill for them.

I think there is a large difference between bickering and power plays though. Bickering is a buzz kill, power plays though usually tend to invigorate fun for lots of players.

Power plays are things like seceding a duchy, starting a rebellion, banning a set of troublesome nobles or so, stealing half the gold of the realm, turning 90% of your realm over to another realm because you're duke and fed up with the ruler.

Those things I think are valuable for game play.

However, many ppl use bickering to set up power plays which kind of ruins the point.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on November 06, 2012, 12:40:26 PM
And we already have people in the priesthood that have threatened to use the fact that they are priests to prevent their removal.

I really do hate this mechanic, and consider it a miracle it hasn't been abused to death already.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on November 06, 2012, 01:38:38 PM
I think there is a large difference between bickering and power plays though.

Sure there is.

It's the difference between a political election season and attack ads.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 06, 2012, 03:49:36 PM
Sure there is.

It's the difference between a political election season and attack ads.

Fair enough.

I would put forth though that it is quite possible to carry out such actions without much of the open bickering involved. At least on the front end.

Bickering on the back end is just called interaction imo.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 06, 2012, 06:02:32 PM
Sure there is.

It's the difference between a political election season and attack ads.

SO WE NEED A CRUSADE.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on November 06, 2012, 07:17:57 PM
SO WE NEED A CRUSADE.

Didn't you just have one?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 06, 2012, 09:58:31 PM
Didn't you just have one?

Actually, no. But even if we did,

WE NEED ANOTHER ONE!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on November 07, 2012, 01:36:24 AM
Actually, no. But even if we did,

WE NEED ANOTHER ONE!

Should try to spread astroism to the other continents as well instead. Always seemed weird to me that It wasn't being done.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on November 07, 2012, 01:46:41 AM
Should try to spread astroism to the other continents as well instead. Always seemed weird to me that It wasn't being done.

Who can claim the legitimacy to launch such a project?

The elders would need to get together to launch the project abroad together. But then that starts to be difficult. They don't all have other characters in the same places, or available noble slots, or nobles in the right places willing to pick up that faith.

Anyone deciding to solo it would likely be seen as an usurper or impostor.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on November 07, 2012, 01:53:15 AM
Who can claim the legitimacy to launch such a project?

The elders would need to get together to launch the project abroad together. But then that starts to be difficult. They don't all have other characters in the same places, or available noble slots, or nobles in the right places willing to pick up that faith.

Anyone deciding to solo it would likely be seen as an usurper or impostor.

At the same time, there's nothing stopping someone from creating a new religion (yes, it's a new religion as far as the database is concerned) named "Sanguis Astroism" on one or even all of the other continents.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on November 07, 2012, 02:16:33 AM
At the same time, there's nothing stopping someone from creating a new religion (yes, it's a new religion as far as the database is concerned) named "Sanguis Astroism" on one or even all of the other continents.

Mechanic-wise, sure.

Then, go make it actually work. That's another question altogether.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on November 07, 2012, 02:20:27 AM
The problem is that with a religion "power-play" will inevitably descend into bickering, because there are very few ways in which power can be siezed and enemies removed, especially when both sides are supported by priests. SA is so big that any potential schismaics are too afraid to start their own orders and so what you get is a broad church containing various opposing factions that will always bicker.

Nevertheless I would say the current controversy is merely the usual byproduct of a democratic election. The real problem occurs in-between elections when we get the same old controversies repeated over and over again, with Elders unable to act for fear of causing a storm.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 07, 2012, 02:26:59 AM
The problem is that with a religion "power-play" will inevitably descend into bickering, because there are very few ways in which power can be siezed and enemies removed, especially when both sides are supported by priests. SA is so big that any potential schismaics are too afraid to start their own orders and so what you get is a broad church containing various opposing factions that will always bicker.

Nevertheless I would say the current controversy is merely the usual byproduct of a democratic election. The real problem occurs in-between elections when we get the same old controversies repeated over and over again, with Elders unable to act for fear of causing a storm.

Honestly though, this whole thing wouldn't be an issue if it was possible to remove priests from a religion. I realize this is a game mechanics inhibition but I believe this inhibition ruins the game more than the slight IR violation it involves.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on November 07, 2012, 02:32:55 AM
Honestly though, this whole thing wouldn't be an issue if it was possible to remove priests from a religion. I realize this is a game mechanics inhibition but I believe this inhibition ruins the game more than the slight IR violation it involves.

Which, considering that other game events have the same effect, doesn't sound that bad a "violation" at all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on November 07, 2012, 02:46:27 AM
Which, considering that other game events have the same effect, doesn't sound that bad a "violation" at all.
Such as?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on November 07, 2012, 02:51:58 AM
Which, considering that other game events have the same effect, doesn't sound that bad a "violation" at all.
Such as?

When a religion dies, all its remaining priests are kicked back to Warrior.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on November 07, 2012, 03:04:11 AM
Such as?


When a religion dies, all its remaining priests are kicked back to Warrior.

Using cold storage kicks you out of the religion, presumably kicking you back to warrior class as well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 07, 2012, 03:23:53 AM
Should try to spread astroism to the other continents as well instead. Always seemed weird to me that It wasn't being done.
Solari started a religion on the Colonies based on a bit of theology I worked out for a sort of "anti-SA" religion that casts the Bloodstars as the three eyes of an evil god.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on November 07, 2012, 03:58:15 AM
Solari started a religion on the Colonies based on a bit of theology I worked out for a sort of "anti-SA" religion that casts the Bloodstars as the three eyes of an evil god.
Interesting though I hope Solari role plays that properly through Malus and the other character, which in essence only means two things in my mind. First no info-funneling, and if Malus were to ever be on the same continent as the other character that they are not allies/don't get along. I say this because of Malus's priesthood vs the new characters both showing great interest in their religion which are quite against each other.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 07, 2012, 04:07:08 AM
I'm not sure why you think there would ever be any "info-funneling". What could an SA religion on Dwilight ever have to say to help out an "anti-SA" religion on the Colonies? And what would Malus have to do with anything? And what does anything that's happening on Dwilight have to do with anything on the Colonies? (And vice-versa.) The religion is loosely based on some theology I worked out years ago. So far as I know, he has nout founded it in some attempt to damage or wipe out SA. That would be a ridiculous thing to start on the Colonies. It merely uses some portion of the SA theology, albeit in a way that casts the Bloodtsars in an entirely different aspect.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on November 07, 2012, 06:07:36 AM
I'm not sure why you think there would ever be any "info-funneling". What could an SA religion on Dwilight ever have to say to help out an "anti-SA" religion on the Colonies? And what would Malus have to do with anything? And what does anything that's happening on Dwilight have to do with anything on the Colonies? (And vice-versa.) The religion is loosely based on some theology I worked out years ago. So far as I know, he has nout founded it in some attempt to damage or wipe out SA. That would be a ridiculous thing to start on the Colonies. It merely uses some portion of the SA theology, albeit in a way that casts the Bloodtsars in an entirely different aspect.
Not specific info-funneling but more like my cousin Malus has told me all about the banker position so I would be a great candidate. So it's not secret specific stuff but just because for instance he as a player can do a great job of banker his cousin would not be sharing that info thus his other character wouldn't know much about it. Sadly this example isn't exactly what I mean as there are very few cases in which it would apply.

Actually, connected to banking lets say someone is stealing from realm, and it is pointing toward the banker, the other character can not say, my cousin malus has told me about banking at that it seems only the banker would be able to steal that much as they are the only individual who has access to that much gold.  Like I said there are very few cases it would apply to and thus it would be pretty easy to not even have a chance to as its quite rare.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on November 07, 2012, 06:20:27 AM
I really do hate this mechanic, and consider it a miracle it hasn't been abused to death already.

It... hasn't?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on November 07, 2012, 06:33:55 AM
Interesting though I hope Solari role plays that properly through Malus and the other character, which in essence only means two things in my mind. First no info-funneling, and if Malus were to ever be on the same continent as the other character that they are not allies/don't get along. I say this because of Malus's priesthood vs the new characters both showing great interest in their religion which are quite against each other.

Here's the whole of the wiki, and probably half of the theology of the religion:

http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/The_Blinded_God (http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/The_Blinded_God)

Basically, all he's using is the three red stars in the sky, but he's interpreting them as three eyes of a single god, which had been blinded by some other evil gods. Who says that the Blinded God is evil?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 07, 2012, 06:39:21 AM
The original theology I wrote for The Book of the Blinded God cast the three-eyed god as evil. It was intended to be a foil for SA. The intention was to use create a separate interpretation for the three lights in the sky, and to explain why they grow bright and dim. It even acknowledged their influence on humans, but referred to the as Greed, etc. Negative traits instead of positive. The SA followers were described as either innocent dupes or willing conspirators of evil.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on November 07, 2012, 06:41:45 AM
Here's the whole of the wiki, and probably half of the theology of the religion:

http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/The_Blinded_God (http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/The_Blinded_God)

Basically, all he's using is the three red stars in the sky, but he's interpreting them as three eyes of a single god, which had been blinded by some other evil gods. Who says that the Blinded God is evil?
This does not sound anti-SA but post-SA as in the religion failed and was lost so the blood stars were actually three eyes of a god that was weakened due to jealous gods attacking him (other religions destroying SA due to them all being jealous of its greatness.) Remi seems more like a priest of SA from the future and not one of an enemy of SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on November 07, 2012, 06:42:19 AM
The original theology I wrote for The Book of the Blinded God cast the three-eyed god as evil. It was intended to be a foil for SA. The intention was to use create a separate interpretation for the three lights in the sky, and to explain why they grow bright and dim. It even acknowledged their influence on humans, but referred to the as Greed, etc. Negative traits instead of positive. The SA followers were described as either innocent dupes or willing conspirators of evil.
That may be the original but is not what is currently being used.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 07, 2012, 06:44:11 AM
No, Solari did change it somewhat. I'm just describing the way I originally wrote it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on November 07, 2012, 08:21:29 AM
I hope that kicking out priests waits until they code in schisms.  There should be repercussions to kicking out a priest.  If Schisms ever do get coded I think SA would splinter fairly fast.  The only way Allison would ever do that is if she were kicked out.  She swore an oath long ago to never found a new religion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on November 07, 2012, 09:45:58 AM
Schism would probably be only allowed by high ranking members :(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on November 07, 2012, 12:46:56 PM
It... hasn't?

I'd figure there'd be a greater amount of complaining on the forums if it had.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on November 07, 2012, 02:42:23 PM
This does not sound anti-SA but post-SA as in the religion failed and was lost so the blood stars were actually three eyes of a god that was weakened due to jealous gods attacking him (other religions destroying SA due to them all being jealous of its greatness.) Remi seems more like a priest of SA from the future and not one of an enemy of SA.

This is kinda-sorta accurate. It's really more of an independent take on the phenomenon of three geostationary stars in the night sky. The theology itself is a little thin right now, because I'm a) overwhelmed with a new house and new job and b) it's not really my personal style to come up with a fully-baked religion, ready for people to adopt. Part of the fun is filling in the details among the faithful. As to whether the Blinded God is evil, well... that's all a matter of perspective, isn't it?  ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on November 11, 2012, 03:29:22 AM
LOL Allison getting kicked out of her own realm. Hilarious stuff. I wonder where she will go next.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on November 11, 2012, 04:30:12 AM
How the wheel turns.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 11, 2012, 05:01:27 AM
LOL Allison getting kicked out of her own realm. Hilarious stuff. I wonder where she will go next.
You missed the funniest part: She was banned by her own husband.  :o ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on November 11, 2012, 05:06:50 AM
You missed the funniest part: She was banned by her own husband.  :o ;D

Yeah  ;D Brom is abandoning Allison to keep himself alive. What a great couple they are.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 11, 2012, 05:17:51 AM
Allison has really struck out a lot lately with many of her plots. Is she losing her touch?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on November 11, 2012, 05:21:51 AM
Allison has really struck out a lot lately with many of her plots. Is she losing her touch?

I hope not :( It would suck if she loses her influence and becomes a regular failed villain...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 11, 2012, 05:36:35 AM
She forgot the #1 rule: Don't screw with Brom. He may not be the best villain, but when he's not being a villain he's essentially unstoppable.

(Pretty sure Anaris would back up that one too)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 11, 2012, 05:45:23 AM
I'm pretty sure you just got stopped. It wasn't that hard this time. I'm willing to bet it was due to choice of friends/allies. I admit that the cut-your-losses move of banning Allison like that was unexpected. This might hurt her a bit more than most of her recent flops.

I wonder if Rabisu will drop her as Luminary...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 11, 2012, 05:46:59 AM
I'm pretty sure you just got stopped. It wasn't that hard this time. I'm willing to bet it was due to choice of friends/allies. I admit that the cut-your-losses move of banning Allison like that was unexpected. This might hurt her a bit more than most of her recent flops.

Let's wait and see what happens.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on November 11, 2012, 06:02:25 AM
I'm pretty sure you just got stopped. It wasn't that hard this time. I'm willing to bet it was due to choice of friends/allies. I admit that the cut-your-losses move of banning Allison like that was unexpected. This might hurt her a bit more than most of her recent flops.

I wonder if Rabisu will drop her as Luminary...

Well, she did kick him out of Kabrinskia, back in the day.

And he did strongly believe her to be a heretic.

And she did just try to bribe him.

Hmm...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on November 11, 2012, 03:07:50 PM
Allison has really struck out a lot lately with many of her plots. Is she losing her touch?

Ahh, the ravages of old age...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on November 11, 2012, 04:20:29 PM
She forgot the #1 rule: Don't screw with Brom. He may not be the best villain, but when he's not being a villain he's essentially unstoppable.

(Pretty sure Anaris would back up that one too)

Huh?

Not in the slightest. Brom's plots in Luria failed, every single one. He was banished, multiple times. I'm still not sure what bright sparks decided to let him back in, but it didn't last long.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on November 11, 2012, 06:53:41 PM
Huh?

Not in the slightest. Brom's plots in Luria failed, every single one. He was banished, multiple times. I'm still not sure what bright sparks decided to let him back in, but it didn't last long.
He was saying he wasn't the best villain, as you stated, but that when he isn't plotting as a villain, people generally can't mess with him due to the power, or something like that is what he meant.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 11, 2012, 09:23:12 PM
Due to the power of what? Greyskull?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on November 11, 2012, 10:11:49 PM
Due to the power of what? Greyskull?
Yeah...I kinda messed up that part right there. I meant to say due to the power of his positions and allies/friends.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on November 11, 2012, 11:05:36 PM
A nice couple of failed villains.

Both Brom and Allison seem to be failing a lot of plots...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 11, 2012, 11:08:13 PM
Huh?

Not in the slightest. Brom's plots in Luria failed, every single one. He was banished, multiple times. I'm still not sure what bright sparks decided to let him back in, but it didn't last long.

I was saying before Brom began plotting his respect among his peers for his work in the realm gave him a large amount of influence and made him nearly untouchable should someone wish him harm at that time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: ^ban^ on November 12, 2012, 12:09:04 AM
I was saying before Brom began plotting his respect among his peers for his work in the realm gave him a large amount of influence and made him nearly untouchable should someone wish him harm at that time.

But... Brom was never untouchable in Luria.

He certainly believed he was, I'll grant you that, but Hrok - among others - called his bluff and called it hard.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 12, 2012, 12:23:21 AM
But... Brom was never untouchable in Luria.

He certainly believed he was, I'll grant you that, but Hrok - among others - called his bluff and called it hard.

Hrok didn't exist at the time of which I'm speaking.

This is around the time of Duke Chris and Zile, while Proslyn and company where still around.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on November 12, 2012, 01:36:00 AM
Another day, another heated Allison-centered controversy, another call for a Magistratum.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on November 12, 2012, 01:47:12 AM
Pretty typical.  I doubt I will get punished much.  They would have to dole out.equal punishment for Aram
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 12, 2012, 01:55:38 AM
Only if they believe that the message you passed is authentic.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Devercia on November 12, 2012, 03:24:54 AM
Aram's own report suggested there was more there than met the eye.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on November 12, 2012, 03:26:24 AM
You missed the funniest part: She was banned by her own husband.  :o ;D

I don't see a ban on her family page. Or does that only show once it comes into effect?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 12, 2012, 03:32:39 AM
An "ask to leave" isn't really a ban. It is an invitation to GTFO. If you don't GTFO in 3 days, *then* it automatically becomes a ban, with family history entry and all. If you leave before then, you get away without a ban at all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 12, 2012, 03:46:17 AM
As for the letter, it looks to me like Allison took a real letter from Aram and tacked on that last sentence. Looking at the chain as a whole, it simply doesn't fit. It also doesn't fit Aram's style, his writing style, his opinion of Allison, or the sequence of events. I mean, why would Aram offer to bribe Allison with the Book, then when Allison offers to bribe Aram with the Sceptre he turns around and blows the whistle on Allison? That would be dumb.  Also, Allison's letters make no mention of Aram's attempt at bribery, like "how about instead we do this?" And that letter is just so disconnected.... I'm 99.9% sure it's a partial forgery.

Brance is pretty sure it's forged, for all those reasons I listed above. He knows both of the involved partied *very* well. (Aram married Brance's sister back in Perdan on EC, and he's known Allison from back in the first days of Dwilight.) He will probably let others deal with this. He's tired of dealing with Allison's crap.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vessol on November 12, 2012, 04:14:15 AM
And then Allison is threatening to secede the duchy if she is banned  8).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 12, 2012, 04:33:50 AM
If I had a dollar for every letter Allison has written in the past three days....I'd be richer than Darka.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 12, 2012, 04:40:12 AM
An "ask to leave" cannot be rescinded. Once it has been sent, there are only two possible outcomes: you leave, or you're banned.

Also, Kabrinskia only has one city and one duchy. Allison can't secede, nor change allegiance to another realm.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 12, 2012, 04:55:18 AM
An "ask to leave" cannot be rescinded. Once it has been sent, there are only two possible outcomes: you leave, or you're banned.

Also, Kabrinskia only has one city and one duchy. Allison can't secede, nor change allegiance to another realm.

Shhh, You're ruining the fun.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on November 12, 2012, 05:27:26 AM
I can and did change allegiance. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 12, 2012, 05:34:12 AM
I can and did change allegiance.

Obviously.

I'm pretty sure that at this point all of the old rules about allegiance changes are gone or bugs since the new estate system has completely warped it all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 12, 2012, 05:35:10 AM
Oh crap... just what we needed, another Magistrates trial...

Did you not just see the last Magistrates case about the fact that what you just did is a bug, and doing it is exploiting a bug?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on November 12, 2012, 06:25:11 AM
Get your crap together, Astroism! We have bigger fish to fry...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 12, 2012, 06:41:35 AM
Get your crap together, Astroism! We have bigger fish to fry...

Seriously, Terran is sitting right there!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on November 12, 2012, 06:51:59 AM
Oh crap... just what we needed, another Magistrates trial...

Did you not just see the last Magistrates case about the fact that what you just did is a bug, and doing it is exploiting a bug?

What bug?  I thought this was possible because of the ban spoken against me.  My character was backed into a corner and it was the only option available to her.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Woelfy on November 12, 2012, 07:10:47 AM
What bug?  I thought this was possible because of the ban spoken against me.  My character was backed into a corner and it was the only option available to her.

Welcome to my hell.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on November 12, 2012, 07:38:37 AM
Yeah no this 'sploit is not cool. It's fun to play Paul completely flipping his !@#$ as the realm that he worked so hard to protect just ceases to exist though.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on November 12, 2012, 07:41:32 AM
Yeah no this 'sploit is not cool. It's fun to play Paul completely flipping his !@#$ as the realm that he worked so hard to protect just ceases to exist though.

I wonder if this is a tendency of realms named after families  ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: mikm on November 12, 2012, 09:30:34 AM
This whole give your realm away business sure is something.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 12, 2012, 09:32:29 AM
This whole give your realm away business sure is something.

Yep, Its got to be at the top of the list of "unfun" moves.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Norrel on November 12, 2012, 11:10:52 AM
Yep, Its got to be at the top of the list of "unfun" moves.

If you're going to have one person control your entire realm as a single duchy, you should be prepared to face the consequences.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: mikm on November 12, 2012, 11:24:56 AM
What bug?  I thought this was possible because of the ban spoken against me.  My character was backed into a corner and it was the only option available to her.
You could have just on a boat. No one could touch you there.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on November 12, 2012, 12:50:17 PM
I can and did change allegiance.

Because obviously it was totally OK with Solaria, so it would be totally OK with Kabrinskia.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chaotrance13 on November 12, 2012, 02:10:41 PM
Can we not use the proper channels regarding this? Tom's said it himself in the Q+A forum - forum complaints do nothing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on November 12, 2012, 04:28:03 PM
I for one welcome our new Astrum overlords!  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vessol on November 12, 2012, 08:25:29 PM
If you're going to have one person control your entire realm as a single duchy, you should be prepared to face the consequences.

Especially when that one person is known to be hilariously unstable.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Woelfy on November 12, 2012, 09:52:55 PM
If you're going to have one person control your entire realm as a single duchy, you should be prepared to face the consequences.

If we've learned anything, it's to not trust the people that realms are named after.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on November 12, 2012, 09:57:26 PM
Especially when that one person is known to be hilariously unstable.

You mean being comicly insane isn't a required trait to be a leader on this game? ...God I miss Norland
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on November 13, 2012, 01:47:02 PM
In other, more directly-related-to-IC news, a Magistratum is being rustled up against Allison. Again. Only this time, the composition of the Elders is rather less hospitable toward her.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on November 13, 2012, 02:25:52 PM
The vote for a Magistratum failed already.  It is impossible for them to gain sufficient votes to fulfil the rules for calling a Magistratum.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 13, 2012, 02:37:19 PM
I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. For non-theocratic issues, there are no specific criteria for the votes. The vote sits at 4-3. If it ended today, that's a vote *for* a trial.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on November 13, 2012, 02:43:47 PM
I am accused of interfering in a holy and sacred election.  That seems rather theocratic to me.   If it weren't a Theocratic issue Mordaunt could have simply called for a magistratum without a vote.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 13, 2012, 02:54:43 PM
Theocratic issues refers to things like Heresy and matters of theology (as is explained in the Charter). Charges of bribery, corruption, and forgery are not matters of theology. And Mordaunt doesn't really know the Charter. It seems that many of the Elders have never read the Charter, or seem to think the Charter says something other than what it really says.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 13, 2012, 03:49:12 PM
Theocratic issues refers to things like Heresy and matters of theology (as is explained in the Charter). Charges of bribery, corruption, and forgery are not matters of theology. And Mordaunt doesn't really know the Charter. It seems that many of the Elders have never read the Charter, or seem to think the Charter says something other than what it really says.

Or know it very well, and are happy to run roughshod over it in order to get at Allison.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on November 13, 2012, 03:51:34 PM
Or know it very well, and are happy to run roughshod over it in order to get at Allison.

...From what he's just said, it sounds like their misuse of the Charter, whether through ignorance or choice, is actually delaying them in "getting at Allison."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on November 13, 2012, 06:09:14 PM
It's not so much about knowledge of the Charter (Brance does know it well, as does Rabisu) as opinions regarding this specific kerfuffle (Brance is in favor of a Magistratum, Rabisu is not). Many things influence opinions. It's kinda funny to see anti-Allison conspiracies alleged... I remember when Glaumring (et al) saw pro-Allison "cabals" conspiring too. She's just a controversial character, evoking high emotional tensions is all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 13, 2012, 07:21:16 PM
It's not so much about knowledge of the Charter (Brance does know it well, as does Rabisu) as opinions regarding this specific kerfuffle (Brance is in favor of a Magistratum, Rabisu is not). Many things influence opinions. It's kinda funny to see anti-Allison conspiracies alleged... I remember when Glaumring (et al) saw pro-Allison "cabals" conspiring too. She's just a controversial character, evoking high emotional tensions is all.

We're not organized enough to be a conspiracy.

There's just a pretty large group of people who really hate her.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on November 13, 2012, 09:29:25 PM
The Magisterium is a joke.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Woelfy on November 14, 2012, 04:16:37 AM
We're not organized enough to be a conspiracy.

There's just a pretty large group of people who really hate her.

^ +1

Even people who just hear rumours tend to dislike her. I honestly don't think I've ever seen a single good thing written about Allison.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 14, 2012, 04:39:45 AM
She can be very effective in assembling support for her goals. She is very influential, and very capable of handling the dirty jobs. She gets things done.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 14, 2012, 04:41:28 AM
She can be very effective in assembling support for her goals. She is very influential, and very capable of handling the dirty jobs. She gets things done.

Heresy!!!

Call a Magisterium!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on November 14, 2012, 05:09:32 AM
She's very enthusiastic and energetic, full of zest and zeal. And when she puts her efforts toward doing a thing, she won't let it go. Like a dog with a bone, just chewing and chewing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on November 14, 2012, 01:20:14 PM
The Fall of Allison.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on November 14, 2012, 01:35:00 PM
MAGISTRATUM. Not Magisterium. The first refers to judicial process, and is the singular accusative form of magistrate. The second refers to the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, specifically bishops and the pope. I don't mean to be pedantic, but this sort of thing is popping up regularly IC, too. One of SA's charms is that it has words and institutions that are wholly unto themselves, so that if I say "magistratum", it conjures up all sorts of thoughts. Confusing the terms dilutes that power over time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on November 14, 2012, 02:48:07 PM
She can be very effective in assembling support for her goals. She is very influential, and very capable of handling the dirty jobs. She gets things done.

And this is why the trials are a joke. She does more for SA than anyone else yet always gets in trouble and a slap on the wrist while the rest of the theocracies sit and wait for her. She is the single defining entity of SA, the face of SA more poweful than the regent or prophet himself.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 14, 2012, 03:55:42 PM
Some day she'll get in over her head. The fact that a priest cannot be kicked out is the biggest problem. We all know she can't be kicked out. That makes the trials a bit difficult. What can they really do to her? You can pronounce RP punishments all you want. But if you can't *really* do anything to her, then what's the point? If she could be kicked out, then  the Magistratum would be more effective.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 14, 2012, 06:31:12 PM
MAGISTRATUM. Not Magisterium. The first refers to judicial process, and is the singular accusative form of magistrate. The second refers to the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, specifically bishops and the pope. I don't mean to be pedantic, but this sort of thing is popping up regularly IC, too. One of SA's charms is that it has words and institutions that are wholly unto themselves, so that if I say "magistratum", it conjures up all sorts of thoughts. Confusing the terms dilutes that power over time.

Thank you for the context. Me personally, I was already aware of this, but was intentionally messing it up as I feel the whole issue is amusing. I was caught it seems.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 14, 2012, 06:36:45 PM
Some day she'll get in over her head. The fact that a priest cannot be kicked out is the biggest problem. We all know she can't be kicked out. That makes the trials a bit difficult. What can they really do to her? You can pronounce RP punishments all you want. But if you can't *really* do anything to her, then what's the point? If she could be kicked out, then  the Magistratum would be more effective.

I know what you can do:

1. Create a new novice rank: "Heretic"
2. Publicly pronounce Allison as an enemy of the faith. State that any who aid her, change her rank, or allow her to remain in their realm will become an enemy of the faith.
3. Require all theocratic judges to ban and execute her on sight.
4. Announce that any realm allowing her to remain more than a week will have a crusade called upon them.

Done.

(Optional)
5. Announce that term 4 will be retracted when Allison voluntarily leaves SA.

Mission accomplished.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on November 14, 2012, 06:48:04 PM
I have thought of this as well.

Although a priest cannot be a novice rank.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 14, 2012, 06:55:39 PM
I have thought of this as well.

Although a priest cannot be a novice rank.

I can't help but disagree with many of these priest rules. I understand the reasoning behind them, but not being able to get rid of a priest causes serious issues.

The plan can be implemented just as well with a new full member rank though.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 14, 2012, 06:56:06 PM
I know what you can do:

1. Create a new novice rank: "Heretic"
2. Publicly pronounce Allison as an enemy of the faith. State that any who aid her, change her rank, or allow her to remain in their realm will become an enemy of the faith.
3. Require all theocratic judges to ban and execute her on sight.
4. Announce that any realm allowing her to remain more than a week will have a crusade called upon them.

Done.

(Optional)
5. Announce that term 4 will be retracted when Allison voluntarily leaves SA.

Mission accomplished.

Indeed, the theocracies can be used as agents of enforcement– slap a ban on her as soon as she enters each.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on November 14, 2012, 07:06:58 PM
I know what you can do:

1. Create a new novice rank: "Heretic"
2. Publicly pronounce Allison as an enemy of the faith. State that any who aid her, change her rank, or allow her to remain in their realm will become an enemy of the faith.
3. Require all theocratic judges to ban and execute her on sight.
4. Announce that any realm allowing her to remain more than a week will have a crusade called upon them. Witness the failure of your plan as a good half of your faith is more than willing to aid her, be a laughing stock for the rest of your days.

Or, you know, maybe not. But maybe yes. If game-mechanic protection was all Allison had, a way would have been found a long time ago. It remains that many people do not actually want her gone.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 14, 2012, 07:55:45 PM
1. Create a new novice rank: "Heretic"
I had been planning to do something similar with other priests in the past. Chrisxan Al-Cyr was one of them. There was another, too, but he also disappeared. I was thinking of something like "False Priest" or "Accursed of the Bloodstars". You can tailor the title to whatever you need, and toss on a rather large monthly fee and a 0 debt limit for the rank as well.

It seems that we have had more than a few priests who, once outed as troublemakers/spies/etc., have disappeared. In at least one case, the entire family disappeared. Few people are willing to continue playing such an outcast priest.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on November 14, 2012, 10:11:26 PM
Issues with troublesome priests/priestesses usually resolve themselves when one of them gets imprisoned and beheaded. It's the very effective gaming of the system that Allison has done as an Elder that has presented the greatest challenge to people that have tried to oust her. The Charter is very specific about a Magistratum called for theological matters. There's much more leeway granted when one is called by the Regent for temporal matters, as happened with Mordaunt. The charges presented so far aren't even remotely theological in nature, and a vote wasn't really required (Elders, especially the Regent, should really read the Charter!) so the Magistratum will be proceeding apace.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ehndras on November 14, 2012, 10:19:54 PM
Is this whole Allison thing the only big event going on in SA these days? Jeeze, Allison is pretty much the lifeblood and posterchild of SA (publicly and to outsiders, at least) since she keeps the RPs rolling and the intrigue steaming, that's the sole reason why she won't be beheaded any time soon - she provides too many good RP opportunities in an otherwise boring-as-f*ck atmosphere. I wish there was more intrigue in SA, what's point in a huge theological collective without infighting? Hell, even the Holy Roman Empire had its issues. Massive... Massive... Issues... Its just more fun that way. :) SA is both the highlight and the bane of Dwilight, and its influence will make or break the fun times to be had. I don't like watching players emigrate or quit because they're bored of how things go. All my friends who joined SA realms quit from boredom. :| Ironically the only who remained in BM are myself in Terran, a friend in Aurvandil, my friend Astrom (ha!) who joined Astrum quit recently from boredom, I haven't heard a whimper from anyone from Summerdale in ages, and I think that's it.

SA has so much potential! C'mon guys, lets make Dwilight the center of attention with some much-needed conflict! Start planning ahead for once this Aurvandil fiasco is over. See who you really, really like, see who you see yourself having good RP conflict with, and work your magic! If you need help, shoot Alura Aurea a message IC or OOC, I type a good 5 to 20 thousand words a day in my writing activities to keep in practice and write stories, poetry, and lyrics in various styles and themes. (Though Scifi will always be my main one.) I am ALWAYS up to help make things interesting if someone needs help with a plot or RP idea. :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on November 14, 2012, 10:25:00 PM
Is this whole Allison thing the only big event going on in SA these days?

This was pretty much my impression, though I think those trying to oust her want that spotlight for themselves. Question is, would they do more with it?

Quote
SA has so much potential! C'mon guys, lets make Dwilight the center of attention with some much-needed conflict! Start planning ahead for once this Aurvandil fiasco is over. See who you really, really like, see who you see yourself having good RP conflict with, and work your magic! If you need help, shoot Alura Aurea a message IC or OOC, I type a good 5 to 20 thousand words a day in my writing activities to keep in practice and write stories, poetry, and lyrics in various styles and themes. (Though Scifi will always be my main one.) I am ALWAYS up to help make things interesting if someone needs help with a plot or RP idea. :)

Hm, Paul did think Alura was neat. And... Marshal now, too, hrmmm... Let's see if he keeps his own army after New Kabrinskia or whatever we're gonna call (Not that) it is reformed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on November 14, 2012, 10:51:36 PM
So many Astroists and only one star, Allison. I left SA out of boredom, having much more fun now doing my own religion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ehndras on November 14, 2012, 10:52:57 PM
Yeah, I left SA because the politicking structure pissed me off and it bored me. Still, I see huge potential in the SA if only people can stop letting Allison do all the work.



@Marlboro, shoot me a message here or in-game any time. :) I'm interested in New-Kabri both IC and OOC. On the non-BM side, I've got an RP-oriented Skype group of GMs and Roleplayers from various games and places that I speak to regularly, (some of which play or played BM, one of which is about to join BM tomorrow, having another BMer there would probably help convince the whole group to stop our massive Civilization V conquest games long enough to play some BM :P), anyone interested in Fantasy, Scifi, or the most random conversations possible are welcome to join us. :P You can also find me on FB via the BM group, I'm the random long-haired dude, Gregory Struck. Cheers!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on November 14, 2012, 11:34:42 PM
Indeed, the theocracies can be used as agents of enforcement– slap a ban on her as soon as she enters each.

And I bet a few unaligned would be ready to ban her to please the Astrocracies. Or just because they hate her to begin with.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on November 14, 2012, 11:46:28 PM
And I would be ready to ban her to please the Astrocracies. Or just because I hate her to begin with.

FTFY.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 15, 2012, 12:19:19 AM
Politicing is kind of a central point to the game. What else would you expect when you get so many nobles together, from such a disparate cross-section of the island?

To be honest, you are somewhat correct about Allison driving a lot of what hapens. What you are incorrect about is that it wouldn't hapen without her. She tends to derail as much as she starts. In fact, she has worked to derail as much of the church's efforts to work against the south as she could, simply because she's not in charge of it. She can be very frustrating. If not for her, I think more would actually get done, because we wouldn't have to be constantly fighting her.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on November 15, 2012, 12:27:46 AM
Honestly I consider this really a phase for SA. I consider Allison the Brom of Luria or vice versa depending upon how you look at it.

My reasoning is that while Brom was in Luria he helped push forward a lot of RP since he was simply plotting all the time. However, he also messed up a lot of things, a lot of his own plans and others, and much of Luria was sort of stuck in a rut for a while. But, once Brom left, Luria really stepped forward and started developing new paths of RP and started expanding some, etc...

I think the same could happen with Allison if she left SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on November 15, 2012, 01:01:52 AM
All us plotter schemers are under the radar right now. Allison needs to join us in the shadowlands for a while.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on November 15, 2012, 06:17:26 AM
All us plotter schemers are under the radar right now. Allison needs to join us in the shadowlands for a while.
I am sure  Allison is plotting something, she always is.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on November 15, 2012, 06:27:32 AM
If you need help, shoot Alura Aurea a message IC or OOC, I type a good 5 to 20 thousand words a day in my writing activities to keep in practice and write stories, poetry, and lyrics in various styles and themes. (Though Scifi will always be my main one.) I am ALWAYS up to help make things interesting if someone needs help with a plot or RP idea. :)

Come do some of that writing in Arcaea. We have plenty of battles, but we need more RP.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Woelfy on November 15, 2012, 06:48:26 AM
I am sure  Allison is plotting something, she always is.

Aren't we all?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ehndras on November 15, 2012, 07:52:03 AM
Come do some of that writing in Arcaea. We have plenty of battles, but we need more RP.

Arcaea, riiiiight. Been putting my 2nd Arcaean on pause because I'm too broke to donate $ to re-unlock my noble slot at the mo', which is halting my usual RPs in Arcaea since I need Vvaros and Alekhthaeos together to make it work as planned. :) Should be good and back to RPing by next week, I hope.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on November 15, 2012, 09:53:44 AM
Damn... That felt surprisingly good.    8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on November 15, 2012, 01:27:50 PM
Damn... That felt surprisingly good.    8)

Office of the Austere's Points of Protocol
Rule 1: Follow the rules
Rule 2: Shut up about having to follow the rules

Malus knew Constantine would make a great Luminary of the Austere/Attack Dog. TBH, it was the way he acted when Luria rolled in to take his region that sort of sealed the deal.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on November 16, 2012, 03:01:56 AM
Office of the Austere's Points of Protocol
Rule 1: Follow the rules
Rule 2: Shut up about having to follow the rules

Malus knew Constantine would make a great Luminary of the Austere/Attack Dog. TBH, it was the way he acted when Luria rolled in to take his region that sort of sealed the deal.
That is how war should be fought considering its nobility, respect regardless of who's side they are on.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 16, 2012, 03:52:37 PM
This is how a Magistratum should work!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on November 16, 2012, 04:00:26 PM
It's not like Allison is pre-determined of guilt. Personally, I'm dubious that she'll be punished severely if at all. But for the sake of the institution itself (which Allison has made a career out of undermining, it should be noted), Malus is going to do his level best to ensure that the Magistratum is thorough and fair. It might take awhile, but what's another week to (hopefully) silence both sides of the Allison Drama Club forever?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 16, 2012, 04:05:45 PM
meh– she doesn't actually need to be punished. She just needs to be put in her place. She's not above the process, a precedent is set, and she lost at every step of the way. That's enough for me. We just proved we can get her tossed out of the Elders on short notice by simple vote if she gets too crazy. That's big.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 16, 2012, 05:03:14 PM
Malus is going to do his level best to ensure that the Magistratum is thorough and fair.
You do realize that the lead Magistrate you appointed is the one that didn't even bother to attempt an investigation last time?

And that the punishment they gave out was expurgation? (Which equates to no punishment at all.)

Quote
It might take awhile, but what's another week to (hopefully) silence both sides of the Allison Drama Club forever?
HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 16, 2012, 05:16:27 PM
We just proved we can get her tossed out of the Elders on short notice by simple vote if she gets too crazy. That's big.
Not really that big. Rabisu could have tossed her out any time he wanted.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on November 16, 2012, 05:21:23 PM
You do realize that the lead Magistrate you appointed is the one that didn't even bother to attempt an investigation last time?

Lead? Malus is the lead. Rabisu is required to be there, and absolutely nobody stepped forward to fill the vacancy that Aram created except Pierre.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 16, 2012, 06:20:44 PM
I thought Pierre was picked to lead. I must have misunderstood.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on November 16, 2012, 06:23:48 PM
I thought Pierre was picked to lead. I must have misunderstood.

Oh, no. Pierre is a replacement for Aram, because Aram got himself accused of bribery as well. I suppose we could have held a separate Magistratum for the charge of bribery, but what's done is done.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on November 16, 2012, 06:24:44 PM
You do realize that the lead Magistrate you appointed is the one that didn't even bother to attempt an investigation last time?

Come on, you're not going to repeat that OOC are you?

There was an investigation on public letters. They were public. I read them. What need was there of asking around for copies? That's just inviting forgery.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on November 16, 2012, 07:33:22 PM
meh– she doesn't actually need to be punished. She just needs to be put in her place. She's not above the process, a precedent is set, and she lost at every step of the way. That's enough for me. We just proved we can get her tossed out of the Elders on short notice by simple vote if she gets too crazy. That's big.

This doesn't seem that big to me. She's lost before. She was fully excommunicated once (twice?), and has been kicked out of the Elders at least twice before this for various reasons. Those all ended up being temporary setbacks in the end.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on November 16, 2012, 07:37:18 PM
I would like to see an Allison regency or prophet status. Too bad im not there to support that anymore... Oh how I tried!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 16, 2012, 08:04:14 PM
@Glaumring: Brance was fully willing to support Allison for the Regency in the previous term. It's too bad she backed out.

@VonGenf: I'm just saying, that's what happened. I'm not trying to restart any arguments, much less make any OOC attacks.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on November 16, 2012, 09:32:29 PM
Imma stab Brance and Will in the face. This is what you people get for crafting a Charter that nobody understands and nobody follows.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on November 16, 2012, 10:04:23 PM
Most likely after the Magistratum we can have a nice quiet couple of days ... before the next one for Allison.

THIS IS WHAT WE WILL SOLELY DO HENCEFORTH. 

We can make new Magistratum titles. Pro-Allison Magistrate, Anti-Allison Magistrate, Cantankerous Token Neutral Magistrate. And have them be permanent.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 16, 2012, 10:32:44 PM
Brance wasn't an elder when the Charter was written. I think that was Pierre's administration.

But if you want to know how a Magistratum works, ask Brance. After all, he wrote that. He thinks it's pretty obvious.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on November 16, 2012, 10:34:11 PM
We can make new Magistratum titles. Pro-Allison Magistrate, Anti-Allison Magistrate, Cantankerous Token Neutral Magistrate. And have them be permanent.

LOL'ed
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 16, 2012, 10:45:59 PM
Are you getting an idea of why these trials never go as smoothly as you expect them to go?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on November 16, 2012, 11:35:22 PM
Apathy?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 16, 2012, 11:45:56 PM
Oh no. Anything but that. Thinking the problem is apathy reveals a very deep misunderstanding of how SA works.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on November 16, 2012, 11:55:30 PM
The real problem is Mathurin. He just never shuts up, that one. You can't get any discussion done because he's always going on about his cats. WE DON'T CARE ABOUT NIBBLES ANYMORE, PROPHET. YES SHE'S A CUTE KITTY. WE GET IT.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on November 17, 2012, 12:00:26 AM
Oh no. Anything but that. Thinking the problem is apathy reveals a very deep misunderstanding of how SA works.

Whoa thats deep man...  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on November 17, 2012, 03:20:26 AM
At least he's not crawling around and WANNA WANNA WANNA BIKKIT!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on November 17, 2012, 10:32:23 AM
Brance wasn't an elder when the Charter was written. I think that was Pierre's administration.

Wasn't it started before? It's been in the works for a long time.

In any case, Pierre hates the charter. He'd scrap it entirely (except for the Creed, which he wrote).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 17, 2012, 01:55:51 PM
:P
Brance despises the creed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on November 17, 2012, 02:38:42 PM
Brance despises the creed.

 :'(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 18, 2012, 01:39:22 AM
To me, the creed is written in a very modern way, like you're trying to explain your theology to someone who follows a different religion. "We believe the Bloodstars influence us." It sounds like you're not sure. The creed of the church should be a strong affirmation of self-evident truths. Things that everyone knows are true. The words "we believe" should be erased from the entire thing. There were other objections I had to it back when it was written, but I can't remember them at the moment.

Anyway, Brance doesn't really believe in the creed, and doesn't pay any attention to it at all. He's confident in his faith, and doesn't need some list of things he's supposed to believe. Those things are for people that don't really understand the Stars.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on November 18, 2012, 08:51:03 AM
To me, the creed is written in a very modern way, like you're trying to explain your theology to someone who follows a different religion. "We believe the Bloodstars influence us." It sounds like you're not sure. The creed of the church should be a strong affirmation of self-evident truths. Things that everyone knows are true. The words "we believe" should be erased from the entire thing. There were other objections I had to it back when it was written, but I can't remember them at the moment.

I guess I did not see that way when I wrote it, but that's a fair criticism. I'm not sure how to make it sound less modern though.

For the format, I based myself on the Nicene Creed, which is a 4th century document, but all the translations are modern. Maybe someone know enough greek to comment on the style of the original?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_versions_of_the_Nicene_Creed_in_current_use

Anyway, Brance doesn't really believe in the creed, and doesn't pay any attention to it at all. He's confident in his faith, and doesn't need some list of things he's supposed to believe. Those things are for people that don't really understand the Stars.

Mostly the Creed is for new people. If you join SA today, it's a good summary. Many people never read the sermons.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on November 18, 2012, 05:18:22 PM
Many in SA are in it for the power the religion bit is a nice addition tooas a side game.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 18, 2012, 05:45:11 PM
Which pretty much makes it the same as any other religion.

Any *succesful* religion, that is.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on November 18, 2012, 05:54:36 PM
Which pretty much makes it the same as any other religion.

Any *succesful* religion, that is.
+1, if they have that much power, they are doing it right.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 18, 2012, 06:55:20 PM
To me, the creed is written in a very modern way, like you're trying to explain your theology to someone who follows a different religion. "We believe the Bloodstars influence us." It sounds like you're not sure. The creed of the church should be a strong affirmation of self-evident truths. Things that everyone knows are true. The words "we believe" should be erased from the entire thing. There were other objections I had to it back when it was written, but I can't remember them at the moment.

Anyway, Brance doesn't really believe in the creed, and doesn't pay any attention to it at all. He's confident in his faith, and doesn't need some list of things he's supposed to believe. Those things are for people that don't really understand the Stars.

"We believe" is not for explaining to other people, but as a confession of joining a faith– self-identification. As noted, it stems, in liturgical usage, from the Christian creedal tradition, and then takes another use in the shahadah of Islam.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on November 18, 2012, 07:00:40 PM
"We believe" is not for explaining to other people, but as a confession of joining a faith– self-identification.

Right; it's not a description, it's an affirmation.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 18, 2012, 07:08:48 PM
That doesn't mean I have to like it.  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BardicNerd on November 18, 2012, 07:41:06 PM
"We believe" is not for explaining to other people, but as a confession of joining a faith– self-identification. As noted, it stems, in liturgical usage, from the Christian creedal tradition, and then takes another use in the shahadah of Islam.
Exactly.  It is the seeing 'we believe' as a weak statement saying 'we think is right' that is the modern interpretation -- in this context, is is a strong affirmation, saying 'belief in this is what makes someone a member of SA.'

'Creed,' translates basically as 'belief' from what I understand.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creed
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JPierreD on November 19, 2012, 03:13:37 AM
This is the Pyrist creed:

I believe in the holy flames, which purify living and dead.
I honor my ancestors, who give me courage and strength.
I respect the spirits, who influence tides and seasons.
I worship the Gods, who rule heaven and earth.
I renounce the impurity, which corrupts mind and body.
I reject the underlords, who consume flesh and soul.

Which is the Astroist?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 19, 2012, 03:47:29 AM
It's on the wiki, under the Charter, which is linked from the Sanguis Astroism page.

We believe that the Divine Bloodstars, acting through our blood, influence everything that we do.
We believe that the Maddening Star influences our raw emotions and impulses.
We believe that the Auspicious Star influences our reason and capacity for logical thought.
We believe that the Austere Star influences our soul and capacity for serenity.
We believe that above all else, men should seek to reach a state of Harmony with the influence of all three Stars, so that we may act with Wisdom according to our knowledge.
We believe that to succeed at this is to attain Enlightenment, as the First Prophet Mathurin did.
We hold the spiritual writings of the First Prophet Mathurin to come from the greatest understanding of the Stars we have yet achieved. All should study them so we can better understand and study the Stars themselves.
We believe that everyone should know and believe this creed to be true. We do not shun those who seek honest enlightenment, and we seek always to spread our knowledge of the Truth to the unenlightened.
All this we believe.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on November 19, 2012, 05:10:37 AM
That doesn't mean I have to like it.  ;D
Yeah, the more I read it, the less I like it. It just feels too much like I am telling my friend about SA and less like a creed. It should all be one liners without  explanations.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on November 19, 2012, 01:57:02 PM
Mathurin is so enlightened he hasn't spoken in years.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 19, 2012, 04:21:25 PM
Has nobody read the Nicene Creed?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on November 19, 2012, 04:40:08 PM
Has nobody read the Nicene Creed?

Eh. We still had religion (read catholicism) classes in high school when I went there. We had to learn and recite it. At least they were no points for the attitude you recited it with.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on November 19, 2012, 05:12:32 PM
Has nobody read the Nicene Creed?

I can recite it from heart in English, and with some minor prompting, at least most of it in Latin.

But then, I think you were probably referring to the people who don't like the existing SA creed ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 19, 2012, 07:09:14 PM
I can recite it from heart in English, and with some minor prompting, at least most of it in Latin.

But then, I think you were probably referring to the people who don't like the existing SA creed ;D

1. Impressive.

2. Yeah, I was. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on November 19, 2012, 07:14:54 PM
1. Impressive.

Well, the English is from having said it nearly every week for the first 22 years of my life (y'know, after I was old enough to say it), and intermittently since.

The Latin is from having sung Latin masses in the local college's Oratorio society several times.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 19, 2012, 07:45:04 PM
Has nobody read the Nicene Creed?
I read it from the link that was supplied. Or at least parts of it.

I still don't like it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on November 21, 2012, 10:55:33 PM
Well, this Magistratum just took an interesting turn...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 21, 2012, 11:51:00 PM
Mrh?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on November 21, 2012, 11:53:48 PM
Graaaarghhh!!!!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on November 29, 2012, 09:06:04 PM
It is done.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on November 29, 2012, 10:24:36 PM
Sanguis Astroism!?!!? Yippie! ... Ummm I mean... Sorry , whats done?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 30, 2012, 12:27:13 AM
Nothing you need to worry about.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on November 30, 2012, 06:39:27 PM
It is done.

She played her hand too soon. Lets see how it develops.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on November 30, 2012, 06:59:27 PM
rofl Allison asking people to join Aurvandil. Pretty hilarious.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 30, 2012, 07:46:41 PM
rofl Allison asking people to join Aurvandil. Pretty hilarious.
She has gotten 6 people from the former Kabrinskia to follow her so far. I think that's all of them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 30, 2012, 07:51:35 PM
She has gotten 6 people from the former Kabrinskia to follow her so far. I think that's all of them.

I hope she takes all her people, then we can get a nice fancy schism rolling.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 30, 2012, 08:00:58 PM
That may be all of them. :p

Maybe they will overthrow Mendicant.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 30, 2012, 08:05:16 PM
That may be all of them. :p

Maybe they will overthrow Mendicant.

lol, that would be hilarious.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 30, 2012, 08:15:45 PM
Allison can't help but cause trouble. She has to be in charge. That's the root of the current stir, she's not in charge of the church.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on November 30, 2012, 09:05:48 PM
No one wants someone in charge who's a power-junkie. People who crave power so desperately don't get it, or if they get it don't get to keep it. People who don't want the power tend to be given it, however. Because they have a respect for power; it's a responsibility to them, not a thing to be consumed and mainlined.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on November 30, 2012, 09:08:30 PM
No one wants someone in charge who's a power-junkie. People who crave power so desperately don't get it, or if they get it don't get to keep it. People who don't want the power tend to be given it, however. Because they have a respect for power; it's a responsibility to them, not a thing to be consumed and mainlined.

Thank you, Daycryn, for your informative presentation on the socio-political dynamics of Bizzaro World.

Next up, we have Chénier and ^ban^ to tell us about the way things work here in the real world.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on November 30, 2012, 09:41:20 PM
Allison could have been Regent a couple times.  She didnt crave power, she willingly gave it up a few times.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on November 30, 2012, 09:41:46 PM
Thank you, Daycryn, for your informative presentation on the socio-political dynamics of Bizzaro World.

Next up, we have Chénier and ^ban^ to tell us about the way things work here in the real world.

And me and Solari will have a side conversation about the interplay between ideas of "power" and "influence."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 30, 2012, 09:58:21 PM
Not taking office is not the same as not craving power. Allison always had to have her way. She had to be in the lead. If she wasn't, then she was building roadblocks. As soon as it became obvious that a group of elders was in place that was no longer willing to take her crap, and that she had lost almost all influence with the membership, she bailed. I'm really curious to see what's going to happen with her in the south. This could turn out very interesting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on December 01, 2012, 01:53:26 AM
And me and Solari will have a side conversation about the interplay between ideas of "power" and "influence."

^^^
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on December 01, 2012, 06:22:26 PM
Thank you, Daycryn, for your informative presentation on the socio-political dynamics of Bizzaro World.

Oh you're most welcome!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on January 05, 2013, 11:14:14 PM
So. "Orthodox Astroism," with Allison as proclaimed Prophet.

Not to say I told you so, but I told you so. Neener.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 05, 2013, 11:23:16 PM
Mrh? Are you trying to imply that someone didn't see this coming? I suppose perhaps some pig herder in the Lurias may not have known...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 05, 2013, 11:51:31 PM
So. "Orthodox Astroism," with Allison as proclaimed Prophet.

Not to say I told you so, but I told you so. Neener.
So does that mean you will finally declare a crusade?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on January 06, 2013, 12:31:17 AM
So does that mean you will finally declare a crusade?

Good luck with that. Aurvandil is located too south for SA realms. I bet most units will desert before they even have their first battle.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Woelfy on January 06, 2013, 12:50:27 AM
Mrh? Are you trying to imply that someone didn't see this coming? I suppose perhaps some pig herder in the Lurias may not have known...

Lurian pig herders saw this one coming.

/me knows firsthand.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on January 06, 2013, 02:16:16 AM
Good luck with that. Aurvandil is located too south for SA realms. I bet most units will desert before they even have their first battle.

We've been working on solutions to that and doing trial-runs for some time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 06, 2013, 03:38:28 AM
We've been working on solutions to that and doing trial-runs for some time.

In any case, crusade does not equal sending troops from the north. A crusade can be called, but fought by marrocidenese mercenaries.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 06, 2013, 04:44:34 AM
In any case, crusade does not equal sending troops down north. A crusade can be called, but fought by marrocidenese mercenaries.

I'm sure you meant down south...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 06, 2013, 07:39:58 AM
At some point the North will realize that Aurvandil is not a threat to them and look towards the realms that can actually do them harm.   Astrum lost Golden Farrow from their fold.  They just might not have realized it yet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Nosferatus on January 06, 2013, 09:04:20 AM
Chenier keeps sugesting to just put gold into D'hara and Terran.
But if the SA has already plenty of Gold stacked up then wouldnt it be better to just colonize a piece of land with plenty of inhabitants like chesney duchy, go there with 30 nobles and 50k gold and just launch wave after wave.
Terran would have to give up some land but we all know SA could do more with it in this war.
The European christians also had to settle in the cities they took to effectively fight to conquer the holy lands.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Norrel on January 06, 2013, 10:53:37 AM
Yaay! Finally SA schisms. Hopefully this trend continues and we end up with an interesting north for the first time in forever. What's the point of a massive hegemonic religion if it doesn't descend into heresy and infighting?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on January 06, 2013, 11:56:51 AM
Yaay! Finally SA schisms.

Always thought it would be different... Like, big and grand. This is rather tame.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Norrel on January 06, 2013, 02:48:42 PM
Always thought it would be different... Like, big and grand. This is rather tame.

Anything big and grand would immediately bring down the full brunt of the north, though hopefully this'll inspire something like that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 06, 2013, 04:05:58 PM
That's not true at all. Something big could be done by the right person, in the right way. But Allison isn't the right person, and her choice of names is deliberately provocative.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 06, 2013, 06:30:26 PM
Always thought it would be different... Like, big and grand. This is rather tame.

Its a start and a very healthy one for Dwilight. I know the founders of SA have a dream of ruling all of Dwilight as SA, well... Its not going to happen and instead of running SA like it magically will and sitting in their realms the next 100 years in boredom start to have fun.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on January 06, 2013, 07:08:38 PM
instead of running SA like it magically will

All sufficiently advanced politics is indistinguishable from magic.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 06, 2013, 08:45:23 PM
Chenier keeps sugesting to just put gold into D'hara and Terran.
But if the SA has already plenty of Gold stacked up then wouldnt it be better to just colonize a piece of land with plenty of inhabitants like chesney duchy, go there with 30 nobles and 50k gold and just launch wave after wave.
Terran would have to give up some land but we all know SA could do more with it in this war.
The European christians also had to settle in the cities they took to effectively fight to conquer the holy lands.
Technically Terran couldn't really allow that as without Chesney they can't be apart of the moot.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 06, 2013, 11:00:41 PM
If they could afford to bleed so many nobles, and wanted to, they wouldn't even need to found a new realm, they could just join up the existing realms.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lychaon on January 07, 2013, 12:30:59 AM
If they could afford to bleed so many nobles, and wanted to, they wouldn't even need to found a new realm, they could just join up the existing realms.

I think it would somehow an exploit of the game mechanics regardless of the "cultural identity" of a group of nobles. I mean, in order to resupply to keep on with the campaign, you'd join the realm whose borders contact the enemy. And they're not even from federated realms, nor some kind of "cultural core" very close to the realm which they'd join.

I'm talking without knowing exactly all the issues, but I think what Penchant says could have a point, in a non-permanent way. Of course, ink rivers should be written before within the parties.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 07, 2013, 12:58:41 AM
I think it would somehow an exploit of the game mechanics regardless of the "cultural identity" of a group of nobles. I mean, in order to resupply to keep on with the campaign, you'd join the realm whose borders contact the enemy. And they're not even from federated realms, nor some kind of "cultural core" very close to the realm which they'd join.

I'm talking without knowing exactly all the issues, but I think what Penchant says could have a point, in a non-permanent way. Of course, ink rivers should be written before within the parties.
Them joining existing realms solely for the war is not against the rules AFAIK. Also they are allied and both dedicated to this war so that point doesn't really stick. He isn't talking about them joining to repair their equipment, fight, lose a bunch of men and rejoin old real to get old troops, he is talking about the nobles joining the realm for the duration of the war to give military aid.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on January 07, 2013, 03:03:38 AM
Technically Terran couldn't really allow that as without Chesney they can't be apart of the moot.

Yes we can.

Maroccidens or Mesoccidens.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 07, 2013, 04:05:47 AM
Yes we can.

Maroccidens or Mesoccidens.
Duh.  :-[
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Nosferatus on January 07, 2013, 09:05:42 AM
Yes we can.

Maroccidens or Mesoccidens.

I am sure many in SA cant wait to found a SA realm in that area.
If the right people are in it with alot of gold stock piled and there enough RCs, it can do some serious damage.

Still cheniers point stands, they could also join the exisiting realms

Intresting things are all about to happen yet still the most interesting thing resolves around the lurian war and how it will end.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eldargard on January 07, 2013, 09:12:34 AM
Lurian War? LN walked in and took Shinnen Plurias with little effort. LV huddles in the capitol as their nation crumbles. Not blaming them as they are in a corner and I doubt I could have done better. Heck, my character, a LV noble, has done nothing to aid or hinder anyone. Just saying that it has not been much of a war...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Nosferatus on January 07, 2013, 09:17:48 AM
Just saying that it has not been much of a war...

Yes indeed, but it doesn't mather, it kept three realms busy and the outcome of this 'war'  will change the shape of all three realms involved and there course for the future.

PS, if you want a real war, take your friends south.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 07, 2013, 02:53:47 PM
Sure, the Lurias and SA could go south but to what gain?  If the 'Moot can't take care of themselves why should others bother helping them?  I don't believe a Crusade will be called. 


Quite frankly, The north should take Terran, Aurvandil should take Barca and the Lurias should take D'hara.  Then the 3 factions will be within striking distance of one another and the real wars can start.   Unless of course you like the idea of paying Terran to fight a war for you or you like the idea of a gang bang.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Nosferatus on January 07, 2013, 03:02:49 PM
Sure, the Lurias and SA could go south but to what gain?  If the 'Moot can't take care of themselves why should others bother helping them?  I don't believe a Crusade will be called. 
I dont know If a crusade would be called, but i could imagine it happening.
Atleast from my characters perspective it would.

The Sa would definatly gain alot from a crusade colony in Chesney.
A. To gain of a first theocratic stronghold on the marocidens and the south
B. Efectivley destroy or convert the heathen scum, heatens are bad, mkay.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: MediumTedium on January 07, 2013, 03:16:25 PM
Terran being alive actually helps Aurvandil. If they conquer Terran they would be free to go down South when ever they wanted with no morale penalties and such .
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on January 07, 2013, 04:11:41 PM
Terran being alive actually helps Aurvandil. If they conquer Terran they would be free to go down South when ever they wanted with no morale penalties and such .

Not really. Perhaps the realm in Terrans place could, certainly nothing would change for the nobles from Morek, Astrum and Iashalur.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on January 07, 2013, 04:15:07 PM
God damn... The charter is seriously screwed up.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 07, 2013, 04:19:25 PM
Why do you think I tried to get it updated for the past 7 or 8 months?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lychaon on January 07, 2013, 04:26:26 PM
Quite frankly, The north should take Terran, Aurvandil should take Barca and the Lurias should take D'hara.  Then the 3 factions will be within striking distance of one another and the real wars can start.   Unless of course you like the idea of paying Terran to fight a war for you or you like the idea of a gang bang.

So, you find more interesting three huge hegemonic entities fighting an hypothetical war, and propose the north to take Terran. I can't find a reason for that.

Let's forget about the bunch of rogue regions in the north that have been unruled for quite some time. Now let's think that many nobles in Terran (I don't know exactly how many, but Hireshmont II amongst them) follow the SA. I think they have more reasons to let hem be (I won't talk about contributions), than make war against them.

Now, Aurvandil forbids the spreading of any religion within its borders, in quite a particular way that maybe they like I guess to reaffirm their peculiarity comparing the rest of Dwilight (I don't know what all its regions are like, but the northern marches follow several religions, SA amongst them). They have given home to Allison, a character who decided to "apostatize" from the SA because she was accused to bribe in I don't know exactly which process. She even "threatened" the elders who gave her a hand of redemption, assuring she would found the "true religion" SA should be. And then she called it "Orthodox Astroism" or something similar, in what seems an exercise of provocation.

Personally I think Theocracies would have more reasons to be willing to fight Aurvandil and/or Allison than Terran.

I assume you think Aurvandil should take Barca to give you some parcels to found your own realm. Or maybe they find it necessary because they can afford it militarily speaking, I don't know.

And Terran could perfectly combine its existence with the possibility for the northern realms to bring war to Aurvandil, the way it's been mentioned.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 07, 2013, 04:35:59 PM
The northern realms have no reason at all to make war on the Veinsormoot realms. Its destruction has been a pet project of Allison's for years. She especially despises D'Hara due to some incidents way back in the first year or so of Dwilight's opening. Unfortunately for her, no one else seems to want to join with her to do it.

As for the northern realms founding some kind of Crusade colony.... get real. Like any one has the nobles available to do such a thing, even if a way could be found to do it within the boundaries of SMA. It's not like either Terran or D'Hara would willingly give up a city to create a new SA theocracy in the middle of the Veinsormoot's three-way snugglefest.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 07, 2013, 04:46:16 PM
Sure, the Lurias and SA could go south but to what gain?  If the 'Moot can't take care of themselves why should others bother helping them?
It's fun! The Veinsormoot is already falling under SA domination.

Quote
I don't believe a Crusade will be called.
You also thought that Brom would win the Regency election hands-down. I think you said something like "I control enough votes that you can't stop Brom from being elected as Regent." Despite Allison's claims to being able to see the future, you're really not doing it very accurately.

Quote
Quite frankly, The north should take Terran, Aurvandil should take Barca and the Lurias should take D'hara.  Then the 3 factions will be within striking distance of one another and the real wars can start.   Unless of course you like the idea of paying Terran to fight a war for you or you like the idea of a gang bang.
If Aurvandil couldn't handle it, then maybe it would be a gang-bang. But let's face it, everyone has already acknowledged that any so-called "1v1" war on Aurvandil would be suicide for any realm. The entire Veinsormoot working together can't hold them back. All the recent chest-beating around here is merely the 'moot players trying to psyche themselves up. As soon as Aurvandil bothers to actually try to attack the Veinsormoot, they'll crumble just like last time.

Not only that, but none of the northern realms have any valid IC reason to attack any of the Veinsormoot realms. They have multiple valid reasons to attack Aurvandil. And you're just giving them more reasons.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 07, 2013, 05:11:41 PM
Looks like dwilight will have to move towards smaller kingdoms in regards to its low playerbase...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lychaon on January 07, 2013, 05:18:19 PM
If Aurvandil couldn't handle it, then maybe it would be a gang-bang. But let's face it, everyone has already acknowledged that any so-called "1v1" war on Aurvandil would be suicide for any realm. The entire Veinsormoot working together can't hold them back. All the recent chest-beating around here is merely the 'moot players trying to psyche themselves up. As soon as Aurvandil bothers to actually try to attack the Veinsormoot, they'll crumble just like last time.

Aurvandil is quite strong, no doubt. But many other realms have had since these last two months (according the statistics) more military strength than them. In the particular case of Terran, with half the players Aurvandil has got (a lot of them with high level characters), it has been militarily superior in terms of CS. Terran has had more economic strength, and quite a similar food production and supply. So, it's all about planning and synchronizing carefully the campaigns, and the mentality towards war.

The myth of Aurvandil's invulnerability has been fed for long time, and I don't doubt it's very strong. But I it can be defeated, and I think it is possible even without the help of the SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on January 07, 2013, 05:19:52 PM
Looks like dwilight will have to move towards smaller kingdoms in regards to its low playerbase...

... which has increased by ~50 characters over the last three months.

Don't take your wishes for realities.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 07, 2013, 05:54:03 PM
All of which joined non-Astroist realms... :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 07, 2013, 05:59:33 PM
Actually, I can explain the "lack" of nobles quiet easily, and it has nothing to do with the changing number of nobles. To put it simply, the new estate system allows us to expand into more regions, and for new realms to be created with less nobles than were needed before.  Because you are expanding, you get a higher ratio of lords to knights until you end up on the end of the spectrum the Farronite Republic is at, with all lords except for two knights in Golden Farrow. We aren't losing nobles so much as gaining lords, and lords can't exactly up and leave for a new realm whenever they want.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 07, 2013, 06:07:12 PM
I dont recall threatening any Elders.  I thougt Brom would become Regent because I had garnered enough votes t kg at he had to cpnvince just 1 other Elder to vote gor him.  He assured me he had the support after I told him who I had.  He failed to gain even 1 supporter.  He over exagerated his support and I believed him.  He said that Prophet Mathurin would endorse him...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 07, 2013, 06:30:17 PM
The only Astroist realm with nobles is Morek. The rest of the realms are small and stagnant.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 07, 2013, 06:56:06 PM
Looks like dwilight will have to move towards smaller kingdoms in regards to its low playerbase...
You have it backward. Lower number of players tends to *increase* the geographic size of realms. Realms have to have a certain number of characters to survive. Otherwise the players get bored and leave. If you drop the number of characters, the players will tend to cluster together, causing those realms they choose to expand. If you increase the number of characters on an island, there is greater pressure for positions and power, so the realms will fragment as players scramble to create the power positions they want.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 07, 2013, 07:00:45 PM
Aurvandil is quite strong, no doubt. But many other realms have had since these last two months (according the statistics) more military strength than them. In the particular case of Terran, with half the players Aurvandil has got (a lot of them with high level characters), it has been militarily superior in terms of CS. Terran has had more economic strength, and quite a similar food production and supply. So, it's all about planning and synchronizing carefully the campaigns, and the mentality towards war.
The CS numbers listed on the stats page are very misleading, if you don't know how to interpret them, or know the situation behind them. Most realms other than Aurvandil have a large amount of militia. Aurvandil is unique in that with a large number of nobles, they don't need the large militia base to protect their regions from monsters, etc.

Quote
The myth of Aurvandil's invulnerability has been fed for long time, and I don't doubt it's very strong. But I it can be defeated, and I think it is possible even without the help of the SA.
They are most definitely not invulnerable. I did not say that. They are *very* strong, though, beyond that which is normally possible from their apparent economy or character count. Their extreme focus on military power and a very strong sense of common purpose let's them do amazing things with their mobile force.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 07, 2013, 08:12:01 PM
You have it backward. Lower number of players tends to *increase* the geographic size of realms. Realms have to have a certain number of characters to survive. Otherwise the players get bored and leave. If you drop the number of characters, the players will tend to cluster together, causing those realms they choose to expand. If you increase the number of characters on an island, there is greater pressure for positions and power, so the realms will fragment as players scramble to create the power positions they want.

Perhaps but 85% of the nobles of Dwilight have no ambition at all. I'd say Bowie Ironsides was the most ambitious.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on January 07, 2013, 08:31:02 PM
They are *very* strong, though, beyond that which is normally possible from their apparent economy or character count. Their extreme focus on military power and a very strong sense of common purpose let's them do amazing things with their mobile force.

Hey, remember when almost every realm in BM was like that...  ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 07, 2013, 09:23:55 PM
Oh yes. 6 or 7 years ago, Aurvandil would have been just another realm, with nothing remarkable about it at all. Except for the low noble count. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 07, 2013, 10:01:17 PM
Wish Dwilight was filled with more nobles and more skullduggery.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on January 07, 2013, 11:05:07 PM
Oh yes. 6 or 7 years ago, Aurvandil would have been just another realm, with nothing remarkable about it at all. Except for the low noble count. ;)

I thought the game was slower and quieter than I remember. Looks like I lost interest back in BM's prime and have found renewed vigor during a great lull. I'd curse my luck, but I have 7 years of backstory to keep me busy.

Perhaps but 85% of the nobles of Dwilight have no ambition at all. I'd say Bowie Ironsides was the most ambitious.

I wonder if you know about the new happenings...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 07, 2013, 11:18:58 PM
Im out of the loop in the plots and plans department. I am currently focused on my faith and the council. Sometimes its best to lay low.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Astinus on January 07, 2013, 11:36:26 PM
iirc I played when in EC the average nobles per realm was something around 120, with Perdan touching even 160 or something.

There were way more non game-mechanic related RP but overall the game felt way slower compared to BT where there were many more small realms
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 07, 2013, 11:57:27 PM
As for the northern realms founding some kind of Crusade colony.... get real. Like any one has the nobles available to do such a thing, even if a way could be found to do it within the boundaries of SMA. It's not like either Terran or D'Hara would willingly give up a city to create a new SA theocracy in the middle of the Veinsormoot's three-way snugglefest.

The Holy Snugglefest!

Also, yea, about Aurvandil's invincibility... It's basically a 1v1 right now, them vs. Terran. Barca was KOed early on, and D'Hara was KOed by the long winter, and then driven to fight on another front.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 08, 2013, 12:33:05 AM
Frankly it is in the best interest of the Astocracies and the Lurias to see Aurvandil expand.  Less nobles per realm, thins out the heard.  Harder to communicate and coordinate when you aren't in the same realm.  Spread out means less tax efficiency and they can't do their red line tax plan if they have to spread out.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on January 08, 2013, 12:35:15 AM
Also, yea, about Aurvandil's invincibility... It's basically a 1v1 right now, them vs. Terran. Barca was KOed early on, and D'Hara was KOed by the long winter, and then driven to fight on another front.

don't let the SA TLs in Larur/Paisland hear you say that or they might leave...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 08, 2013, 12:56:13 AM
don't let the SA TLs in Larur/Paisland hear you say that or they might leave...
They have participated in no battles that Aurvandil were in so until that happens I don't really care if they run away. Their current lack of involvement is Terran's fault so I am not complaining, I am just saying they can get off their high horse aka quit acting like they have helped so much in this war. Their help in crushing the squatters accelerated the process but they weren't even vital for that either. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 08, 2013, 01:10:25 AM
don't let the SA TLs in Larur/Paisland hear you say that or they might leave...

They hold the line, at most.

As Penchant said, they haven't participated in any attack, and I don't expect them to. Aurvandil isn't going to be defeated by having more northerners come, it'll be defeated by the Luria-D'Hara war ending.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 08, 2013, 01:16:38 AM
They hold the line, at most.

As Penchant said, they haven't participated in any attack, and I don't expect them to. Aurvandil isn't going to be defeated by having more northerners come, it'll be defeated by the Luria-D'Hara war ending.
Well SA's troops they have down south could be quite useful and might end up being a vital part of the war so I am not saying they are not important, just that they have yet to help majorly with the war. And I do not war the Lurian-D'hara war to end quite yet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lorgan on January 08, 2013, 02:01:42 AM
iirc I played when in EC the average nobles per realm was something around 120, with Perdan touching even 160 or something.

Good times. I started in Ubent, a small realm with no cities and still some 50-60 nobles if I recall correctly and also a communist dictatorship whose main produce was toilets. I remember it as a lot more silly rp and a lot less rp submersion. In the sense that nowadays people like to play their characters more as real medieval nobles who could have actually lived in those times and made such decisions. And it's just harder to bring humour into the roleplay if the character on it's own isn't already outrageous by itself.
Personally, I like the evolution though. That it's harder doesn't mean that it can't be done. And the constant evolution of the game means that there's always new things to look forward to.

There were way more non game-mechanic related RP but overall the game felt way slower compared to BT where there were many more small realms

Yeah, BT was always the most dynamic continent. Realms dying, new ones being created, others growing, alliances shifting or just everyone trying to survive, and to survive as strong as possible. BT is still by far the continent I love the most, and I think the new scrolls will make new conflict a lot more interesting as well. Both strategically as diplomatically. But on it's height (though it may have been a little over the peak) I ruled a pretty big realm, Old Grehk, of some 70-80 people and that was a lot of work already. I couldn't imagine what it must have been like on Atamara or EC... :P
Though the way I remember it, there was a lot more teamwork at the top as well. There was just usually a larger group that took a special interest in a particular realm. I know that I don't want to be involved in the government of the realms of all my characters. Somewhere I just want to have an infiltrator or a loyal soldier and don't give a crap about how the realm is run, unless it affects me personally. Like peace. :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on January 08, 2013, 02:06:32 AM
Well SA's troops they have down south could be quite useful and might end up being a vital part of the war so I am not saying they are not important, just that they have yet to help majorly with the war. And I do not war the Lurian-D'hara war to end quite yet.

Probably because if they travel a bit farther south, they risk desertion due to low morale
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 08, 2013, 02:50:39 AM
Probably because if they travel a bit farther south, they risk desertion due to low morale
I am not asking them to go farther down just cause they can but I do expect them to join the moot whenever we do, which is also why I said I am not complaining about their lack of involvement at the current time as Terran has yet to order an attack and thus we wait.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 08, 2013, 03:43:03 AM
My point was that Aurvandil isn't really taking on the whole 'moot. They KOed Barca with a surprise attack, and D'Hara got KOed by the long winter, then got pulled elsewhere.

Of the three 'moot realms, Terran is the only one really standing up to Aurvandil at the moment.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 08, 2013, 06:36:12 AM
its good for the northerners to have troops in the south.  The armies eat 'Moot food rather than Astocracy food.  They should send more troops.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Astinus on January 08, 2013, 02:37:46 PM
Keep in mind that aurvandil got crippled quite a bit by the whole world declaring war on them thing, that surely prevented a full unleash of Aurvandil power
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: MediumTedium on January 08, 2013, 03:00:58 PM
I think its fair to say Aurvandil restored their regions back to "normal" state a while ago and is working on getting their army strenght back to their usual numbers (40k+cs) or did we already ?! 8) .
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on January 08, 2013, 03:17:16 PM
its good for the northerners to have troops in the south.  The armies eat 'Moot food rather than Astocracy food.  They should send more troops.

That's actually a very good point...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on January 25, 2013, 04:56:10 AM
Any new developments with orthodox Astroism?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on January 25, 2013, 05:14:48 AM
Is this place still even alive with its favorite Consul gone?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 25, 2013, 05:20:42 AM
I'm told that SA kind of got boring.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 25, 2013, 05:22:39 AM
We're all waiting for the Holy Prophet's decision regarding OA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 25, 2013, 05:25:29 AM
I'm waiting for the prophet too.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 25, 2013, 05:27:08 AM
I thought he was down there, waiting for you?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 25, 2013, 05:45:32 AM
We started a conversation before I left SA and it kept going even before I founded OA.  About what the church would be and keeping him informed every step of the way.  The conversation sort of just died off.  I'm trying to kick start it again.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 25, 2013, 05:52:27 AM
We started a conversation before I left SA and it kept going even before I founded OA.  About what the church would be and keeping him informed every step of the way.  The conversation sort of just died off.  I'm trying to kick start it again.
He told us he was waiting to meet you in Candiels though no mention of any other communication with you previously.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on January 25, 2013, 07:14:40 AM
We're all waiting for the Holy Prophet's decision regarding OA.

Yeah, this prophet guy really is slowing down the party  >:(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on January 25, 2013, 09:56:28 AM
Yeah, this prophet guy really is slowing down the party  >:(

Yeah, that's why we put another guy in charge.

Hey, wait, wouldn't that be you?  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on January 25, 2013, 11:45:22 AM
Yeah, that's why we put another guy in charge.

Hey, wait, wouldn't that be you?  ;)

Heh, but my character is beholden to the prophet...  :P though he is pushing the prophet to accept the councils choice.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 25, 2013, 01:16:40 PM
You'd think with no votes against it woukd be a very very easy thing to do...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on January 25, 2013, 11:43:57 PM
Well either way Khari is very interested in OA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on January 26, 2013, 12:33:38 AM
Well either way Khari is very interested in OA.

And I am very interested in a religious world war.  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on January 26, 2013, 12:49:16 AM
And Paul is very interested in Khari.

Wait, what were we talking about?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 26, 2013, 02:52:04 AM
And I am very interested in a religious world war.  ;D
thats not happening anytime soon, just saying.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Samboji on January 27, 2013, 04:34:28 AM
It shouldn't be too hard. The southwest is already rolling, and half of them aren't even Astroists. You've got to admire their enthusiasm though.

Speaking of which, my noble is about to become an SA believer. I'm sure that there's a need for statements in SA like: "Ummmmm, well, whatever. I'm going shopping!!!", in a purely religious context.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 27, 2013, 06:00:22 AM
It shouldn't be too hard. The southwest is already rolling, and half of them aren't even Astroists. You've got to admire their enthusiasm though.

Speaking of which, my noble is about to become an SA believer. I'm sure that there's a need for statements in SA like: "Ummmmm, well, whatever. I'm going shopping!!!", in a purely religious context.
Not sure what you mean by rolling, there are plenty of Astroists  in powerful positions in the southwest, and no realm nor religion is stupid enough to !@#$ with SA as a religion. If a religious war ever happened it would then be a crusade by SA which means every noble of SA must help to their fullest capacity and all of the north must fight for the church. That's the the top half of the map and a large portion of the nobles of the south.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Woelfy on January 27, 2013, 06:02:39 AM
Just declare a crusade on OA and let's get things really rolling.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on January 27, 2013, 06:07:42 AM
I think that there is already a crusade against Aurvandil.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 27, 2013, 06:10:05 AM
I think that there is already a crusade against Aurvandil.
There is not but there could be depending on the prophets decision on OA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Woelfy on January 27, 2013, 06:10:31 AM
Meh, it'd be nice to have a religion to stamp out. Hunt Allison long enough to get her banned from all of Dwilight.... Yessssss....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on January 27, 2013, 06:15:26 AM
I've heard it said that the war/crusade against Aurvandil isn't being fought because people can't feasibly move their army there.

I wonder, if SA made a guild specifically for crusaders and marched their army south. Then, join whatever feasible realm staging point for war so resupply can occur. The guild would be tied to the church, working as a governing body for crusaders. It would be temporary, encourage the SA realms to work together and explore, but might not be SMA kosher. Just an idle thought.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on January 27, 2013, 06:21:17 AM
All the moot has to do is hand us Paisly or Rettleville for a theocracy for our crusaders  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on January 27, 2013, 06:55:49 AM
I've heard it said that the war/crusade against Aurvandil isn't being fought because people can't feasibly move their army there.

I wonder, if SA made a guild specifically for crusaders and marched their army south. Then, join whatever feasible realm staging point for war so resupply can occur. The guild would be tied to the church, working as a governing body for crusaders. It would be temporary, encourage the SA realms to work together and explore, but might not be SMA kosher. Just an idle thought.

Such a guild already exists...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 27, 2013, 07:43:10 AM
I've heard it said that the war/crusade against Aurvandil isn't being fought because people can't feasibly move their army there.

I wonder, if SA made a guild specifically for crusaders and marched their army south. Then, join whatever feasible realm staging point for war so resupply can occur. The guild would be tied to the church, working as a governing body for crusaders. It would be temporary, encourage the SA realms to work together and explore, but might not be SMA kosher. Just an idle thought.
For the millionth time, not a crusade. Also a bit of bull!@#$ and if I ever remember to speak with the House of Lords, Morek could end up joining the war again with a bit of effort.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on January 27, 2013, 04:01:23 PM
Such a guild already exists...

And it's also perfectly SMA kosher. Why would it not be?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 28, 2013, 01:56:14 AM
Crusaders can join Terran. Piece of cake.

Or heck, Fissoa.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vessol on January 28, 2013, 03:35:36 AM
"That is their right as ponies -- and of noble blood, at that."

I spit out my drink at that. Rofl
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 28, 2013, 04:53:26 AM
"That is their right as ponies -- and of noble blood, at that."

I spit out my drink at that. Rofl
super not SMA but I need to read up to double check. Not the pony part but the commoners can become nobility part.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on January 28, 2013, 05:30:49 AM
"That is their right as ponies -- and of noble blood, at that."

I spit out my drink at that. Rofl

All fear the epic crusader ponies of the north!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on January 29, 2013, 03:40:33 AM
Yesss. YESSSSS. MOAR LURIANZ.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Woelfy on January 29, 2013, 03:56:01 AM
The woman who was leading AP just joined... Wtf?

Religious continuity much? ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 29, 2013, 03:59:35 AM
Join the Dark Side... you know that it is the only true way...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 29, 2013, 04:03:48 AM
At one time, there was some talk of the two being variants, or some such.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on January 29, 2013, 04:11:36 AM
Personally I would like to see OA grow and have conflicts with SA. Political and by the blade.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on January 29, 2013, 04:33:36 AM
Personally I would like to see OA grow and have conflicts with SA. Political and by the blade.

Needz moar Holy Warz.

GOD WILLS IT!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on January 29, 2013, 04:38:18 AM
Needz moar Holy Warz.

GOD WILLS IT!

btw JeVondair– Rynn should totes join SA. It's what all the cool kids are doing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on January 29, 2013, 04:42:13 AM
btw JeVondair– Rynn should totes join SA. It's what all the cool kids are doing.

Meh. Rynn's not a sceneboy, and no one has ever really tried to "illuminate" him. Besides, the RP of him being of the desert tribes fits too well with VE. The disowned and disgraced Lion'el, who disavowed VE in favor of SA when he renounced ties to his family and proper speech, will have to do.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 29, 2013, 04:59:32 AM
Once we have everyone, we can declare victory. Then we can dissolve it all, and let everyone get back to their normal, boring religions.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on January 29, 2013, 05:57:31 AM
Meh. Rynn's not a sceneboy

We have a hipster prime minister? eh, it suits us.  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 29, 2013, 09:27:32 AM
(https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/7015471616/h2385A51F/)

I present... Rynn.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on January 29, 2013, 10:26:47 AM
The woman who was leading AP just joined... Wtf?

Religious continuity much? ;)

Oh yeah, the decision was made lightly and there was absolutely no circumstances leading up to it. I guess you really do know everything...

...Nawt.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eldargard on January 29, 2013, 10:36:56 AM
I can vouch for that. There is quite a back story behind Alice's moves. Now I just need to sort out how Brantley is going to react to it all...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on January 29, 2013, 01:51:46 PM
Once we have everyone, we can declare victory. Then we can dissolve it all, and let everyone get back to their normal, boring religions.

Nonsense. Either schisms will get coded, and we'll have legit wars over the Church's resources, or we'll treat the whole enterprise like the Catholic Church in medieval times, as a broker of war and intrigue. It's a fine line between smothering people in peace and nudging people into periodic but not catastrophic religious war, but I'm confident that we'll figure it out. And if not, then we'll just do what you suggest. ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Woelfy on January 29, 2013, 05:47:26 PM
Oh yeah, the decision was made lightly and there was absolutely no circumstances leading up to it. I guess you really do know everything...

...Nawt.

Aww, little Arundel has a hurt feeling!  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eldargard on January 29, 2013, 06:08:12 PM
Nonsense. Either schisms will get coded, and we'll have legit wars over the Church's resources, or we'll treat the whole enterprise like the Catholic Church in medieval times, as a broker of war and intrigue. It's a fine line between smothering people in peace and nudging people into periodic but not catastrophic religious war, but I'm confident that we'll figure it out. And if not, then we'll just do what you suggest. ;D

I would really like to see SA gain convenient wide dominance. To that end I am also not as excited about schisms as others might be. Having a single, dominant, religion would add so much to the SMA feel of Dwight. Suddenly, characters are religious or not and pieces of the carious codes of chivalry fit so much more nicely. I would so love to see this happen!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on January 29, 2013, 08:31:57 PM
I'm with Tom in that I think religion in BM should more often serve as a flashpoint for conflict and disputes, as it did in the Middle Ages and generally everywhere humans go. Conflict over material and land often miraculously finds justification in God, err, Bloodstars. People would often join the Catholic Church just to gain political leverage, as I'm sure a large number of Dwilight nobles have done, and use said leverage to hammer on the political competition.

I think a huge fight between the northern theocracies over some minor doctrinal point would be amazing fun and fit the bill for religion. All this peaceful cooperation is kinda unrealistic.  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on January 29, 2013, 08:45:48 PM
I think a huge fight between the northern theocracies over some minor doctrinal point would be amazing fun and fit the bill for religion. All this peaceful cooperation is kinda unrealistic.  ;)

A pity Alison did not keep her schism in the north, then. For My part, I wish SA took a tyrannical, self serving turn, as the Catholic popes did. I am not too familiar with precisely how religion works in this game. Is it all RP? Or is there moneyflow involved somewhere?

#everthed'haran
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 29, 2013, 08:49:04 PM
Huge money flows to the endless money pits which some people call "temples".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on January 29, 2013, 09:39:29 PM
Aww, little Arundel has a hurt feeling!  ;)

Yes, many tears were had.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 29, 2013, 09:51:41 PM
I would really like to see SA gain convenient wide dominance. To that end I am also not as excited about schisms as others might be. Having a single, dominant, religion would add so much to the SMA feel of Dwight. Suddenly, characters are religious or not and pieces of the carious codes of chivalry fit so much more nicely. I would so love to see this happen!

I would like to see a plethora of religions. SA is a north eastern religion. An alien religion. The west lands have their own ways. Not say that Astrum hasnt had influence but mainly the north and Farronite and previously Asylon. With a weak Iashular and a republican Farronite and a smattering of temples in Asylon to D'Hara. If SA doesnt win against Aurvandiil those lands will divide into even more religions. The only way to fight uniformity is to become more diverse than SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 29, 2013, 09:56:01 PM
I would like to see a plethora of religions. SA is a north eastern religion. An alien religion. The west lands have their own ways. Not say that Astrum hasnt had influence but mainly the north and Farronite and previously Asylon. With a weak Iashular and a republican Farronite and a smattering of temples in Asylon to D'Hara. If SA doesnt win against Aurvandiil those lands will divide into even more religions. The only way to fight uniformity is to become more diverse than SA.

And yet the only way to fight those who want to destroy SA is to join up with SA, because the anti-SAers aren't very selective in their targets.

Aurvandil is one of the best thing that's happened to SA in a while, because it gives them something to unite around and because it makes joining up a lot more alluring to the non-SA states it attacks. Aurvandil doesn't help create diversity, it polarizes.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on January 29, 2013, 11:19:45 PM
And yet the only way to fight those who want to destroy SA is to join up with SA, because the anti-SAers aren't very selective in their targets.

Aurvandil is one of the best thing that's happened to SA in a while, because it gives them something to unite around and because it makes joining up a lot more alluring to the non-SA states it attacks. Aurvandil doesn't help create diversity, it polarizes.

Very astute, and well said.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 30, 2013, 12:03:48 AM
And yet the only way to fight those who want to destroy SA is to join up with SA, because the anti-SAers aren't very selective in their targets.

Aurvandil is one of the best thing that's happened to SA in a while, because it gives them something to unite around and because it makes joining up a lot more alluring to the non-SA states it attacks. Aurvandil doesn't help create diversity, it polarizes.

Yet, just in a short time Cult of Bloodmoon and Orthodox Astroism have both sprung from the loins of Astroism. I once believed that you had to join them to fight them until I realized that its a cop-out. You do not fight from within, you form your ideas, found your kingdom and give blossom to your culture and fight from the outside, without diversity Dwilight is dead, and if everyone folded as easy as a D'Haran we would be souless and without any tangible form, for the question is not 'what makes a D'Haran' but what around D'Hara makes a D'Haran, you are influenced by our neighbor your are strengthened by your unique culture, Astroism is a fact, it will not go away and I hope to the heavens it never is destroyed and made a memory, I am happy for its existence, it has formed so much of my own characters history, yet I am a man of the southern islands, born in Port Raviel and that has always guided my way through my time on Dwilight, I am a person bound by the culture, and history of the tomb islands and by being that I will never again allow Astroism to become the single dominant power on Dwilight. I have seen Melodia, and then Shadovar and then D'Hara rise from those shores and your kingdom is merely a mote in history and will D'Hara be remembered as a mighty and diverse kingdom or a mere colony of an alien religion? Asylon has chosen to form its own path we respect Astroism and find it has worth, yet we are Islanders, Thulsomans, Caerwynian and even some Eastlanders, we have a history that does not allow us to tow the line and right or wrong we will maintain and try to cultivate our own history for as long as our hands can wield sword and cut flesh.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Nosferatus on January 30, 2013, 01:11:37 AM
your post got me confused Glaumring, is it you or your character who posted it?  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on January 30, 2013, 01:51:11 AM
Yet, just in a short time Cult of Bloodmoon and Orthodox Astroism have both sprung from the loins of Astroism. I once believed that you had to join them to fight them until I realized that its a cop-out. You do not fight from within, you form your ideas, found your kingdom and give blossom to your culture and fight from the outside, without diversity Dwilight is dead, and if everyone folded as easy as a D'Haran we would be souless and without any tangible form, for the question is not 'what makes a D'Haran' but what around D'Hara makes a D'Haran, you are influenced by our neighbor your are strengthened by your unique culture, Astroism is a fact, it will not go away and I hope to the heavens it never is destroyed and made a memory, I am happy for its existence, it has formed so much of my own characters history, yet I am a man of the southern islands, born in Port Raviel and that has always guided my way through my time on Dwilight, I am a person bound by the culture, and history of the tomb islands and by being that I will never again allow Astroism to become the single dominant power on Dwilight. I have seen Melodia, and then Shadovar and then D'Hara rise from those shores and your kingdom is merely a mote in history and will D'Hara be remembered as a mighty and diverse kingdom or a mere colony of an alien religion? Asylon has chosen to form its own path we respect Astroism and find it has worth, yet we are Islanders, Thulsomans, Caerwynian and even some Eastlanders, we have a history that does not allow us to tow the line and right or wrong we will maintain and try to cultivate our own history for as long as our hands can wield sword and cut flesh.

D'Hara is not an Astroist puppet. The Prime Minister is an Elementalist. Half the nobility follow VE and the other half follow SA. Religion is usually left out of public discourse, though a little while ago there was an up-swell of skepticism regarding SA. The majority of D'Harans, Astroist or otherwise, would not tolerate the prospect of the realm becoming a theocracy. I think the nobles of DH enjoy having some religious diversity.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 30, 2013, 02:13:01 AM
Yet, just in a short time Cult of Bloodmoon and Orthodox Astroism have both sprung from the loins of Astroism.

And yet, they both hover on the verge of irrelevance. In the scope of continental politics, neither offers much. They probably add local color and RP material. But so far, neither has the power or influence to drive politics. Perhaps CoB can do some in Asylon. But OA is relegated to a meaningless fringe that serves only to  be a splinter in SAs big toe.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 30, 2013, 03:20:54 AM
And yet, they both hover on the verge of irrelevance. In the scope of continental politics, neither offers much. They probably add local color and RP material. But so far, neither has the power or influence to drive politics. Perhaps CoB can do some in Asylon. But OA is relegated to a meaningless fringe that serves only to  be a splinter in SAs big toe.

Some of our religions were not lucky enough to sprout from the first utterances of the gods when this land was formed from his word. BoC has its own history that has been in the works from the foundation of Thulsoma some 3 years ago or so. Politically we mean nothing beyond our borders, but so then does Truinism, even Verdis Elementum is barely recognized beyond a few kingdoms and survives through the good graces of my own whims in Asylon, there has been a few times I considered eradicating it from Asylon yet on the other hand realized we were strong by accepting it and its differing opinion, that we would not fall for the same trap Caerwyn did nor become a wall like Astroism. Wasn't it long ago that even SA was tolerant of another religion? I can't remember its name right now but there used to be two religions in Morek. There is also a religion in the Lurias that means nothing to the westlands, yet that doesn't diminish its importance to Dwilight.

SA is a political force, it is dominant, yet all around it people are slowly chipping away at the facade, with the Farronite 'Republic' with Swordfell, with starvation in Iashular, with Aurvandiil and Falkirkia, the independent Lurias, the fall of Solaria, with an inept Libero, with the loss of Allison Kabrinski, myself and whoever else has been chased away from SA to the very silence of the prophet on so many issues and his apparent reluctance to lead or pass the mantle. You think that D'Hara, Barca(lol) and Terran somehow weigh the scales so heavily towards SA domination? They are fickle, Chenier and his ilk are double faced cobras and merely call out to you now while there is a chance to ride on your boots never being aware that with a simple slip that they will fall beneath the Astroist toe.

Asylon does not claim for empire, nor does it preach its religion is best, we honour alliances no matter the political cost to ourselves, we defend the small and weak and we live and die by the spirit of the warrior poet. We are not popular, nor defend the best lands, we have not many alliances nor influence beyond even our own borders, yet through all this we have a consistant group of nobles that has stayed with us a long time and through thick and thin has managed to survive where many said it would be impossible, if we are here tomorrow or gone next week it does not matter, in Dwilight there is a million different victories, some are as simple as crushing or as complex as ideas that permeate the landscape like a virus.

Keep fighting, keep evolving and keep playing. Its not done yet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on January 30, 2013, 03:51:04 AM
And yet, they both hover on the verge of irrelevance. In the scope of continental politics, neither offers much. They probably add local color and RP material. But so far, neither has the power or influence to drive politics. Perhaps CoB can do some in Asylon. But OA is relegated to a meaningless fringe that serves only to  be a splinter in SAs big toe.

They're kinda new give them time...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 30, 2013, 04:03:44 AM
They're kinda new give them time...
OA may be new but Cult of Bloodmoon has been around for several months and AFAIK, not been able to expand outside of Asylon.
Quote
You think that D'Hara, Barca(lol) and Terran somehow weigh the scales so heavily towards SA domination
You like to put words in people's mouths but no one said that, actually the contrary. Barca has almost no SA, D'hara is roughly even between VE and SA, and Terran is not all SA by a long shot. Also, there may be a religion in Luria but even there SA is growing with many of its higher ranked nobles being a part of SA.
Quote
yet all around it people are slowly chipping away at the facade, with the Farronite 'Republic' with Swordfell, with starvation in Iashular, with Aurvandiil and Falkirkia, the independent Lurias, the fall of Solaria, with an inept Libero,
Iashular only needs more nobles to rule over its regions, Farronite only allows SA followers to become lords, and Swordfell only allows temples of SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 30, 2013, 04:21:16 AM
Some of our religions were not lucky enough to sprout from the first utterances of the gods when this land was formed from his word. BoC has its own history that has been in the works from the foundation of Thulsoma some 3 years ago or so. Politically we mean nothing beyond our borders, but so then does Truinism, even Verdis Elementum is barely recognized beyond a few kingdoms and survives through the good graces of my own whims in Asylon, there has been a few times I considered eradicating it from Asylon yet on the other hand realized we were strong by accepting it and its differing opinion, that we would not fall for the same trap Caerwyn did nor become a wall like Astroism. Wasn't it long ago that even SA was tolerant of another religion? I can't remember its name right now but there used to be two religions in Morek. There is also a religion in the Lurias that means nothing to the westlands, yet that doesn't diminish its importance to Dwilight.

SA is a political force, it is dominant, yet all around it people are slowly chipping away at the facade, with the Farronite 'Republic' with Swordfell, with starvation in Iashular, with Aurvandiil and Falkirkia, the independent Lurias, the fall of Solaria, with an inept Libero, with the loss of Allison Kabrinski, myself and whoever else has been chased away from SA to the very silence of the prophet on so many issues and his apparent reluctance to lead or pass the mantle. You think that D'Hara, Barca(lol) and Terran somehow weigh the scales so heavily towards SA domination? They are fickle, Chenier and his ilk are double faced cobras and merely call out to you now while there is a chance to ride on your boots never being aware that with a simple slip that they will fall beneath the Astroist toe.

Asylon does not claim for empire, nor does it preach its religion is best, we honour alliances no matter the political cost to ourselves, we defend the small and weak and we live and die by the spirit of the warrior poet. We are not popular, nor defend the best lands, we have not many alliances nor influence beyond even our own borders, yet through all this we have a consistant group of nobles that has stayed with us a long time and through thick and thin has managed to survive where many said it would be impossible, if we are here tomorrow or gone next week it does not matter, in Dwilight there is a million different victories, some are as simple as crushing or as complex as ideas that permeate the landscape like a virus.

Keep fighting, keep evolving and keep playing. Its not done yet.

You realize that Luria contains a Light and Luminary, Luria's Queen and former elder of AP just joined Sanguis Astroism, and Lurian nobles are trickling into Sanguis Astroism in a fairly steady fashion. There are some diehard AP hangers on, granted, but SA is steadily increasing in presence in Luria. Solaria's absorption into Luria Nova has not adversely affected this, in fact I would dare say that its contributing to SA's growth in the region. Aurvandil and Allison's heresy have done nothing but strengthen SA and weaken other established religions. Not to mention OA is a joke at present, their public board states "A new religion." Which is pretty bad considering all one really has to do is copy and paste SA's boards in this case, make a few cosmetic and detail oriented changes, and BAM, done.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 30, 2013, 04:51:39 AM
They're kinda new give them time...
Time will not help Orthodox Astroism. It will remain a fringe, irrelevant religion.

CoB *could* be relevant. But, for some reason, they choose not to be.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 30, 2013, 05:24:00 AM
Time will not help Orthodox Astroism. It will remain a fringe, irrelevant religion.

CoB *could* be relevant. But, for some reason, they choose not to be.

Because you would crush us out like a bug if we were more vocal. Asylon cannot fight off all of SA and their allies. We barely survived our fight with Kabrinskia, Astrum and Corsanctum. We cannot be relevant because if we were a crusade would be called and it would stamp us out. The rest of Dwilight chooses to side with the victors, if we are the losers at least we will go down as free men!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on January 30, 2013, 06:11:38 AM
Reading Glaumring's rants makes me have a newfound understanding for every tyrant who viciously stomped out opposition... ever.

I think historians have underestimated the motive of crushing annoying people in interpreting the actions of dictators of the past.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on January 30, 2013, 06:16:01 AM
Because you would crush us out like a bug if we were more vocal. Asylon cannot fight off all of SA and their allies. We barely survived our fight with Kabrinskia, Astrum and Corsanctum. We cannot be relevant because if we were a crusade would be called and it would stamp us out.

Why would SA declare a crusade on CoB, or on Asylon for that matter? There's no reason to. It was already decided when the religion was founded that it wasn't evil, nor heretical, nor a threat. And these days it's Rabisu who has the authority to declare Crusades or not, Rabisu who ate Bloodmoon Fruit with the rest of them in Asylon and was there when the Cult was founded. So, honestly, stop worrying and be as relevant as you like!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 30, 2013, 06:27:25 AM
Because you would crush us out like a bug if we were more vocal. Asylon cannot fight off all of SA and their allies. We barely survived our fight with Kabrinskia, Astrum and Corsanctum. We cannot be relevant because if we were a crusade would be called and it would stamp us out. The rest of Dwilight chooses to side with the victors, if we are the losers at least we will go down as free men!
There is a difference between being relevant and being at war with SA. If you were actively against SA, sure you would probably get in trouble with SA but if you merely convert nobles outside their theocracies, they might not be the happiest but they won't attack you over it. If CoB was political, SA doesn't care. You greatly overestimate SA's aggressiveness, we haven't even declared a crusade on OA, obvious heresy, nor declared it evil I believe.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 30, 2013, 06:27:36 AM
Why would SA declare a crusade on CoB, or on Asylon for that matter? There's no reason to. It was already decided when the religion was founded that it wasn't evil, nor heretical, nor a threat. And these days it's Rabisu who has the authority to declare Crusades or not, Rabisu who ate Bloodmoon Fruit with the rest of them in Asylon and was there when the Cult was founded. So, honestly, stop worrying and be as relevant as you like!
+1
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 30, 2013, 07:39:06 AM
Because you would crush us out like a bug if we were more vocal. Asylon cannot fight off all of SA and their allies. We barely survived our fight with Kabrinskia, Astrum and Corsanctum. We cannot be relevant because if we were a crusade would be called and it would stamp us out. The rest of Dwilight chooses to side with the victors, if we are the losers at least we will go down as free men!

We haven't even got our !@#$ together to declare a crusade on OA, the BoC would have to practically murder the Holy Prophet for SA to take action.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 30, 2013, 08:09:45 AM
We haven't even got our !@#$ together to declare a crusade on OA, the BoC would have to practically murder the Holy Prophet for SA to take action.

not for lack of trying.  You all are just too worried about what the Prophet thinks or says. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 30, 2013, 08:54:46 AM
not for lack of trying.  You all are just too worried about what the Prophet thinks or says.

Most of us could really care less.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on January 30, 2013, 09:02:14 AM
SA is only successful in that it makes those realms that adopt it popular. It doesn't get them results. In practicable terms, the only realms currently capable of achieving anything are Asylon, Aurvandil, Barca, Luria Nova and the Falkirkian Freestate. All other realms are gridlocked, and manned by small numbers of complacent nobility, who are often unable even to maintain their land.

Forming gridlocks and being popular is good for nothing. It's detrimental, even. It poses, to the characters, an existential crisis -- what are they there for? What are they meant to achieve, in an environment where they cannot lose. An environment where they cannot win. Many come to realise that the answer is nothing, and so they leave. One year from now Iashalur will have lost several of it's regions, despite having zero external threats. Same goes for Corsanctum and the Libero Empire. The nobles will just trickle out, at the same steady pace that they always have, and those who remain will be left weaker. But even that is meaningless, because, with or without the decline, the environment for that remainder is exactly the same. There is no one who is even going to bother preying on them, that is how futile their existence is. Fat lot of good popularity did them.

Morek Empire and Astrum are just a step above that. They are lucky enough to be on the fringes of the popularity zone, so that they can keep up the pretence of having an objective by engaging those outside of the bubble. But that is only a pretence. Sending 5 characters, each, to wage a war on the other side of the map is the entirety of their purpose. That may be enough 'excitement' to barter an existence of minimum sustainability from it's characters, but that is all. They will remain popular realms, without practicable value.

And so it is to Asylon, Aurvandil, Barca, etc. that characters will flock. It is there that they will stay. And it is those places which will maintain a raison d'etre. One year from now those places will be as exciting as ever, while the popular realms will be, well, popular.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: MediumTedium on January 30, 2013, 09:29:02 AM
SA is only successful in that it makes those realms that adopt it popular. It doesn't get them results. In practicable terms, the only realms currently capable of achieving anything are Asylon, Aurvandil, Barca, Luria Nova and the Falkirkian Freestate. All other realms are gridlocked, and manned by small numbers of complacent nobility, who are often unable even to maintain their land.

Forming gridlocks and being popular is good for nothing. It's detrimental, even. It poses, to the characters, an existential crisis -- what are they there for? What are they meant to achieve, in an environment where they cannot lose. An environment where they cannot win. Many come to realise that the answer is nothing, and so they leave. One year from now Iashalur will have lost several of it's regions, despite having zero external threats. Same goes for Corsanctum and the Libero Empire. The nobles will just trickle out, at the same steady pace that they always have, and those who remain will be left weaker. But even that is meaningless, because, with or without the decline, the environment for that remainder is exactly the same. There is no one who is even going to bother preying on them, that is how futile their existence is. Fat lot of good popularity did them.

Morek Empire and Astrum are just a step above that. They are lucky enough to be on the fringes of the popularity zone, so that they can keep up the pretence of having an objective by engaging those outside of the bubble. But that is only a pretence. Sending 5 characters, each, to wage a war on the other side of the map is the entirety of their purpose. That may be enough 'excitement' to barter an existence of minimum sustainability from it's characters, but that is all. They will remain popular realms, without practicable value.

And so it is to Asylon, Aurvandil, Barca, etc. that characters will flock. It is there that they will stay. And it is those places which will maintain a raison d'etre. One year from now those places will be as exciting as ever, while the popular realms will be, well, popular.

Agreed, you can see from realm statistics of active players per realm that more players are going "inactive" in SA realms while other realms are slowly gaining more people. Aurvandil sits at 62, Luria Nova 46, and Asylon at 33 while Morek and Astrum went from 45 to 32/33, even Barca is climbing from 13 to 20 so far. SA might be more popular but southern realms are a lot more fun to be in.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on January 30, 2013, 11:31:55 AM
Keep in mind that both Morek and Astrum sent a bunch of their nobles to Swordfell and Iashalur, respectively. And I'm guessing the Farronite Republic took in a few nobles from around the SA realms too. It's not that those players got bored, they just went elsewhere.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on January 30, 2013, 01:40:35 PM
Why would SA declare a crusade on CoB, or on Asylon for that matter? There's no reason to. It was already decided when the religion was founded that it wasn't evil, nor heretical, nor a threat. And these days it's Rabisu who has the authority to declare Crusades or not, Rabisu who ate Bloodmoon Fruit with the rest of them in Asylon and was there when the Cult was founded. So, honestly, stop worrying and be as relevant as you like!

But...but...his persecution complex!!!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 30, 2013, 03:08:30 PM
Keep in mind that both Morek and Astrum sent a bunch of their nobles to Swordfell and Iashalur, respectively. And I'm guessing the Farronite Republic took in a few nobles from around the SA realms too. It's not that those players got bored, they just went elsewhere.

They sent them out or they left to found more exciting realms?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on January 30, 2013, 08:04:57 PM
No, they just signed up for the respective colony efforts. Mostly people sticking with their duchy and thus moving to the new realm.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on January 30, 2013, 08:28:32 PM
Like any thread, this one has salient points and trollbait. As someone who previously sneered at SA as a soul-crushing force of fun-killing communists, I can relate to many of the perceptions being voiced here. When I decided to join SA with Malus, it was partly to confirm what I suspected that I already knew. Well, I was wrong. Any institution or force in BM of this size has its challenges. It's perfectly fine to philosophically disagree with regard to one vs. many religions. These are all matters of preference. However, it's worth clarifying for people who are intrigued that many of these comments are made out of (forgivable) ignorance or because they've been on the wrong side of an interaction. SA is no more the caricature that has come to define it than CE is.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on January 30, 2013, 09:40:18 PM
Like any thread, this one has salient points and trollbait. As someone who previously sneered at SA as a soul-crushing force of fun-killing communists, I can relate to many of the perceptions being voiced here. When I decided to join SA with Malus, it was partly to confirm what I suspected that I already knew. Well, I was wrong. Any institution or force in BM of this size has its challenges. It's perfectly fine to philosophically disagree with regard to one vs. many religions. These are all matters of preference. However, it's worth clarifying for people who are intrigued that many of these comments are made out of (forgivable) ignorance or because they've been on the wrong side of an interaction. SA is no more the caricature that has come to define it than CE is.

+1

Heck, I even helped FOUND a competing religion, Triunism. We pretty well kept SA as an irrelevance in Terran for a long time, and locked it out of Maroccidens.

Then I realized Triunism was completely boring, nothing more than a little local flavor with no significance. I joined SA, and realized that I had never really played the religion game in BM until then.

You too can experience this wonderfulness if you join SA today! The Prophet Mathurin wants you!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 30, 2013, 10:08:29 PM
BoC has been fun on a different level. Though I did enjoy SA , mainly I had done what I wanted and then wanted change. SA provided comfort, I find though that instead of seeking comfort I will instead choose even a detrimental path merely to add drama and develop my character a different way. BoC is very geared towards missionary work, we constantly try to preach wherever we can because ultimately we believe that unlike other religions ours has tangible results and faith is apparent upon eating the sacred fruit. We believe that SA is hindered by its mere belief in the stars, by eating the sacred fruit you could travel to them, speak with them and bypass the prophet altogether. Our faith resides in the fruit, just as a catholic will drink wine and bread as a symbol, in order to have more fun we add in some lunacy and hallucinations.

I have some more ideas regarding the way I want it to go and play on the 'drug addiction' side, the fall of man and the mind and body and hopefully move out of the stage of light and enlightenment and move towards darkness and neurosis. There cannot be redemption without a fall.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 30, 2013, 11:02:21 PM
Like any thread, this one has salient points and trollbait. As someone who previously sneered at SA as a soul-crushing force of fun-killing communists, I can relate to many of the perceptions being voiced here. When I decided to join SA with Malus, it was partly to confirm what I suspected that I already knew. Well, I was wrong. Any institution or force in BM of this size has its challenges. It's perfectly fine to philosophically disagree with regard to one vs. many religions. These are all matters of preference. However, it's worth clarifying for people who are intrigued that many of these comments are made out of (forgivable) ignorance or because they've been on the wrong side of an interaction. SA is no more the caricature that has come to define it than CE is.
+1. What I hate are people that post things like Kwanstein and MediumTedium. It's alway they are perfect, and that SA, in this example, sucks instead of just accepting that they are both fun in their own way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 30, 2013, 11:14:20 PM
+1

Heck, I even helped FOUND a competing religion, Triunism. We pretty well kept SA as an irrelevance in Terran for a long time, and locked it out of Maroccidens.

Then I realized Triunism was completely boring, nothing more than a little local flavor with no significance. I joined SA, and realized that I had never really played the religion game in BM until then.

You too can experience this wonderfulness if you join SA today! The Prophet Mathurin wants you!

I pretty much agree, but I haven't found the resolve to do the leap myself... thus far. And I doubt I will, unless Aurvandil pushes us too far.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 31, 2013, 01:50:35 AM
I pretty much agree, but I haven't found the resolve to do the leap myself... thus far. And I doubt I will, unless Aurvandil pushes us too far.

Only when convenient eh Chenier?  ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 31, 2013, 02:20:39 AM
Only when convenient eh Chenier?  ::)

Of course. It's all about weighting the options to one's personal benefits. I'd rather be my own boss, influencing in a regional power bloc, but if forced to choose between a lower-ranking member of a more powerful institution and power block, or total annihilation and loss of influence and power, the choice seems rather easy. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on January 31, 2013, 04:03:11 AM
I just want to share my sudden, profound appreciation for the prophecies: specifically Bengt Algotsson's interpretation of the second one. I'm incredibly impressed, wanting to ride the SA train all the way to the end of the line. Get ready for a new theocracy! :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 31, 2013, 05:00:33 AM
Woohoo!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on January 31, 2013, 09:08:13 AM
I pretty much agree, but I haven't found the resolve to do the leap myself... thus far. And I doubt I will, unless Aurvandil pushes us too far.

Dude.

Join us.

One of us... one of us...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on January 31, 2013, 09:08:50 AM
Finally really breaking into Paisly, and with a very experienced priest to boot, would, methinks, be of great value to SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 31, 2013, 01:11:28 PM
Finally really breaking into Paisly, and with a very experienced priest to boot, would, methinks, be of great value to SA.

I don't want to be a mere puppet... if I join, I would need some assurances to be rather high up. Switching faiths will also result in a loss of oratory skill I believe, which would be a pain (I'd hate to be a less effective ambassador). I'd also need to, you know, actually read up on SA, which I never got my head around to doing.

And Machiavel has so much history with VE... he's the one who brought it to D'Hara, Barca, and a wee bit to the South-East. He used to be a very active proselytizer. He was the only priest south of Caerwyn for very, very long, and he turned D'Hara, at one point, into a nearly 100% elementalist state. It wouldn't feel right to turn back on that. And I can't hide I've used Verdis Elementum against Aurvandil of a few occasions, though I did use restrain to prevent backlash against the followers who do live there.

It's a scary leap. If I jump, I can make D'Hara a strongly SA realm. Which obviously comes with its load of advantages. Though it would change the realm forever.

And dammit, I don't have time to read up all of SA's pages! Not now, at least. Gotta say that's probably one of the biggest factors. It's likely to happen, though, one day. With Aurvandil betraying us, and the Lurias joining it more and more, the reasonable thing to do sounds like joining it more ourselves as well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on January 31, 2013, 03:30:12 PM
Switching faiths will also result in a loss of oratory skill I believe, which would be a pain (I'd hate to be a less effective ambassador).

I have no idea where you got such a ridiculous idea. Skills have nothing whatsoever to do with guild, religion, or realm membership. They are stuff you know how to do.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on January 31, 2013, 04:32:49 PM
I have no idea where you got such a ridiculous idea. Skills have nothing whatsoever to do with guild, religion, or realm membership. They are stuff you know how to do.

He'd have to drop his priest class to leave VE. I think that's what he's referring to– not precisely the religion, but the class.

The priest class description says there are penalties if you drop it; I always assumed that referred to oratory skills.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on January 31, 2013, 04:50:50 PM
He'd have to drop his priest class to leave VE. I think that's what he's referring to– not precisely the religion, but the class.

The priest class description says there are penalties if you drop it; I always assumed that referred to oratory skills.

No...that's not the case either.

And I believe that the penalties mentioned were intended to be purely player/RP based, from some things I recall Tom saying a few years ago.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on January 31, 2013, 06:12:23 PM
No...that's not the case either.

And I believe that the penalties mentioned were intended to be purely player/RP based, from some things I recall Tom saying a few years ago.

Yeah, I'm not sure what that text actually refers to. It should probably be removed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on January 31, 2013, 06:19:59 PM
And dammit, I don't have time to read up all of SA's pages! Not now, at least. Gotta say that's probably one of the biggest factors.

Just do what I do, and don't bother reading anything.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 31, 2013, 10:52:16 PM
Just do what I do, and don't bother reading anything.

Not my approach.

No...that's not the case either.

And I believe that the penalties mentioned were intended to be purely player/RP based, from some things I recall Tom saying a few years ago.

Well, I was thinking that because that's what someone had said in another thread. Happy to learn it is not true.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 31, 2013, 11:50:50 PM
Just do what I do, and don't bother reading anything.
It must work, you are the one with the power to declare a crusade.
Not my approach.
The charter and maybe the prophecies are all you really need.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on February 04, 2013, 12:46:04 AM
Farronite senators have passed into law allowing non SA priests to preach but only if the local senator allows. And as I predicted king Turin is all hot and bothered.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on February 04, 2013, 01:57:12 AM
He isn't the only one. Maybe the leadership of the Republic should've thought about their previous commitments on the matter before voting to overturn them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 04, 2013, 02:01:03 AM
I think it is about time we burn the republic and rebuild the theocracy.  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 04, 2013, 02:18:44 AM
And you all laughed and sneered at Brance when he predicted that something like this would happen...

All you noob elders, and your republican backgrounds. "They have laws to prevent this, they'll be fine...." pfftt... when will you ever learn?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on February 04, 2013, 02:31:57 AM
Nothing has been overturned. Never did we ever say no other religion could preach our lands. But I did start the referendum to see what our Lords wanted.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on February 04, 2013, 02:43:04 AM
I think it is about time we burn the republic and rebuild the theocracy.  ;)

Right after you beat down Aurvandil, right?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 04, 2013, 02:55:44 AM
Right after you beat down Aurvandil, right?
I wouldn't be so sure of that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 04, 2013, 03:35:47 AM
Why wait?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 04, 2013, 03:51:45 AM
Better to get rid of cancer before it spreads.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 04, 2013, 03:52:13 AM
Why wait?

Not like they're dedicated to much in the South, right?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 04, 2013, 04:25:03 AM
Better to get rid of cancer before it spreads.

It's already terminal... Its just a matter of time now.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 04, 2013, 06:57:20 AM
Honestly, Hireshmont now wants to see FR destroyed.

He staked a lot on the argument that the previous situation was salvageable. To have it now backfire like this is bad news bears. Time to save face by burning the evidence, eh?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on February 04, 2013, 07:34:03 AM
Why wait?

Yes, why wait for something that won't ever happen. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xECUrlnXCqk

It's already terminal... Its just a matter of time now.

You guys are giving Glaumring some serious mahogany. If that's not a sign that you're on the wrong path I dunno what is.

I'm pretty interested in seeing how this all plays out, personally. SA can't erase a realm off the face of Dwilight; there's no option SA can check to murder all the nobles in a realm they conquer, and they don't have the nobles to hold all the land (See also: The dead zone surrounding Iashalur). I was hoping to fight Aurvandil myself, hence why Paul spent over a month hanging out in Terran waiting for everyone to get their asses into gear, but I'll settle for whatever giant looming threat comes his way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on February 04, 2013, 08:15:02 AM
Honestly, Hireshmont now wants to see FR destroyed.

He staked a lot on the argument that the previous situation was salvageable. To have it now backfire like this is bad news bears. Time to save face by burning the evidence, eh?

And which previous situation was that?

FR freely gave the church many of the terms they wanted as they would have been given anyways. Not one letter has ever been sent back from the elders give our republic the 'Ok' to live. FR is a free state to rule as the governing boby of senators agree.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on February 04, 2013, 10:50:52 AM
Well, we're long overdue for another crusade and it seems that for once we all pretty much agree on the target... This should be fun  :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Galvez on February 04, 2013, 05:51:19 PM
It is about time SA turns against each other. Like the Christian Kings of medieval Europe.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 04, 2013, 06:24:21 PM
It is about time SA turns against each other. Like the Christian Kings of medieval Europe.

It's not like it's never happened before, and it will happen again in the future.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 04, 2013, 06:38:10 PM
It is about time SA turns against each other. Like the Christian Kings of medieval Europe.
I disagree. I refer to Bedwyr's signature which says some thing like, "You know what the chain of command is mm? Its the chain I beat you with until you know who is in command." or something like that. Basically they just need to be put in their place for committing acts against the church.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 04, 2013, 07:13:33 PM
I don't even understand which faiths they want to let in. The druggies?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 04, 2013, 07:19:24 PM
Looks like CoB, yes. Also, SA 'turning against each other' looks a lot like SA vs FR.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 04, 2013, 07:53:53 PM
And which previous situation was that?

FR freely gave the church many of the terms they wanted as they would have been given anyways. Not one letter has ever been sent back from the elders give our republic the 'Ok' to live. FR is a free state to rule as the governing boby of senators agree.

That is not true.

Hireshmont did send an okay to Khari– albeit an ambiguous one, given that FR was pretty ambiguous about their own position.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eldargard on February 04, 2013, 08:38:15 PM
It is about time SA turns against each other. Like the Christian Kings of medieval Europe.

This is exactly why I would love to see SA, as a single religion, be dominant across Dwilight. Once that happens, what choice is there? There is no longer SA and non -SA realms to stand off against each other. Generally, barring any threats to the church, the SA countries will be back to scheming and fighting amongst themselves. The French and English were both Christian nations but fought bitterly. Aside for when something like a crusade or excommunication came up, then they would unite in the name of the church and take care of business. Once done, back to the bitter fighting! Plus, it makes religion portable. I can simply chose to be a religious man and that will be held true most everywhere - just like in medieval Europe. I can see so many ways this would be cool in my head and just wished I could express them all...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: MediumTedium on February 04, 2013, 09:55:52 PM
Even if something happen like war between them (SA) i doubt its gonna do much, it will be over very fast and everything will be back to normal unless we see something like Astrum vs Morek or something like that. I dont think smaller realms opposing SA to some degree would not have an effect on anything.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 04, 2013, 10:20:33 PM
You fail to take history into account.

The other thing about the 'entire dwilight SA' thing is how dead do you want Dwilight to be to get to that point.SA has had years to takeover and I dont think many of us want to wait 4 more years until they do. I have heard this line of logic before when I played UO, if everyone would just join the big guild the real fighting can begin, nope... It doesnt work like that, SA will continue to bleed break apart reform deform and change.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: MediumTedium on February 04, 2013, 11:02:32 PM
I agree on that, if entire Dwilight became SA that would be no fun i bet 40% of Dwilight population would go to other continents.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 04, 2013, 11:04:07 PM
Highly doubtful.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Galvez on February 04, 2013, 11:36:08 PM
When SA takes a more aggressive approach to convert Dwilight, they will receive more and more resistance. Even if they succeed to destroy every other religion, the pagans will hide in the dark to scheme. They will wait for SA members to turn their religious differences at each other and when it is the right time the pagans will strike hard and form new organised religions to combat SA at the moment their cohesion is dead and there is no strong leadership to unify the faithful against this new threat. That will be their ultimate downfall.  ::) I got dragged away somewhat in that last sentence.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 04, 2013, 11:43:58 PM
When SA takes a more aggressive approach to convert Dwilight, they will receive more and more resistance. Even if they succeed to destroy every other religion, the pagans will hide in the dark to scheme. They will wait for SA members to turn their religious differences at each other and when it is the right time the pagans will strike hard and form new organised religions to combat SA at the moment their cohesion is dead and there is no strong leadership to unify the faithful against this new threat. That will be their ultimate downfall.  ::) I got dragged away somewhat in that last sentence.
haha yeah right. Extremely hard organization and everyone in power would likely be SA considering most are now.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 04, 2013, 11:50:03 PM
Don't be fooled by their membership, Penchant. There are a significant number of "believers for convenience" in SA. If there wee other viable options for them, they would leave.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 04, 2013, 11:55:18 PM
Don't be fooled by their membership, Penchant. There are a significant number of "believers for convenience" in SA. If there wee other viable options for them, they would leave.
I am aware of that but I don't see other viable options ever happening without there ever being a unified religion of the south.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 05, 2013, 12:03:44 AM
Then it is like a cancer, you live with the dying tissue until it kills you, or you choose to cut it out. I have nothing against SA fighting to take over Dwilight, I think it's great, I think SA is great. I am glad they are on Dwilight, but in my own case I have found it is more fun for myself to play as an underdog on the other side than to be the topdog. Plus, I prefer creating kingdoms and religions than to sitting around being told what to do. I am a noble not a peasant, I demand power and shall have it by my birthright, the rest of you can follow the prophet or a single religion, not I... I am a free man!   ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on February 05, 2013, 03:38:26 AM
Don't be fooled by their membership, Penchant. There are a significant number of "believers for convenience" in SA. If there wee other viable options for them, they would leave.

This is definitely true. If a particularly politically potent religion came along, we would see SA hemorrhage members.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 05, 2013, 03:40:14 AM
This is definitely true. If a particularly politically potent religion came along, we would see SA hemorrhage members.
But as long as the south is a bunch of tiny religions, that will never happen.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 05, 2013, 03:49:13 AM
I don't know that I would say "hemorhage". It would lose some, to be sure.

I would imagine that a lot of those who leave would be those who claim they don't like the politics. So they will leave and join some apolitical religion. Which will suck, because only the politically active religions are interesting to the players, despite what they claim. And it will die on the vine. And we'll be back to SA...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on February 05, 2013, 03:57:11 AM
I don't know that I would say "hemorhage". It would lose some, to be sure.

I would imagine that a lot of those who leave would be those who claim they don't like the politics. So they will leave and join some apolitical religion. Which will suck, because only the politically active religions are interesting to the players, despite what they claim. And it will die on the vine. And we'll be back to SA...

I agree, boring religions die fast. But if there were some hypothetical second religion that had clout and promised ultimate power, wealth, virgins, etc., I think SA would certainly significantly sink for the convenience factor. Ismail, as a perennial pragmatist would probably consider jumping ship if it would benefit him, though he would never admit that, eve to himself. Honor and all that!  :D

It would be cool to see some religious movement sweep the south and unite all the smaller religions, but I don't really know what could accomplish that. I'm enjoying the fundamentalism of the Bloodspeakers on BT, maybe some similar grand old pagan revival could unite against SA and provide a viable counterweight.

Hmm, I wonder what would happen if CoB, VE and AP had lovechildren...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 05, 2013, 04:31:08 AM
Hmmm. The needle in Rabisu's Crusade Compass is starting to point in a new direction.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on February 05, 2013, 04:56:53 AM
I agree, boring religions die fast. But if there were some hypothetical second religion that had clout and promised ultimate power, wealth, virgins, etc., I think SA would certainly significantly sink for the convenience factor. Ismail, as a perennial pragmatist would probably consider jumping ship if it would benefit him, though he would never admit that, eve to himself. Honor and all that!  :D

It would be cool to see some religious movement sweep the south and unite all the smaller religions, but I don't really know what could accomplish that. I'm enjoying the fundamentalism of the Bloodspeakers on BT, maybe some similar grand old pagan revival could unite against SA and provide a viable counterweight.

Hmm, I wonder what would happen if CoB, VE and AP had lovechildren...

Here Allison! C'mere girl! C'mere! *Whistles*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 05, 2013, 07:36:47 AM
Hmmm. The needle in Rabisu's Crusade Compass is starting to point in a new direction.

DEATH TO THE FARRONITE REPUBLIC. DEATH!!!!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on February 05, 2013, 07:48:14 AM
I agree, boring religions die fast. But if there were some hypothetical second religion that had clout and promised ultimate power, wealth, virgins, etc., I think SA would certainly significantly sink for the convenience factor. Ismail, as a perennial pragmatist would probably consider jumping ship if it would benefit him, though he would never admit that, eve to himself. Honor and all that!  :D

It would be cool to see some religious movement sweep the south and unite all the smaller religions, but I don't really know what could accomplish that. I'm enjoying the fundamentalism of the Bloodspeakers on BT, maybe some similar grand old pagan revival could unite against SA and provide a viable counterweight.

Hmm, I wonder what would happen if CoB, VE and AP had lovechildren...

SA would kill anything that started to do that before it could really get its momentum going, is the only problem.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 05, 2013, 10:12:54 AM
Not if it sets up far enough! We already saw that SA has a problem projecting (military/crusade) power too far south.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 05, 2013, 02:23:31 PM
They didnt even have to have a religion and SA is all over them like flies...  :o
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on February 05, 2013, 02:27:14 PM
Hmmm. The needle in Rabisu's Crusade Compass is starting to point in a new direction.

I think it's time for a new unique item called Rabisu's Compass of Crusading.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 05, 2013, 05:20:11 PM
SA would kill anything that started to do that before it could really get its momentum going, is the only problem.

Hey Perth.

Join SA.

It's what all the cool politicians are doing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 05, 2013, 05:33:02 PM
Actually all the cool ones have started their own religions. 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 05, 2013, 06:45:06 PM
Actually all the cool ones have started their own religions. 8)
He said the cool polticians not the bat!@#$ crazy ones no one outside of Asylon trusts.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on February 05, 2013, 07:03:05 PM
He said the cool polticians not the bat!@#$ crazy ones no trusts.

Wrong, I trust him. Both IC and OOC.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 05, 2013, 07:04:46 PM
Well, maybe someone trusts him, but that doesn't mean the rest of that isn't true...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on February 05, 2013, 07:14:08 PM
Well regardless of how all this goes down, Khari feels she is in the right and following the Bloodstars. And boy this is the most vocal she has ever been.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 05, 2013, 07:16:11 PM
And Gustav's tired of dealing with zealots who would only drive away newcomers to the faith.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 05, 2013, 07:22:05 PM
That.... doesn't make any sense.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 05, 2013, 08:08:01 PM
ooc, yeah, it doesn't make sense. But we're talking IC about my character's feelings regarding the matter, which is much more subjective.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on February 05, 2013, 11:29:54 PM
It's funny, I remember Constantine being seen as a "moderate" against Allison's fanaticism and apparently now Constantine is one of the "zealots".  :o

How times change...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 06, 2013, 12:02:48 AM
Wrong, I trust him. Both IC and OOC.

Thats my boy! 8)

WAAAARGGGHhhhhh!!!!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vessol on February 06, 2013, 12:40:10 AM
Samos is stuck between being very conservative and a strongly religious Astroist and supporting his realm and the idea of Republicanism.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 06, 2013, 12:54:39 AM
]
Wrong, I trust him. Both IC and OOC.
Fixed
He said the cool polticians not the bat!@#$ crazy ones no one outside of Asylon trusts.
[/quote
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on February 06, 2013, 01:15:32 AM
]Fixed
He said the cool polticians not the bat!@#$ crazy ones no one outside of Asylon trusts.


hahaha, that I cant deny =)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 06, 2013, 07:31:29 AM
Samos is stuck between being very conservative and a strongly religious Astroist and supporting his realm and the idea of Republicanism.

Then maybe Samos should have fought a little harder to not send a giant "Frack you" to the only Elder who actually fought for the possibility of faithful Republicanism.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on February 06, 2013, 01:27:01 PM
Then maybe Samos should have fought a little harder to not send a giant "Frack you" to the only Elder who actually fought for the possibility of faithful Republicanism.

Not the only one in favor of it. Just the most vocal about it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 06, 2013, 01:33:05 PM
And now you see what happens when you try to mix religion and republics. Silly republicans. Theocracies ftw!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 06, 2013, 01:34:48 PM
And now you see what happens when you try to mix religion and republics. Silly republicans. Theocracies ftw!

The last Theocracy, Kabrinskia, served as a rallying point for a heretical splintering of the faith. No Kabrinskia = no Orthodox Astromancy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 06, 2013, 01:41:40 PM
It was bound to happen with or without Kabrinskia. All it took was Allison getting permanently removed from power in SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 06, 2013, 01:42:18 PM
The last Theocracy, Kabrinskia, served as a rallying point for a heretical splintering of the faith. No Kabrinskia = no Orthodox Astromancy.

The last theocracy delayed the heretical splintering of the faith by giving Allison a cool toy to play with. When the toy broke, splintering duly ensued.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on February 06, 2013, 01:58:21 PM
It's funny, I remember Constantine being seen as a "moderate" against Allison's fanaticism and apparently now Constantine is one of the "zealots".  :o

How times change...

THE HAMMER OF THE AUSTERE.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on February 06, 2013, 02:21:39 PM
The last Theocracy, Kabrinskia, served as a rallying point for a heretical splintering of the faith. No Kabrinskia = no Orthodox Astromancy.

Because OA is doing so much these days.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 06, 2013, 05:31:11 PM
Not the only one in favor of it. Just the most vocal about it.

Oh, I know. Still tho--- hireshmont feels quite wounded
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vessol on February 08, 2013, 12:19:10 AM
Then maybe Samos should have fought a little harder to not send a giant "Frack you" to the only Elder who actually fought for the possibility of faithful Republicanism.

I think I was the only one who vocally opposed the proposed law when it was brought up for vote.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: MediumTedium on February 08, 2013, 12:31:24 AM
So... is Libero going to become a part of Morek or what?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 08, 2013, 01:33:39 AM
So... is Libero going to become a part of Morek or what?
By war, yes.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on February 08, 2013, 03:42:46 AM
Gotta say... that is quite the pair of balls on Ingi.  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 08, 2013, 07:38:42 AM
.... yeah... what's up with Libero?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: MediumTedium on February 08, 2013, 02:37:41 PM
.... yeah... what's up with Libero?

It seems that Morek Empire Ruler tried to "bribe" Libero Empire Ruler to join rest of the Morek Empire. Libero Empire Ruler would get Duchy in Morek if he accepted i believe and he did not want that. So it seems Morek will try to annex them by force now.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 08, 2013, 02:43:34 PM
It seems that Morek Empire Ruler tried to "bribe" Libero Empire King to join rest of the Morek Empire. Libero Empire Ruler would get Duchy in Morek if he accepted i believe and he did not want that. So it seems Morek will try to annex them by force now.

It is worth nothing that Libero dissolved the federation, automatically starting the war, and not the other way around.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 08, 2013, 02:45:44 PM
That will make a good epitaph for the Liberans.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: MediumTedium on February 08, 2013, 05:36:35 PM
It is worth nothing that Libero dissolved the federation, automatically starting the war, and not the other way around.

Well i bet Morek would declare war anyway because they did not want to become a part of Morek Empire.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 08, 2013, 05:43:41 PM
Well i bet Morek would declare war anyway because they did not want to become a part of Morek Empire.

But they didn't. And now, they don't need to.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: MediumTedium on February 08, 2013, 06:38:22 PM
They would eventually and this was honorable move from Libero to dissolve alliance. I would do it too if i was ruler and some other realm tried to bribe me, i would not keep alliance with them thats for sure.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 08, 2013, 06:46:54 PM
Bribery is an ugly way of looking at it. Ugly and unfortunate.

There were those in Morek who wanted no war with Libero, but when you break federation the issue is forced.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 08, 2013, 07:47:45 PM
Unless you are Iashular  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on February 08, 2013, 08:55:54 PM
Unless you are Iashular  :P

I'm Iashaluri. Please pity me
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 09, 2013, 02:45:39 AM
They would eventually and this was honorable move from Libero to dissolve alliance. I would do it too if i was ruler and some other realm tried to bribe me, i would not keep alliance with them thats for sure.
He declared war over it, not dissolve alliance. It may be because they dissolved a federation they were stupid to get into but nonetheless, they declared war over instead of working it out.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: MediumTedium on February 09, 2013, 03:54:53 AM
He declared war over it, not dissolve alliance. It may be because they dissolved a federation they were stupid to get into but nonetheless, they declared war over instead of working it out.

I doubt this would be worked out peacefully. I think Morek would demand some if not most of the regions of Libero Empire and Libero would not agree and then war would happen.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 09, 2013, 04:10:59 AM
I doubt this would be worked out peacefully. I think Morek would demand some if not most of the regions of Libero Empire and Libero would not agree and then war would happen.
Doesn't matter, with the current situation, LE is the aggressor because there isn't anything that actually suggests that other than Morek is big enough to bully them so why not?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on February 10, 2013, 01:37:59 AM
They would eventually and this was honorable move from Libero to dissolve alliance. I would do it too if i was ruler and some other realm tried to bribe me, i would not keep alliance with them thats for sure.

I agree. If a monarch's sense of sovereignty is directly threatened, through 'bribery' or force, I can definitely see their princely conscience compelling them to war out of sheer indignation.

..but it doesn't seem like a very good idea strategically!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on February 10, 2013, 02:04:05 AM
..but it doesn't seem like a very good idea strategically!

Theodred tried pleading to the rulers of Dwilight, before the declaration of war. However, the location of his realm and the time he dedicated to pleading both condemned him to death. If he waited it out, he'd have had more opportunity to survive. Oh well, I suppose.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 10, 2013, 02:17:19 AM
Uh... he could have just waited it out. Morek's offer didn't sound that aggressive at all. Seems like he wanted his realm to die more than Morek did.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 10, 2013, 07:28:49 AM
Uh... he could have just waited it out. Morek's offer didn't sound that aggressive at all. Seems like he wanted his realm to die more than Morek did.
I agree. It was a preposition/offer not a threat really.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 10, 2013, 03:14:54 PM
If I was Libero I'd probably want to commit suicide out of shear boredom too..
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 10, 2013, 10:40:14 PM
If I was Libero I'd probably want to commit suicide out of shear boredom too..
Go away please. That is another of your the north sucks because of the peace blah blah things that just gets annoying.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 11, 2013, 12:50:25 AM
Yeah it has nothing to do with my historic dislike of Libero for the time I ruled a small insignificant kingdom on the edge of their land was maligned , ignored and had Liberons plotting to take the kingdom by force. Oh, how I wish we had instead stayed to fight instead of the failed Summerdale experiment. One day I will return to Storms keep and there refound my kingdom and like tendrils strike out and rule the entire north under the banner of the sacred Bloodmoon.... Muahhahahahahahahah
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on February 11, 2013, 02:01:11 PM
Quote from: Mathurin
If she had even a single insight into the Stars that we of this Church have not, that alone would have merited its existence.  However, her only defence of her sect was that it would be politically embarrassing if we were to declare a crusade against her, and fail.  She has no faith.

'Orthodox Astroism' has no existence other than to be an instrument of Allison Kabrinski's profane desire for personal power, and no purpose other than to wrest influence and believers away from Sanguis Astroism. I have rarely declared another religion to be evil. In this case, I must make such a proclamation.

Oh snap.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on February 11, 2013, 02:10:42 PM
Boom.    ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 11, 2013, 03:11:20 PM
Its good to see that Mathurin can be politcal and twist the truth as well.  I had began to think he was a bit of a bore...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on February 11, 2013, 03:24:02 PM
I've lately found that when Mathurin does deign to write a letter, they're masterful in provoking comment, thought, or action. Usually in ways that are contradictory. He's been walking the line between a figurehead who retains much of his authority because of his detachment from daily affairs, and a driver of events, quite well. That hasn't always been the case.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 11, 2013, 03:30:18 PM
He is very good about that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 11, 2013, 08:49:47 PM
Honestly, Mathurin plays the religion leader/founder better than any player I've seen it that role. I've been genuinely impressed/annoyed by it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 11, 2013, 10:31:08 PM
Honestly, Mathurin plays the religion leader/founder better than any player I've seen it that role. I've been genuinely impressed/annoyed by it.

IT helps to have a large religion that is able to go on without him.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 11, 2013, 11:08:57 PM
IT helps to have a large religion that is able to go on without him.
I think he is actually talking about his great skill in the way he talks in his letters. The size of your religion shouldn't matter about that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 11, 2013, 11:14:25 PM
I think he is actually talking about his great skill in the way he talks in his letters. The size of your religion shouldn't matter about that.

I'm not questioning his skill. I'm just saying that the form of a religion limits how "great" the leader or founder can be.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 11, 2013, 11:16:56 PM
I'm not questioning his skill. I'm just saying that the form of a religion limits how "great" the leader or founder can be.
I disagree. Its the leader which makes that all happen which is why so there are so few successful religions. Takes a lot of work to form your religion to where you can be in Mathurins position of leader that need not lead most the time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 11, 2013, 11:26:48 PM
I disagree. Its the leader which makes that all happen which is why so there are so few successful religions. Takes a lot of work to form your religion to where you can be in Mathurins position of leader that need not lead most the time.

If you claim that Mathurin is what allowed SA to become big, then I would challenge that claim. A bad leader could have made it fail, but one would not have needed to be exceptionally skilled to make it grow big. Circumstances created SA, not Mathurin.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 11, 2013, 11:28:56 PM
If you claim that Mathurin is what allowed SA to become big, then I would challenge that claim. A bad leader could have made it fail, but one would not have needed to be exceptionally skilled to make it grow big. Circumstances created SA, not Mathurin.
I am not claiming Mathurin made SA big, but I am claiming that he formed the system of the church in a way that he doesn't need to do everything or even much at all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 11, 2013, 11:45:42 PM
It did take both circumstances and leadership. Without the semi-mythical leadership of Mathurin, the religion could easily have fractured. Mathurin doesn't say much, so when he does say something, people pay attention. And it's obvious that he is paying attention, and not just ignoring everything. He comments in ways that get people thinking, and moving in the appropriate direction, without obvious pushes and orders. It is a very deft touch, and highly effective.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 12, 2013, 04:44:56 AM
Yes, +1 to Mathurin's skill. Mmm, crusade!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on February 12, 2013, 08:07:53 PM
Mathurin doesn't say much, so when he does say something, people pay attention. And it's obvious that he is paying attention, and not just ignoring everything. He comments in ways that get people thinking, and moving in the appropriate direction, without obvious pushes and orders. It is a very deft touch, and highly effective.

That's pretty much it. I initially assumed the player was just refusing to let go, but barely paying attention to the game. Happy to have been proven wrong.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 13, 2013, 04:57:41 AM
He really does take such a minimalist approach that he leaves all the real decisions in everyone else's hands, most of the time. Like this OA thing. Sure they're evil, okay, but that doesn't mean it warrants a Crusade. Lots of things are evil. So nothing actually changes, unless the elders and everyone else make changes happen.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ironsides on February 27, 2013, 06:46:43 PM
Theocrats are having a heyday with Swordfell's crisis...

Beware theocrats, the Bogeyman is going to get you!

Quote
Letter from Bowie Ironsides
Message sent to everyone in your realm (16 recipients)

Lord Creed,

We have earned a new title to wear, we are the 'Bogeymen of Astromancy!'

Apparently, in Astromancer communities, whenever there is illness or crop failure, or when items go missing without explanation, or when relationships fail or if people do not earn what they believe entitled to it is all because of us! They curse us as agents of their superstitious ire!

Amusing, albeit concerning.

Bowie Ironsides
Noble
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on February 27, 2013, 09:30:59 PM
Well I was happy to send Farronite army your way but after creeds letter to swordfell to many complained and Gustav turned the force back. I would have stayed longer but orders had been given...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ironsides on February 28, 2013, 04:07:39 AM

We will cook something up and let you know  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 28, 2013, 04:19:04 PM
Well I was happy to send Farronite army your way but after creeds letter to swordfell to many complained and Gustav turned the force back. I would have stayed longer but orders had been given...

To be honest I never quite understood how my letter had anything to do with the Farronite army to turn back. I t had nothing to do with religion or about me claiming any lands but it is what it is. NO big deal I already have other actions in motion I am just getting bored as a player listening to all this complaining in Swordfell.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 28, 2013, 04:24:19 PM
The fact that an army of a faithful realm was coming to depose a duke of another faithful realm would have been reason enough. If you had not sent that letter, people would have found out after the fact, but you sent it out, so I basically pulled major damage control for my realm. Luckily that worked better than I thought it would....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 28, 2013, 04:28:00 PM
I t had nothing to do with religion

EVERYTHING has to do with religion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 28, 2013, 04:32:57 PM
Indeed it does.

But that doesn't stop some heretics from trying to claim otherwise.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on February 28, 2013, 04:49:46 PM
The fact that an army of a faithful realm was coming to depose a duke of another faithful realm would have been reason enough. If you had not sent that letter, people would have found out after the fact, but you sent it out, so I basically pulled major damage control for my realm. Luckily that worked better than I thought it would....

Oh I see you got pushed around by the church typical  as for why I sent out a letter .  I sent the letter out to give him a chance  guess being a nice guy does not pay off lesson learned.

It was not like your realm was doing it out of the goodness of your heart I was going to pay you a good amount of food or gold for your services but never could get a exact number you leader takes forever to respond to messages.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 28, 2013, 06:05:43 PM
Actually, it was the other way around... you never answered our questions...

Either way, bringing an external force to an internal conflict is always a highly politicized move, especially if it brings followers of the same religion into conflict. Had that letter not been sent, our army would have been able to get to Balance's Retreat (though whether the units would have lasted longer than a day or two because of morale issues is another can of worms) before anyone could have found out. The aftermath would of course be the curb-stomping of the Farronite Republic by SA realms, but we would have been able to get to the region.

That didn't happen though. What did happen was you sent the letter, making our coming relatively useless because of forewarning. Gustav acted, playing the part of outraged judge who wasn't informed of these developments, threatening to ban anyone who went into Balance's Retreat. It worked, much better than I expected, actually gaining Gustav some goodwill (I believe, at least that was the general feeling of the letters which were sent to the full member body of the Church). And here we are.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on February 28, 2013, 06:18:50 PM
Sooo, how 'bout dat sermon? Riviting stuff amiright?  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 28, 2013, 07:19:19 PM
Still haven't read it...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on February 28, 2013, 07:53:57 PM
Still haven't read it...

Roleplay from Mathurin Hossenfeffer   (1 day, 9 hours ago)
Message sent to everyone in the region Mimer (14 recipients)
Mathurin allowed the excited hubbub to continue a while, then calmly took up a position at the pulpit and waited.

Voices gradually diminished as he was noticed by more and more of the congregation.

"Lords and ladies of Corsanctum, Faithful, honoured guests," he began when the temple was quiet, "we have witnessed something I consider to be of significance.  All too often Sanguis Astroism is accused of a militaristic imperative to cleanse the world of non-believers.  And yet today, in the Sacred Heart of Sanguis Astroism, we have born witness to the joiningof Lady Khari, priestess and Guardian Stalwart of the Faith, and Prime Minister Rynn of D'Hara, a follower of the path of Verdis Elementum.  The ceremony contained elements, if you'll pardon the pun, of both religions, and I hope it also satisfied both."

He paused for a moment or two.  "I would like to take this opportunity to ask; why do we have religion?  What is the purpose of faith?  What is the place of a church?

"I would suggest that it is threefold, though I acknowledge that it is in my nature to see import in patterns of three." He paused to bow to Baal at this stage. "Firstly, and most importantly it is a unified struggle to pierce the veils of mystery of the world around us, to understand the Truth behind truth, to commune with, in some small, mortal way, and get closer to, Divinity.  Secondly, it is a joint glorification of that same Divinity, a public recognition and exclamation of the connection we have with the Divine.  And thirdly, it is a community of fellows who tread the same path to Divinity, who can support each other, can aid when our faith is troubled, and comfort when our souls are wounded.

"Recently I have had to travel to Aurvandil to try and understand our Faith's relationship with 'Orthodox' Astroism.  Sadly, I'm sure you know well by now, it has been determined to be nothing more than a political tool, designed to validate Allison Kabrinski's heresy and to bring offence to our Church.   There was no seeking of truth, no glorification of anything other than possibly Allison herself, and no community other than through vitriol.

"By contrast I ask you to consider the contribution of Verdis Elementum today, specifically the act of consecration of the pendant Verdis we saw.  Even as an outsider to their religion, and doubtless failing to truly comprehend all it signifies, I could easily see the desire to understand the workings of our world, the veneration of the elements, and the unity the act brought.  We turn our gaze up to the Bloodstars, they turn their senses to the elemental forces at play in the world around them. 

"There is much debate in our Church at the moment as to whether or not other religions should be tolerated, especially within those realms which are dedicated to our Faith.  To those who would suggest that all others be cast out, I ask this question.  Can you be sure that the same Divinity which shines through the Bloodstars, which manifests within each man and woman, which lies at the core of our Faith; can you be sure it does not also inspire the elements, quicken the Wind, hasten the Fire, strengthen the Earth and stir the Water?  Verdis Elementum also reveres the element of Spirit, which surely gives a only a different consideration to the Spark of Divinity we hold to be within us all.  Can you be sure that they are not simply walking along a different path to the same destination?"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 28, 2013, 08:53:49 PM
In other words:

Mathurin just endorsed the position of the more radical conservatives among the elders and spat in the face of Abbigal.

It's all in how you read it, folks. He just almost gave verbatim some of Hireshmont's arguments, yet also validated the argument of extremity (also put forward by Hireshmont).

PLLEEEEASE SOMEBODY SEND IT TO ME IC.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on February 28, 2013, 09:13:23 PM
I went it to everyone in the Farronite Republic.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on February 28, 2013, 09:28:38 PM
I went it to everyone in the Farronite Republic.
and D'Hara!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 28, 2013, 09:49:09 PM
If you sent it to us, I sure didn't see it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on February 28, 2013, 11:27:49 PM
In other words:

Mathurin just endorsed the position of the more radical conservatives among the elders and spat in the face of Abbigal.

It's all in how you read it, folks. He just almost gave verbatim some of Hireshmont's arguments, yet also validated the argument of extremity (also put forward by Hireshmont).

PLLEEEEASE SOMEBODY SEND IT TO ME IC.

I will agree its in how you read it.  I do not see that it is spitting in Abbigals face.  It questions how you can be sure that others do not simply walk on a different path.  I too would like  to see it IC.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 01, 2013, 12:08:13 AM
Seemed rather tolerant in my opinion. Almost an endorsement of SA becoming more open and less lockstep towards other faiths. If anything it sounded like the prophet became more open to what many in his do not want.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 01, 2013, 01:07:48 AM
Seemed rather tolerant in my opinion. Almost an endorsement of SA becoming more open and less lockstep towards other faiths. If anything it sounded like the prophet became more open to what many in his do not want.

And he did it all specifically about Verdis Elementum. No reference to any other faith at all, and a specific mention of exceptions regarding enemies of the faith.

This will be a great springboard for a doctrine of anathema...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on March 01, 2013, 01:25:42 AM
Yet that still leaves open the possibility that others could also be along a different path.  The only one that was mentioned specifically as being evil was Allison's Faith and OA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 01, 2013, 01:56:05 AM
Yet that still leaves open the possibility that others could also be along a different path.  The only one that was mentioned specifically as being evil was Allison's Faith and OA.

Which is exactly what Hireshmont has been arguing and Abbigal has been arguing against.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on March 01, 2013, 02:13:28 AM
Which is exactly what Hireshmont has been arguing and Abbigal has been arguing against.
and since  when has Abbigal been a  friend of Allison's Faith or her?  Abbigal has spoken against crusading down there for the purpose  of rooting Allison out.  The other private temples  have nothing to do with Allison's faith.  Honestly Abbigial would probably want to help sent troops down and to    Aurvandil but cant  because of needing to build the realm.  Though I guess you are implying that Bowie  is someone how of the same faith as Allison?

ok After re-reading Hireshmont's letters I can see that he does  allow for space for some other faiths.  Yet once again I do not think Bowie is quite to the point of evil as Allison and her faith in regards.   Letting in someone for OA is something even Abbigal would not do.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on March 01, 2013, 02:29:25 AM
I cannot imagine how anyone, playing true to character as an Elder of the Faith, could see how Abbigal was doing anything other than dissimulating with regards to Bowie or whatever her true intentions may be. It's been painful to watch it all unfold. Maybe Abbigal thinks she's in the right, but this is one of the few issues in which I've seen the entire gaggle of Elders united. That can never be a good sign for the person(s) on the opposite side of the issue.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 01, 2013, 02:39:21 AM
What bugs me is how all the current suppporters of Bowie/Creed are all saying "He hasn't done anything against me/Swordfell". It's a big "F--- You!" to the Elders, ignoring everything that's been said, and completely rejecting the religious authority of their own church.

I'm just waiting for the Elders to get fed up with it, and order Swordfell to expel them from the realm. Then we'll really see who is willing to back up the church.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Creed on March 01, 2013, 02:54:19 AM
What bugs me is how all the current suppporters of Bowie/Creed are all saying "He hasn't done anything against me/Swordfell". It's a big "F--- You!" to the Elders, ignoring everything that's been said, and completely rejecting the religious authority of their own church.

I'm just waiting for the Elders to get fed up with it, and order Swordfell to expel them from the realm. Then we'll really see who is willing to back up the church.

LOL I don't understand the hate the church has for poor Creed just a simple noble trying to make a name for himself in the world.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 01, 2013, 03:24:58 AM
What bugs me is how all the current suppporters of Bowie/Creed are all saying "He hasn't done anything against me/Swordfell". It's a big "F--- You!" to the Elders, ignoring everything that's been said, and completely rejecting the religious authority of their own church.

I'm just waiting for the Elders to get fed up with it, and order Swordfell to expel them from the realm. Then we'll really see who is willing to back up the church.
1. What has Bowie/Creed actually done other than say in the past they don't like SA?
2. The church does not have that authority so I doubt it will happen when you have troubles with other places.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ironsides on March 01, 2013, 04:48:19 AM

Draw the line Astromancy, and watch as everyone crosses it.

I kind of feel like explaining Bowie's position here, but I wont. I will reserve that for IC interaction  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on March 01, 2013, 05:02:55 AM
1. What has Bowie/Creed actually done other than say in the past they don't like SA?
2. The church does not have that authority so I doubt it will happen when you have troubles with other places.

Who needs authority when you have a huge army?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 01, 2013, 05:38:20 AM
Who needs authority when you have a huge army?

Huge armies are what I call authority
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on March 01, 2013, 05:58:48 AM
Mathurin's sermon was a good one, advocating the importance of Faith in religion, even in other religions than SA (except for OA, as it involves nor encourages true faith at all), even giving a nod to syncretism. Had Rabisu heard it, he might be having a discussion with him on weighty personal matters right now. Instead...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on March 01, 2013, 06:20:36 AM
Huge armies are what I call authority

No, that's authoriTAH!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 01, 2013, 07:56:37 AM
The fact that two Elders have weighed in, in favor of that sermon make me quite glad I am not in SA anymore. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 01, 2013, 02:29:34 PM
Huge armies are what I call authority
Not if the leaders aren't willing to use them. SA, while it is using its influence more now, it is using it for stagnation IMO.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 01, 2013, 06:01:28 PM
Huge armies are what I call authority

Never underestimate the power of small well organized armies.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 01, 2013, 08:44:21 PM
Never underestimate the power of huge, well organized armies.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 01, 2013, 11:25:19 PM
Never underestimate the power of huge, well organized armies.


Pshaw,  organization has never been SA's strong suit.  Sheer size and ground n pound is their only viable strategy.  Its the only thing that has worked before.  Problem now though is that the Theocracies have a lot less nobles.  They have big CS numbers but that is a lot of militia and big slow vanity units. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 01, 2013, 11:26:21 PM
I never said we had a well organized army. ^_^ Just saying beware one...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 02, 2013, 12:19:35 AM
Not if the leaders aren't willing to use them. SA, while it is using its influence more now, it is using it for stagnation IMO.

If by stagnation you mean war almost breaking out several times between different SA nations, rising tension between the more conservative factions and the more liberal factions. The only thing holding SA together at present is the war with Aurvandil.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 02, 2013, 01:33:34 AM
That's more than a small exaggeration.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on March 02, 2013, 02:52:46 AM
I think it's more Mathurin's presence that does the trick.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 02, 2013, 03:20:41 AM
The only thing holding SA together at present is the war with Aurvandil.

"War" with Aurvandil.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 02, 2013, 07:56:40 AM
"War" with Aurvandil.
+1, I have seen Astrum around Paisland every once in awhile and Morek just recently tried to help again but they can't, though its not like you can talk Perth. When was the last time Terran did something with the war? At least a month ago.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 02, 2013, 02:35:08 PM
+1, I have seen Astrum around Paisland every once in awhile and Morek just recently tried to help again but they can't, though its not like you can talk Perth. When was the last time Terran did something with the war? At least a month ago.

Hey, Astrum "attacked" "Falkirk"!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 02, 2013, 07:16:52 PM
Hey, Astrum "attacked" "Falkirk"!
O yeah, I forgot about that so that counts as maybe half a battle. Pretty hilarious though pathetic at the same time. Recently on AT a similar situation happened but to a much funnier degree, IMO. What I am wondering, is why they are traveling to Falkirik, though I haven't been able to see Madina yet I suppose.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 02, 2013, 11:07:37 PM
That's more than a small exaggeration.

Not exactly. Libero/Morek. Iashular came close when the Farronites legalized the preaching of non SA priests. Abbigal tried to march a foreign army on her own lands...

I will agree with the "war" on Aurvandil though. It still acts as a means to keep everyone together, even if its just that no one wants to look like they were pursuing a war of aggression while everyone else was helping (more or less) against Aurvandil.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 02, 2013, 11:29:13 PM
Not exactly. Libero/Morek. Iashular came close when the Farronites legalized the preaching of non SA priests. Abbigal tried to march a foreign army on her own lands...

I will agree with the "war" on Aurvandil though. It still acts as a means to keep everyone together, even if its just that no one wants to look like they were pursuing a war of aggression while everyone else was helping (more or less) against Aurvandil.
Thats not SA though. I am talking about the church's elders not theocracies. The first situation was an act of Morek offering LE to become a part of their realm as a duchy then LE got offended and left the federation but they immediately signed for neutrality, nothing really changed. Iashalur pressured the Farronites into stagnation. Abbigal tried to march a foreign army on her own lands and the church made sure to stop that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 02, 2013, 11:55:45 PM
Of course the church put a stop to it. It was an army from an SA realm, led by a declared heretic, marching to depose and SA duke in another SA realm. It was really Creed's presence that blew the plan. If Abbigail had called and led the army herself, it wouls have been a different story.

The Farronite thing isn't "stagnation". It's the church defending their territory. And it could have led to a very interesting war, if Farronite hadn't backed down.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 03, 2013, 12:06:59 AM
Of course the church put a stop to it. It was an army from an SA realm, led by a declared heretic, marching to depose and SA duke in another SA realm. It was really Creed's presence that blew the plan. If Abbigail had called and led the army herself, it wouls have been a different story.

The Farronite thing isn't "stagnation". It's the church defending their territory. And it could have led to a very interesting war, if Farronite hadn't backed down.
1. This is where all of the elders seem to be explicitly trying for stagnation like you are.  I have yet to hear Creed be declared a heretic and  he didn't lead the army. Its just the elders bsing that this was all orcherstrated by Creed when everyone that was for it was like "This isn't by Creed, for Creed, nor are we planning on putting Creed in power!!!". Basically it was stagnation because all the elders just made up fake !@#$ so they could stop it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 03, 2013, 12:12:52 AM
Creed was declared a heretic and kicked out of SA a LONG time ago. I forget when it happened.

And yes, we know that Creed wasn't "leading" the army. That's simply a convenience for discussion purposes. He was coordinating it at the request of Abbigail. But, like I said, if Abbigail had done it herself, or appointed another SA noble to do it, then the church would never have gotten involved. It's not stagnation, it's more like opposing anything that has Creed involved in it. After all, he's a heretic, so anything he wants done is, most likely, worth opposing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 03, 2013, 12:33:50 AM
Creed was declared a heretic and kicked out of SA a LONG time ago. I forget when it happened.

And yes, we know that Creed wasn't "leading" the army. That's simply a convenience for discussion purposes. He was coordinating it at the request of Abbigail. But, like I said, if Abbigail had done it herself, or appointed another SA noble to do it, then the church would never have gotten involved. It's not stagnation, it's more like opposing anything that has Creed involved in it. After all, he's a heretic, so anything he wants done is, most likely, worth opposing.
I suppose...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 03, 2013, 01:09:56 AM
To be completely honest, when the elders first heard about the Farronite expedition, it was by the letter Creed sent to the realm about it. That set off all the "Creed is deposing an SA duke!" furor. That was quickly stopped when Abbigail explained what was going on. Then it morphed into other things, and turned into a general haranguing of Abbigail for consorting and defending heretics.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on March 03, 2013, 01:30:32 AM
Yeah that was interesting. I wish Gustav would not have been so fast to order Farronite troops to turn around. That said I wasn't going to override him once the order was given.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 03, 2013, 01:36:43 AM
Yeah that was interesting. I wish Gustav would not have been so fast to order Farronite troops to turn around. That said I wasn't going to override him once the order was given.
He was just trying to suck up. He even said it on the forums somewhere.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 03, 2013, 01:49:26 AM
Gustav used to be fiery and independent.  Now he is just a softy conformist who is trying to fit in and be one of the "good ole boys"    :)  I wonder how that boot licking is working out for him.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on March 03, 2013, 02:17:01 AM
Yeah that was interesting. I wish Gustav would not have been so fast to order Farronite troops to turn around. That said I wasn't going to override him once the order was given.

General Paul don't take orders from no Judge! It was a convenient enough excuse to leave before his men revolted and he was forced to march against the stronghold by himself, though.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 03, 2013, 04:23:12 AM
It's still there. He's just biding his time since he has other stuff he's working on, and being "fiery and independent" tends to not work well when you are out in Zuma lands....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 03, 2013, 04:31:41 AM
Yeah that was interesting. I wish Gustav would not have been so fast to order Farronite troops to turn around. That said I wasn't going to override him once the order was given.

Farronite+Asylonian troops... I was half way to Golden Farrow and told to turn around... :(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on March 03, 2013, 04:45:55 AM
Farronite+Asylonian troops... I was half way to Golden Farrow and told to turn around... :(

Imagine what a glorious diplomatic !@#$storm that would've been. *Wistful sigh.*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ironsides on March 03, 2013, 07:22:26 AM
Imagine what a glorious diplomatic !@#$storm that would've been. *Wistful sigh.*

I was as surprised as and as disappointed as everyone  :'(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 03, 2013, 08:19:52 AM
Would have gone through with it if Creed hadn't sent that letter. The thing about trying to remove a duke from his position is it kinda helps if he doesn't know the means with which you're doing it...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ironsides on March 03, 2013, 09:03:38 AM

Couldn't you have done it anyway? What were the consequences the Church threatened you with?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 03, 2013, 09:39:16 AM
Couldn't you have done it anyway? What were the consequences the Church threatened you with?

Having to listen to you talk.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on March 03, 2013, 12:32:56 PM
Having to listen to you talk.

I lol'ed  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 03, 2013, 02:05:57 PM
Last time, when we were merely talking to Asylon, something happened that nearly got a crusade up our asses. Still trying to remember why...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on March 03, 2013, 02:37:17 PM
I lol'ed  ;D

lol
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on March 03, 2013, 07:00:34 PM
I'm guessing it was because of the war which involved Asylon/Kabrinskia/Terra/Astrum. And the fact that FR seems to be giving up the claim on the duchy of Itau. Awesome stuff.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 03, 2013, 10:52:23 PM
We are unaware of any FR claim to the duchy of Itau. Its unrecognized, Asylon did the footwork and took it from Itaulond. FR isnt Kabrinskia, any claim they have died with Kabrinskia.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 03, 2013, 10:59:24 PM
FR isnt Kabrinskia, any claim they have died with Kabrinskia.

Sure, I'm sure if Asylon says this, then everyone will go along with it...

Not.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 04, 2013, 01:55:19 AM
Sure, I'm sure if Asylon says this, then everyone will go along with it...

Not.

Actually... Terran kind of did recognize Asylon's claim to Itau a very long time ago, about the time we provided the siege engines to attack Itaulond.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 04, 2013, 02:10:32 AM
Actually... Terran kind of did recognize Asylon's claim to Itau a very long time ago, about the time we provided the siege engines to attack Itaulond.

For obvious reasons, you were fighting together against Kabrinskia. However, if Kabrinskia maintained any kind of claim to that region, then I doubt Astrum will cease to view the region as being of theocratic property.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2013, 03:49:55 AM
Good thing the Farronite Republic is a Republic then.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 04, 2013, 04:09:32 AM
Moderator note: Stop with the flaming and personal insults, please. Keep it civil, or keep off the boards.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on March 04, 2013, 04:22:43 AM
*** the Farronite Republic is a Republic dedicated to the Blood Stars.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2013, 04:31:10 AM
Yeah, so basically a form of government where the nobles do not have true choice in matters. Its an oligarchy. There are a few in power who control the thoughts of the others, you are not allowed to choose for yourself, therefor you live in an oligarchy and a vassal of the Theocracies... Not a true republic , nor even a free nation... Thank you for showing Dwilight that you cannot have claim over Asylonian lands when you cannot even have control over your own realm.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 04, 2013, 04:37:42 AM
Yeah, so basically a form of government where the nobles do not have true choice in matters. Its an oligarchy. There are a few in power who control the thoughts of the others, you are not allowed to choose for yourself, therefor you live in an oligarchy and a vassal of the Theocracies... Not a true republic , nor even a free nation...
I have no idea where you are getting any of this...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 04, 2013, 04:40:45 AM
Yeah, so basically a form of government where the nobles do not have true choice in matters. Its an oligarchy. There are a few in power who control the thoughts of the others, you are not allowed to choose for yourself, therefor you live in an oligarchy and a vassal of the Theocracies... Not a true republic , nor even a free nation... Thank you for showing Dwilight that you cannot have claim over Asylonian lands when you cannot even have control over your own realm.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy

Good one, Glaumring. You just showed us how a "Republic" in a game, and on an island, set in a Middle Ages model, is not a true "free" nation. No kidding, man. No freaking kidding.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2013, 04:44:07 AM
I have no idea where you are getting any of this...

So, what your saying is that FR nobles are free to choose their own faith? Create new faiths and build temples in FR and they don't have to  be crushed into oblivion for that? I don't remember FR being as free as Asylon.

And never once was Itau ever mentioned to us by anyone in FR, because there is no claim,  nor any recognized claim by FR on any lands that exist currently in Asylon. So drop it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2013, 04:47:09 AM
Good one, Glaumring. You just showed us how a "Republic" in a game, and on an island, set in a Middle Ages model, is not a true "free" nation. No kidding, man. No freaking kidding.

Farronite republic isn't on an island... Farronite republic has no claim over Asylonian lands because Asylon never took lands from the Farronite republics or Kabrinskia, Asylon took lands from Itaulond, Itaulong was from Caerwyn, Caerwyn is dead. If anyone had a claim it was Kabrinskia, Kabrinskia is dead, their claim died with Kabrinskia.

If Astrum has a claim they are welcome to come down and get their nose bloody.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 04, 2013, 04:52:47 AM
So, what your saying is that FR nobles are free to choose their own faith? Create new faiths and build temples in FR and they don't have to  be crushed into oblivion for that? I don't remember FR being as free as Asylon.
The ruler of the Farronite Republic came to an agreement with the leaders of SA. They voluntarily entered into an agreement to restrict the religious activities of their realm and nobles. If they break that agreement, then there could indeed be consequences. This shouldn't be any surprise to anyone, and the church expended considerable resources to hand them their realm.

Quote
And never once was Itau ever mentioned to us by anyone in FR, because there is no claim,  nor any recognized claim by FR on any lands that exist currently in Asylon. So drop it.
Not surprising that they wouldn't mention it to Asylon. I mean, that would be really dumb. "Hey Asylon, we just wanted to let you know that we still want Itau, and we will eventually go to war with you to get it. But don't worry, it won't be today. So, umm... we're still cool, right?"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2013, 04:53:56 AM
For obvious reasons, you were fighting together against Kabrinskia. However, if Kabrinskia maintained any kind of claim to that region, then I doubt Astrum will cease to view the region as being of theocratic property.

 I like how you meta-game on the forum so you can make !@#$ happen in game. Why now after all these month does this come up? What leverage are you trying to gain? What information do you know ingame? The issue is none of your business.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 04, 2013, 05:08:53 AM
/me sighs....

Let's try this again...

Moderator Note: Stop the personal insults, or I'll start handing out the warnings. Keep it civil, or go away.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2013, 05:20:23 AM
It really comes down to you guys in these matters, I am one guy fending off from 5 or 6 people that constantly come out to make trouble over everything I say. If there was even one moderate or even one person who would come around and say something like 'yeah yeah you both have your opinions' and leave it alone. Instead I constantly have to deal with a very lopsided and biased form of moderation that does nothing to defuse the issue. You merely use the moderation to cut me off, to silence me. Without there being any resolution. The thing is you can't beat me like this and you will never beat me ingame either. And that frustrates you. So you use the forum as an outlet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 04, 2013, 05:29:07 AM
You merely use the moderation to cut me off, to silence me. Without there being any resolution.
I used moderation to remove the part where you called a whole bunch of players !@#$%^&s.

Quote
The thing is you can't beat me like this and you will never beat me ingame either. And that frustrates you. So you use the forum as an outlet.
I'm not trying to beat you, either on the forums, or in game. (In fact, in-game our characters and realms have essentially no interaction at all, despite being so close.) I'm discussing the issue with you. And of course we both have our opinions, and of course they are both different. If we agreed, then there really wouldn't be a debate, would there?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 04, 2013, 05:41:05 AM
The thing is you can't beat me like this and you will never beat me ingame either. And that frustrates you. So you use the forum as an outlet.

Battlemaster isn't a game where you "beat" people. You don't win Battlemaster. We aren't trying to use the forum as an outlet.

We're trying to have a discussion about game events where we don't engage in quasi-moral judgments about each others' gameplay habits, styles, practices, etc. But it often feels like you make a point of using values-ladden terms to talk about other peoples' preferred ways to play. And that's annoying.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2013, 05:52:41 AM
If I have to fight off so many I will fight dirty. Halleria, Chenier, Vellos, Indirik, Penchant, Anaris ,  and a few others constantly got to be there in the feeding frenzy on everything I say. Oddly enough never having issues with my own realm mates, we have good conversations about stuff and we are all in consensus that your way of dealing with Asylon ig and on the forums is a bit one sided.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 04, 2013, 07:03:31 AM
Freedom isn't free. If individuals want freedom to build temples and preach in SA lands, they will have to fight for it. Its a basic concept.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on March 04, 2013, 12:22:43 PM
The ruler of the Farronite Republic came to an agreement with the leaders of SA. They voluntarily entered into an agreement to restrict the religious activities of their realm and nobles.

Voluntary...uh huh...not.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2013, 02:23:57 PM
Voluntary with a knife against ones throat...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 04, 2013, 02:32:07 PM
Voluntary with a knife against ones throat...

Some realms prefer to have two knives against their throat, so that they can chose freely which one kills them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 04, 2013, 02:33:53 PM
Farronite republic isn't on an island... Farronite republic has no claim over Asylonian lands because Asylon never took lands from the Farronite republics or Kabrinskia, Asylon took lands from Itaulond, Itaulong was from Caerwyn, Caerwyn is dead. If anyone had a claim it was Kabrinskia, Kabrinskia is dead, their claim died with Kabrinskia.

If Astrum has a claim they are welcome to come down and get their nose bloody.

Claims are what people make of them, Glaumring. If someone decides he wants X, and convinces enough people that he should get it, then he has a pretty solid claim. The rest, like actually having owned it before or not, is just fluff that helps convince people that, indeed, you should get the X you want.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 04, 2013, 03:15:50 PM
If you have a group of empire-building theocracies set you up with a rich and prosperous realm, you had better expect that it comes with strings attached. To expect that they will give you the realm, then walk away with no strings attached is a case a criminal naivete. Anyone who actually thinks that would happen ... well, all I can do is laugh in their face. Farronite only made it worse by spitting in the church's face by becoming a republic instead of a theocracy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2013, 04:26:28 PM
If anyone wants Itau they will die in heaps like Kabrinskians and Astrumese before...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 04, 2013, 04:28:59 PM
If anyone wants Itau they will die in heaps like Kabrinskians and Astrumese before...

Time will tell.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2013, 05:46:40 PM
Itau will be their graveyard... I guarantee it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 04, 2013, 06:11:01 PM
Itau will be their graveyard... I guarantee it.

Looking forward to it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on March 04, 2013, 07:29:09 PM
I get the feeling this will be an interesting thread to revisit in a couple of months... Just for laughs   :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on March 04, 2013, 07:42:19 PM
Plenty of Claim Chowder in the making here, one way or another.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2013, 07:55:17 PM
Looking forward to it.

You should focus on your own problems and stay out of ours.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 04, 2013, 07:56:24 PM
You should focus on your own problems and stay out of ours.

Maybe you are part of my own problems.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2013, 08:01:13 PM
I got 99 problems and a D'Haran aint one yo... 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on March 04, 2013, 09:21:25 PM
Glaumring is correct in some of my feelings. I would life to see FR independent from the noose of SA but still be recognized as faithful followers.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 04, 2013, 09:29:41 PM
The restrictions under which FR operates are not exactly harsh. Pretty much the same unofficial rules which all of the theocracies already operate by. And if you didn't want such direct oversight by the church, you shouldn't have flipped them the bird when you made your realm a republic.

But you already know all this, because it's already been discussed to death IG.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2013, 10:14:49 PM
Better die fighting for freedom than live as a slave under the yoke of theocracies! Hooowarghhh! No king of Asylon will ever tell another man what to believe. We are the most free of all of western Dwilight, we house a plethora of faiths under the gateway of north and south, our soldiers stand for freedom and anywhere they march a road of liberty follows beneath their feet. Where Caerwyn crumbled, where Kabrinskia fell, where Itaulond died and the forces of Astrum washed up against our walls like so much driftwood in the seas. There stood Asylon! A beacon of light on the furthest western shores a legend to men of the east, a place of mystery to the kingdoms of the south and feared bed time stories of the north. The last vanguard of a golden age, the single voice of order in a chaotic world. Raise your swords to the heavens rise as free nobles and claim the heavens as your own for it is your birthright to be untethered , unbound and without fear of eternity!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 04, 2013, 10:34:36 PM
Mmm... I loves me some good fiction!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 04, 2013, 11:14:48 PM
I got 99 problems and a D'Haran aint one yo... 8)

+1
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 04, 2013, 11:22:43 PM
Mmm... I loves me some good fiction!

Yeah, keeps us warm at night too .
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 04, 2013, 11:44:48 PM
Yeah, keeps us warm at night too .
Fiction not friction.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 05, 2013, 12:10:30 AM
Wouldn't be good fiction without some friction... 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lanyon on March 05, 2013, 01:21:18 AM
So, My dearest enemies, how do you people that are currently astroists feel about how your religion affects the continent? Do you think SA is healthy for the fun of the continent as it currently exists? if not, what would you do to remedy this? If so how do you feel about SA being compared to the CE power bloc of atamara? Would any of you consider war with another SA realm?

this just comes from some pondering of various posts i've seen in the forums
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 05, 2013, 02:29:47 AM
War between Astroist realms is far from impossible. It just needs the right circumstances, the right reason. It has happened before, and almost certainly will again.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 05, 2013, 02:39:47 AM
So, My dearest enemies, how do you people that are currently astroists feel about how your religion affects the continent? Do you think SA is healthy for the fun of the continent as it currently exists? if not, what would you do to remedy this? If so how do you feel about SA being compared to the CE power bloc of atamara? Would any of you consider war with another SA realm?

this just comes from some pondering of various posts i've seen in the forums
SA, against anyone realm will definitely win. I see a way for a war to develop against SA that isn't an insta-win for SA, but I won't share any details related to that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 05, 2013, 02:47:24 AM
War between Astroist realms is far from impossible. It just needs the right circumstances, the right reason. It has happened before, and almost certainly will again.

Translation: Once we slog through countless more real life years on Dwilight and every inch of the continents are converted down to small kittens and grasshoppers only then will we declare war on another SA realm and its last 2 members, Indirik and his mirror...   ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 05, 2013, 02:52:56 AM
Translation: Once we slog through countless more real life years on Dwilight and every inch of the continents are converted down to small kittens and grasshoppers only then will we declare war on another SA realm and its last 2 members, Indirik and his mirror...   ;D

Not even close to true. If people were better about learning the political undercurrents and getting a feel for the pulse of things, they would know Sanguis Astroism isn't some giant hegemonic regime bent on the annexation of all of Dwilight. The theocracies have their own politics, their own cultures, and given an excuse, will war another.

Aurvandil is just proving too much of a unifying factor at the moment. Its not a compliment to Aurvandil, its a compliment to Vellos for making everyone think that ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 05, 2013, 02:59:21 AM
Not even close to true. If people were better about learning the political undercurrents and getting a feel for the pulse of things, they would know Sanguis Astroism isn't some giant hegemonic regime bent on the annexation of all of Dwilight. The theocracies have their own politics, their own cultures, and given an excuse, will war another.
Stop giving away our secrets. Listening to him rant is too much fun.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lanyon on March 05, 2013, 03:02:30 AM
Not even close to true. If people were better about learning the political undercurrents and getting a feel for the pulse of things, they would know Sanguis Astroism isn't some giant hegemonic regime bent on the annexation of all of Dwilight. The theocracies have their own politics, their own cultures, and given an excuse, will war another.

Aurvandil is just proving too much of a unifying factor at the moment. Its not a compliment to Aurvandil, its a compliment to Vellos for making everyone think that ;)

Aurvandil is just proving too much of a unifying factor at the moment. Its not a compliment to Aurvandil, its a compliment to Vellos for making everyone think that ;)


 Its not a compliment to Aurvandil,
a compliment to Aurvandil

I feel like we are the under acheiving redheaded step child of the continent. Are only compliments are from the back of someone's hand. :'( but any ways, I'm also interested in how yall view yourselves.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 05, 2013, 03:13:22 AM
So, My dearest enemies, how do you people that are currently astroists feel about how your religion affects the continent? Do you think SA is healthy for the fun of the continent as it currently exists? if not, what would you do to remedy this? If so how do you feel about SA being compared to the CE power bloc of atamara? Would any of you consider war with another SA realm?

this just comes from some pondering of various posts i've seen in the forums

SA doesn't stop realms from doing anything, it's the non-SA with their cowardice and utter lack of tact that stop their own selves. There have been plenty of wars on the continent that did not result in all of SA picking out a single realm off, or even a coalition of realms.

SA is the single most dynamic religion in the game. It's not perfect, but compared to all of the other religions out there... it's not that bad at all.

We finally have a religion that people take seriously, and then there's whining about it taking too much place? And I say this as a person who has opposed it for the longest time and was for about all of my char's career an elder priest of a competing religion.

SA does not create stagnation.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on March 05, 2013, 03:20:42 AM
SA is a complete nonfactor in the Marrocidenian War anyways, apart from some well-wishers. The armies of the theocracies can't march on Aurvandil any more than Aurvandil could invade Astrum.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 05, 2013, 03:34:38 AM
Not even close to true. If people were better about learning the political undercurrents and getting a feel for the pulse of things, they would know Sanguis Astroism isn't some giant hegemonic regime bent on the annexation of all of Dwilight. The theocracies have their own politics, their own cultures, and given an excuse, will war another.

Aurvandil is just proving too much of a unifying factor at the moment. Its not a compliment to Aurvandil, its a compliment to Vellos for making everyone think that ;)

Translation: You need a university degree in Sanguis Astroism politics (its that complex). Ok SA isn't that big, its just made of 50 different realms, We don't want to annex all of Dwilight...Silly...Just the non-SA realms... The Theocracies have their own politics( it just has to be subservient to Corsanctum) They have their own cultures ( It just has to be an SA culture) and given an excuse... After all of Dwilight is converted Indirik and his mirror will war each other...  ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 05, 2013, 03:36:19 AM
SA doesn't stop realms from doing anything, it's the non-SA with their cowardice and utter lack of tact that stop their own selves. There have been plenty of wars on the continent that did not result in all of SA picking out a single realm off, or even a coalition of realms.

SA is the single most dynamic religion in the game. It's not perfect, but compared to all of the other religions out there... it's not that bad at all.

We finally have a religion that people take seriously, and then there's whining about it taking too much place? And I say this as a person who has opposed it for the longest time and was for about all of my char's career an elder priest of a competing religion.

SA does not create stagnation.

Translation: Woof woof meow woof meow woof woof meow weow woof  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 05, 2013, 03:56:39 AM
SA doesn't stop realms from doing anything, it's the non-SA with their cowardice and utter lack of tact that stop their own selves. There have been plenty of wars on the continent that did not result in all of SA picking out a single realm off, or even a coalition of realms.

SA is the single most dynamic religion in the game. It's not perfect, but compared to all of the other religions out there... it's not that bad at all.

We finally have a religion that people take seriously, and then there's whining about it taking too much place? And I say this as a person who has opposed it for the longest time and was for about all of my char's career an elder priest of a competing religion.

SA does not create stagnation.

I'm loathe to admit it, but I agree 100% with Chenier.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 05, 2013, 04:00:13 AM
And this bull!@#$ is why people get pissed at you.

Oh come on lighten up... ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 05, 2013, 04:06:22 AM
Oh come on lighten up... ;)
My apologies, I am a bit stressed lately.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 05, 2013, 04:14:29 AM
My apologies, I am a bit stressed lately.

Its ok I get stressed out too and sometimes I get wrapped up in the game and it stresses me out even more. I am working at a very stressful job right now. I don't really have any hate for for anyone on these forums. I just think you guys take yourselves very seriously sometimes, sometimes the game is taken too seriously. I am guilty of it too.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on March 05, 2013, 09:20:37 AM
SA doesn't stop realms from doing anything, it's the non-SA with their cowardice and utter lack of tact that stop their own selves. There have been plenty of wars on the continent that did not result in all of SA picking out a single realm off, or even a coalition of realms.

If SA does not stop realms from doing anything then why did the church stop the army from Faronite republic from taking out A Duke of from Swordfell.  That seems to go against SA not stooping realms from doing anything?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 05, 2013, 10:03:16 AM
If SA does not stop realms from doing anything then why did the church stop the army from Faronite republic from taking out A Duke of from Swordfell.  That seems to go against SA not stooping realms from doing anything?

The church made no official action. What you saw in action was influence working against an action that was extremely unpopular due to the involvement of a convicted heretic.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 05, 2013, 01:05:20 PM
If SA does not stop realms from doing anything then why did the church stop the army from Faronite republic from taking out A Duke of from Swordfell.  That seems to go against SA not stooping realms from doing anything?

SA exists because of each mutual agreement by each member to oppress / threaten/ control any other member. Its kind of like having a membership to a sado masochist club.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Pike on March 05, 2013, 01:10:19 PM
The church made no official action. What you saw in action was influence working against an action that was extremely unpopular due to the involvement of a convicted heretic.
So because the used influence instead of action they did not make them do anything?  Is that not the whole point of having influence so that you can make realms or people do things without actually needing to do any work.

Also I was not really looking for the excuse as to why it was done.  Simply how it was not considered making a realm do something.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 05, 2013, 02:07:09 PM
The church really didn't do much of anything about that. As soon as the members found out about it, FRs judge slammed it fast. No one really had much of a chance to try and do anything before it was already stopped. But then I suppose that's what happens when you deal with convicted heretics.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 05, 2013, 02:09:16 PM
If SA does not stop realms from doing anything then why did the church stop the army from Faronite republic from taking out A Duke of from Swordfell.  That seems to go against SA not stooping realms from doing anything?

See: "and their utter lack of tact".

If you spit in SA's face, then yes, it'll stand in your way. Calling in Creed was basically that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on March 05, 2013, 07:44:22 PM
So, My dearest enemies, how do you people that are currently astroists feel about how your religion affects the continent? Do you think SA is healthy for the fun of the continent as it currently exists? if not, what would you do to remedy this? If so how do you feel about SA being compared to the CE power bloc of atamara? Would any of you consider war with another SA realm?

this just comes from some pondering of various posts i've seen in the forums

CE of Atamara is much more comparable to Aurvandil - a mostly, if not purely military power bloc, which wrestles with other power blocs usually with hard power or the underlying threat of it. SA is just what it is - a large religion. Rare are the times when SA is united and of the same mind on anything, and rare are the times when SA as a whole acts. People on the outside view, and perpetuate this view, as if SA and "the theocracies" are a strangling, unified threat which is tyrannizing and enslaving everyone - because this view serves their interests if they are opposed to the religion or just some of its faithful parties or organizations.

It's healthy for fun, as conflict is fun, and religious and ideological conflicts are quite SMA.  And of course SA realms war with each other plenty of times, past present and future. It's definitely one of the most successful religions in BM, not simply in quantifiable terms but in how the religion itself is interesting and open philosophically, and is not exclusive to just one type of player or character. Those who are just power-hungry ambitious typically cynical nobles have a place in it, those who are earnest devoted pious spiritual type nobles have a place in it, and everyone in between as well. I like it! Two thumbs up!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 05, 2013, 08:30:54 PM
Ummm name a conflict in the last little while where all of SA didnt pile on an enemy....


Thulsoma(saxon) vs everyone in SA
Caerwyn vs Astrum, Morek , Corsanctum etc
Asylon vs Kabrinskia, Astrum, Corsanctum
Aurvandiil vs everyone

Probably a few more in the past. Correct me if Im wrong, im just disputing the notion that SA is disorganized and doesnt gank.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 05, 2013, 08:38:58 PM
Ummm name a conflict in the last little while where all of SA didnt pile on an enemy....

Terran vs Kabrinskia
Luria Nova vs D'Hara
Morek vs Libero
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 05, 2013, 08:39:17 PM
Libero, Morek v. Summerdale
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 05, 2013, 08:44:03 PM
Ummm name a conflict in the last little while where all of SA didnt pile on an enemy....


Thulsoma(saxon) vs everyone in SA
Caerwyn vs Astrum, Morek , Corsanctum etc
Asylon vs Kabrinskia, Astrum, Corsanctum
Aurvandiil vs everyone

Probably a few more in the past. Correct me if Im wrong, im just disputing the notion that SA is disorganized and doesnt gank.

Thulsoma pretty much started the war. So did Caerwyn. Asylon hardly fought alone, despite how you like to victimize yourself, and did not bring in all of SA either (far from it). Aurvandil was also the one who started the war against the 'moot and who house a religion created specifically to rival SA while also being rather anti-SA.

Terran vs Kabrinskia
Luria Nova vs D'Hara
Morek vs Libero
Libero, Morek v. Summerdale
Fissoa vs Falkirk
Luria Nova vs. Giask (and all other lurian wars)
Madina vs Terran and D'Hara
Caerwyn vs Terran and D'Hara
Aurvandil vs Madina
Fissoa vs Lurias
etc
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lanyon on March 05, 2013, 08:47:57 PM
Libero, Morek v. Summerdale

Summerdale was allied with astrum so I don't think that really valid. Also @daycryn I think that aurvandil compared to CE as a realm is a good comparison but not the CE power bloc. 3/5 of the most powerful realms on dwilight are all in that astroists federation. As opposed to aurvandil asylum and falkirk. The only truly powerful realm out of those 3 is aurvandil
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 05, 2013, 08:55:43 PM
Summerdale was allied with astrum so I don't think that really valid.
It was an empty alliance. A previous ruler signed it without consulting the realm at all, because the two rulers were friends.

Besides, it is still a war that a pair of SA realms fought, where the entire SA hegemony didn't dog-pile onto the other side. That fits the criteria asked for. Don't be putting on all kinds of extra, after-the-fact conditions to narrow out any inconvenient examples.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 05, 2013, 08:56:42 PM
Summerdale was allied with astrum so I don't think that really valid. Also @daycryn I think that aurvandil compared to CE as a realm is a good comparison but not the CE power bloc. 3/5 of the most powerful realms on dwilight are all in that astroists federation. As opposed to aurvandil asylum and falkirk. The only truly powerful realm out of those 3 is aurvandil

Astrum, Morek, and...?

2/5 are thocracies. #2 in ranking is Aurvandil, and then there's Luria Nova (part of its own bloc) and Terran (part of the 'moot) in the top 5.

Heck, the 3rd ranking astrocracy is #9, Corsanctum (close to #10 being your precious Asylon).

The SA block really isn't as overwhelmingly powerful as you make them to be. There are just two big players, the rest are rather insignificant players, and the bunch of it is clustered into the far north of Dwilight. If it weren't for the 'moot, all of SA united could never even hope to dent Aurvandil.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 05, 2013, 08:57:38 PM
Summerdale was allied with astrum so I don't think that really valid.

That's extremely valid. When was the last time CE fought a Taran ally?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 05, 2013, 10:24:00 PM
Chenier, Indirik relax I was just inquiring. I was curious to have it clarified. And I will addd this here I am not anti-SA at all, I dont know where that comes from I have repeatedly invited priests to Asylon to maintain their dwindling flock and temples, I built the first SA temple in Asylon way way way back when Asylon was/is a backwater and only left the church because the prophet decided that I wasnt as close a friend as I thought he was. I had been in the SA consul and over the years I did everything I wanted and it had been a goal of mine to start a new religion since Thulsoma sonI tried/ am trying it. I am not content to follow for very long and I feel there are different aspects of BM I'd like to try, Im in this game for the long term so why not. I am not anti-SA , I am against large federations and entangled alliances, the reason I am against them is because I value smaller alliances that allow a better focus and avoid stepping on someones toes. The SA alliance is like this, one kingdom wants to leave so all the others kill it, so it stops any diversity. I prefer pick one neighbor, build a strong alliance and then just have luke warm with the rest so that there is more room to actually battle. I can see why SA wants the big alliances, I just dont agree with it personally in a grand strategy battle game. SA wont ever crumble and start infighting, there will always be another Aurvandiil excuse, another Caerwyn, another Saxon army ad infinitum. In 5 years we'll still be talking about this with the last 5 players on Dwilight, myself Chenier, Vellos , Indirik and Allison...


Its not about destroying SA anymore its now making sure that Dwilight remains diverse and filled with different cultures. If that means fighting for unpopular underdogs so be it because a game where SA is the only culture, the only history isnt very deep or interesting or beautiful at all. So it will be Asylons job to fight for those qualities above all else, the right to found your own faith, to found your own kingdom with your own independent laws and culture and not one that is cowed and stunted by a mass of theocracies.

And no I do not think SA is that strong, but you do have the advantage of having long standing stable economies and a network to share wealth. That is your strength, your weakness is everyone who opposes you and every free thinking noble who refuses to bow to the bloodstars.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on March 05, 2013, 10:32:31 PM
Perhaps you're right.

Perhaps it's time we eliminated our weakness.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 05, 2013, 11:23:26 PM
In so doing eliminating yourselves?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 06, 2013, 12:51:19 AM
In so doing eliminating yourselves?

What are you on man? I'll take two.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 06, 2013, 01:57:12 AM
I have not convinced anyone Aurvandil is the ultimate evil in the galaxy.

I don't know what Indirik is talking about.

Clearly, they're just obviously glowing red and urinating on emblems of the Bloodstars for fun.

Oh, did I say that out loud? Sorry guys...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on March 06, 2013, 02:26:32 PM
An informal survey of beefs with SA would probably reveal that 90% of them are really variations on "I wasn't able to do what I wanted. Ergo it's not fair for anyone." I haven't seen a more dynamic and intrigue-filled forum than SA provides. How could this be, if it's the fun-killing Glaumring-hating machine that it's frequently made out to be?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 06, 2013, 04:29:06 PM
Nice twist of words and meaning. I did everything I wanted in SA and decided to do something different. Why should it be a big deal if someone chooses different than SA, its a game. I had lots of fun in SA and only left when my relations with the prophet went sour, when even he wasnt a partial mediator and chose sides I felt I had over played my hand and I bowed out.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 06, 2013, 04:37:08 PM
I did everything I wanted in SA and decided to do something different. Why should it be a big deal if someone chooses different than SA, its a game.

It's not. It's perfectly fine, in fact.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on March 06, 2013, 06:22:54 PM
Nice twist of words and meaning. I did everything I wanted in SA and decided to do something different. Why should it be a big deal if someone chooses different than SA, its a game. I had lots of fun in SA and only left when my relations with the prophet went sour, when even he wasnt a partial mediator and chose sides I felt I had over played my hand and I bowed out.

If you feel that your words are being misconstrued, then I'm sorry for giving that impression. The majority of your posts about SA concern some scheme that Glaumring, or a friend of Glaumring, hatched that provoked a response from SA. Your experience is not necessarily the experience of everyone else. It's not really a good faith argument if you're implying that an action deserves no reaction at all.  That's all I'm trying to say.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on March 06, 2013, 06:28:09 PM
In so doing eliminating yourselves?

No... you said:

your weakness is everyone who opposes you and every free thinking noble who refuses to bow to the bloodstars.

So I said...:

Perhaps you're right.

Perhaps it's time we eliminated our weakness.

Think about it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 06, 2013, 08:17:45 PM
Aye, it will be your undoing.


Anyways , in regards to schemes and plans I have tried to hatch. One major one was trying to get Astrum to help Asylon attack Caerwyn. Astrum didnt want to so they waited and then Caerwyn attacked them, which worked out for them in the end but left a bit of animosity between Asylon and Astrum , because we felt they didnt really care about helping our fledgling kingdom, back when our sympathy towards SA was the highest. An opportunity squandered because after that it was down hill with Astrum and bellicose Kabrinskia laying down plans to invade Asylon until Terran jumped the gun and declared war on Kabrinskia, this was while Kabrinskia threatened D'Hara and Asylon formed the secret protection pact with D'Hara, which they too squandered. Anyways, that was big scheme.

After that my other scheme was to get Allison elected regent, which was more because I knew that even though we were enemies Lady Allison would cause the most friction in the church and hopefully bring about some infighting. All of it having to do with Asylons desire to see Astrum limited in its reach in the west so that we wouldnt have to obey through threats and we could eventually claim more land.

Astrum is the anvil that weighs down the north west, all things must take into account Astrum. Aurvandiil on the other hand seems to be Astrum of the south. Anyways if it evil or wrong for a smaller kingdom to seek room to breath and grow I apologize, but Asylon comes before Astrum and SA and ultimately a leader of a kingdom does not make good or bad decisions at the time,they are just want has to be done, in hindsight perhaps they are wrong or right. Asylon had tried many times to contact Astrum and found them haughty or ignored our letters, much like Morek did before to Old Thulsoma, but that was another small kingdom on the edge of the world.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on March 07, 2013, 03:48:52 AM
Aye, it will be your undoing.


Anyways , in regards to schemes and plans I have tried to hatch. One major one was trying to get Astrum to help Asylon attack Caerwyn. Astrum didnt want to so they waited and then Caerwyn attacked them, which worked out for them in the end but left a bit of animosity between Asylon and Astrum , because we felt they didnt really care about helping our fledgling kingdom, back when our sympathy towards SA was the highest. An opportunity squandered because after that it was down hill with Astrum and bellicose Kabrinskia laying down plans to invade Asylon until Terran jumped the gun and declared war on Kabrinskia, this was while Kabrinskia threatened D'Hara and Asylon formed the secret protection pact with D'Hara, which they too squandered. Anyways, that was big scheme.

After that my other scheme was to get Allison elected regent, which was more because I knew that even though we were enemies Lady Allison would cause the most friction in the church and hopefully bring about some infighting. All of it having to do with Asylons desire to see Astrum limited in its reach in the west so that we wouldnt have to obey through threats and we could eventually claim more land.

Astrum is the anvil that weighs down the north west, all things must take into account Astrum. Aurvandiil on the other hand seems to be Astrum of the south. Anyways if it evil or wrong for a smaller kingdom to seek room to breath and grow I apologize, but Asylon comes before Astrum and SA and ultimately a leader of a kingdom does not make good or bad decisions at the time,they are just want has to be done, in hindsight perhaps they are wrong or right. Asylon had tried many times to contact Astrum and found them haughty or ignored our letters, much like Morek did before to Old Thulsoma, but that was another small kingdom on the edge of the world.

Why doesn't Asylon just war-dec Astrum? Sounds like you kinda want to.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on March 07, 2013, 03:53:07 AM
Why doesn't Asylon just war-dec Astrum? Sounds like you kinda want to.

Because Glaumring might be a Paramount Lord in Asylon, but he do no longer carry the Crown of Asylon. (But I guess that dosent matter since it seems that on the forums Glaumring = Asylon)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 07, 2013, 04:06:58 AM
(He does act like it.)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on March 07, 2013, 04:11:26 AM
Also because declaring war on Astrum may or may not be the wisest military decision ever (and that's counting the Asylon offensive on Kabrinskia).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 07, 2013, 04:22:48 AM
When was the last time Astrum stood on its own two feet without allies?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 07, 2013, 04:50:07 AM
When was the last time Astrum stood on its own two feet without allies?

When did Asylon willingly do so?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 07, 2013, 05:24:48 AM
If we did SA would crush us under an uber-Alliance. We'd have Iashular, Astrum a bunch of threatened Farronites,Corsanctum would show up to 'defend' SA lands. Morek would sign an immediate peace with Libero and send over one guy. Morek would threaten Swordfell immediately Swordfell would fall to its knees terrified and declare war, then with some IRC or secret talks SA would manage to get the Lurias to declare war for no reason at all. Falkirkia would declare war because someone just converted to SA and had a change of heart. Then Aurvandiil would just finish their paper on federation with Astrum, now 71 new SA  Aurvandiil convert zealots come over the ocean like a plague of locusts, the Moot seeing what going on all of their leaders freshmen in SA all excited, join into the war.... Etc etc

Im joking of course...

Kinda...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 07, 2013, 05:49:15 AM
What if Mendicant converted to SA all of a sudden, a la Constantine?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 07, 2013, 06:00:25 AM
If we did SA would crush us under an uber-Alliance. We'd have Iashular, Astrum a bunch of threatened Farronites,Corsanctum would show up to 'defend' SA lands. Morek would sign an immediate peace with Libero and send over one guy. Morek would threaten Swordfell immediately Swordfell would fall to its knees terrified and declare war, then with some IRC or secret talks SA would manage to get the Lurias to declare war for no reason at all. Falkirkia would declare war because someone just converted to SA and had a change of heart. Then Aurvandiil would just finish their paper on federation with Astrum, now 71 new SA  Aurvandiil convert zealots come over the ocean like a plague of locusts, the Moot seeing what going on all of their leaders freshmen in SA all excited, join into the war.... Etc etc

Im joking of course...

Kinda...

Perhaps if you approached those other realms, and began to show them goodwill and over time gathered support and showed them you were a worthy friend, and then upon your war declaration stated you would allow Astroist lands to remain as they are under your banner you wouldn't have to worry.

Good politics omg!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on March 07, 2013, 06:17:53 AM
What if Mendicant converted to SA all of a sudden, a la Constantine?

That would likely herald a surprising and quick end to Allison's religion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 07, 2013, 06:50:30 AM
That would likely herald a surprising and quick end to Allison's religion.

And a very curious question for Astroism.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 07, 2013, 07:43:24 AM
That would likely herald a surprising and quick end to Allison's religion.

I'm sure all seven Orthodox Astroists would be devastated.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telrunya on March 07, 2013, 09:14:02 AM
Seven? What an insult! We'll have to least 10 devastated Orthodox Astroists! And hey, I'm having fun, just need to devote some more tiem on it :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 07, 2013, 09:55:19 AM
What is Orthodox Astroism all about, anyways. I've heard nothing about it since it was founded really.

I tried looking for a Wiki page, but it lacks one it appears.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 07, 2013, 10:06:28 AM
What is Orthodox Astroism all about, anyways. I've heard nothing about it since it was founded really.

I tried looking for a Wiki page, but it lacks one it appears.

Made one, from the only source that counts.

http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Sanguis_Astroism/Declaration_against_Orthodox_Astroism
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 07, 2013, 10:10:37 AM
What is Orthodox Astroism all about, anyways. I've heard nothing about it since it was founded really.

I tried looking for a Wiki page, but it lacks one it appears.

Last I head there are a grand total of four ranks, nothing on the boards, and like 7 members. Maybe 10 now.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 07, 2013, 10:20:11 AM
Last I head there are a grand total of four ranks, nothing on the boards, and like 7 members. Maybe 10 now.

9.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 07, 2013, 03:18:22 PM
Last I head there are a grand total of four ranks, nothing on the boards, and like 7 members. Maybe 10 now.

TOTALLY RIVALS THE STAGNANT AND DULL AND ANTI-FUN SANGUIS ASTROISM. WE NEED MORE RELIGIONS LIKE THIS.

Or, you know, not...

More religions != More fun religions.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 07, 2013, 04:33:59 PM
Perhaps if you approached those other realms, and began to show them goodwill and over time gathered support and showed them you were a worthy friend, and then upon your war declaration stated you would allow Astroist lands to remain as they are under your banner you wouldn't have to worry.

Good politics omg!

Your idealism is palpable.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 07, 2013, 04:40:25 PM
SA was lucky to have been here at the founding of Dwilight. They got a headstart. That doesnt mean we should stop making religions. CoB is steadily growing, we have lots of temples and a few new members. Its fun, we have good roleplayers and dedicated members. Things will change over time hopefully for the better, we admit that our biggest problem right now is that so many realms dislike us because = Asylon = Glaumring.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 07, 2013, 05:00:03 PM
'Tis true.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 07, 2013, 06:00:27 PM
'Tis true.

The nobles of Asylon know who I am and we all get along great.  If the rest of Dwilight doesnt get me I must being doing something right. The day you stop pissing people off is the day you become irrelevant.  The choices a king makes are for his people first, as long as I remain important and have friends in whatever realm I serve I will have achieved my goal. The difference between myself and people who despise me is that I carry no animosity and always welcome them to my realm as an old friend and answer their letters, behaviour I have seen lacking in many who despise me. The quality of people are not honourable, therefore they are irrelevant.


You are made into man not by ease in life but by trials and tribulation. Batman has the Joker... Which one are you to me?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on March 07, 2013, 06:14:55 PM
Because Glaumring might be a Paramount Lord in Asylon, but he do no longer carry the Crown of Asylon. (But I guess that dosent matter since it seems that on the forums Glaumring = Asylon)

If the rest of Dwilight doesnt get me I must being doing something right. The day you stop pissing people off is the day you become irrelevant. The choices a king makes are for his people first, as long as I remain important and have friends in whatever realm I serve I will have achieved my goal.

Huh. And you wonder why...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 07, 2013, 06:36:55 PM
The people who dont like me are just jealous and the people who know me know there is nothing to be jealous about.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 07, 2013, 07:18:33 PM
So you measure your success byy how many people you piss off. And you do this because you think it's the right thing to do for your realm. Therefore you think that what's best for your realm is to piss off as many other relams and people as possible.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 07, 2013, 08:06:43 PM
No, I came up with the council of Mech Albion a way our two realms to find understanding. I was an early adopter of the Moot and built a guildhouse in Asylon to foster better communication. I stood by Terran and fought above and beyond the call of duty for them. I made the secret alliance with D'Hara to protect them against Kabrinskia. I have constantly pressed for good and equal relations with the Zuma. I was always speaking with the prophet in SA and sent him a 'caged speaking monster from Valldirr' during the times of Old Thulsoma. I have always worked for mutually respectful relations with Iashular.

Judging from my track record, I pissed off Vellos and Chenier because they are flakes and I pissed off Indirik because he is a humourless pail of grey paint. I am still good friends with many people and still strive to build a better Dwilight.

The other day King Grimrog said to me that he now understands the hard choices a king makes and we spoke of how no decision is right or wrong as king, it comes down to choices, the choice of 100000 peasants dying or 99999 dying. You have to make your choices with consideration to your realm. Just like everyone else is.

Whats this have to do with SA? Well many in SA are doing what they think is right, but it pisses off other people. What can they do about it? I dont know thats up to each leader and history to tell.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 07, 2013, 08:13:38 PM
For the record, the character Glaumring doesn't piss me off, nor does he piss off Brance. He annoys Brance occasionally, on the rare occasion that he even comes forward out of the background.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 07, 2013, 08:22:43 PM
Well for the record Indirik does not piss me off either. I dont even know where it comes from. I pick on Astrum and Indirik more on the forums than ingame. Our relations with Astrum have always been next to zero, I have not spoken or met anyone from Astrum in ages. They are as conversational as the Aurvandiil from what I have encountered. Funny thing is is that I used to fear Morek more and as of the last few years have had great encounters and conversations with Morekians who have visited Asylon. Astrum is our neighbor, all I know about them is that they want Itau and keep propping up hostile neighbors on our borders and then blame us for being paranoid. :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 07, 2013, 08:37:07 PM
Mrh? Astrum doesn't want Itau. That would be ridiculous. The Farronites want Itau.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 07, 2013, 08:51:00 PM
Whatever same thing :P

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on March 07, 2013, 08:58:19 PM
Nonsense. D'Hara wants  Itau  ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 07, 2013, 09:01:13 PM
Oh thats fine as long as its not big bad Indirik!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on March 07, 2013, 09:05:08 PM
Nonsense. D'Hara wants  Itau  ::)

Its not custom in Asylon to give wedding gifts ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lanyon on March 07, 2013, 09:08:24 PM
What's are you guys talking about? Aurvandil wants itau
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 07, 2013, 10:04:22 PM
Terran already owns Itau.

*creepy music plays*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 07, 2013, 10:17:19 PM
It was actually our intention to create another kingdom in Itau and Kosht. Kind of like a little mini-Luria in the west coast, lets them have independence and then war eachother in a revolving throne of Asylon thing but having Astrum above us makes us scared and we just keep a large kingdom for our safety. I prefer Asylon broken up into competitive kingdoms. I like the old Luria model before it decided on big is better. That way we develop more cultures, more religion , more trade, more conflict and more choice for new arriving nobles. I will just have to wait until a more convenient time to see if Asylon wants to be broken up. Im sure that Kosht will go before Itau. I'd much rather 3 smaller kingdoms of 10 nobles as a foundation than one big kingdom of 30. I like diversity of cultures.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on March 07, 2013, 10:35:22 PM
I prefer Asylon broken up into competitive kingdoms.

You prefer EVERYTHING broken into smaller competitive Kingdoms...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 07, 2013, 11:34:40 PM
Nonsense. D'Hara wants  Itau  ::)

Of course we do. Asylon was founded by D'Haran exiles, therefore Asylon is property of the Dragon King. Ask Alice.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 08, 2013, 12:02:32 AM
Hey now hey now, Its D'Hara that belongs to Glaumring! I want my ancestral homeland back! To one day see the banner of Melodia rise over Port Raviel and Paisly... Ahhh what glorious and ideal days were my youth. Before those D'Harans came and stole it all away. Of course living in Terran as a youngish lad fighting monsters all day, Caerwyn was a mere speck of regions, and Terran was small and quaint, they were alone out there in the wilderness, years before the moot and all this international powergames and politics. Simpler times, when the north and Astroism were just Morek and there was only the island of Astrum, with Everguard on the mainland. And then Virovene and Ravian and then Glaumring left to join in some swashbuckling adventure on the east continent and joined Virovene merely because it was somewhere different... Oh what memories.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 08, 2013, 02:20:23 AM
I'd much rather 3 smaller kingdoms of 10 nobles as a foundation than one big kingdom of 30. I like diversity of cultures.

Right.

Because it's way more fun to only have 10 people to talk to in your realm than 30.

I was once a huge fan of little realms. I still do think there's a vital place for little realms: nor do I think giant empires are necessary great either. But I'm getting to where I really think 20-40 nobles, 2-3 cities is probably about the ideal size for most realms. Seems like big and small realms are super hit-or-miss on their ability to retain players.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 08, 2013, 02:25:15 AM
Right.

Because it's way more fun to only have 10 people to talk to in your realm than 30.

I was once a huge fan of little realms. I still do think there's a vital place for little realms: nor do I think giant empires are necessary great either. But I'm getting to where I really think 20-40 nobles, 2-3 cities is probably about the ideal size for most realms. Seems like big and small realms are super hit-or-miss on their ability to retain players.

I feel the same way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 08, 2013, 03:43:25 AM
Right.

Because it's way more fun to only have 10 people to talk to in your realm than 30.

I was once a huge fan of little realms. I still do think there's a vital place for little realms: nor do I think giant empires are necessary great either. But I'm getting to where I really think 20-40 nobles, 2-3 cities is probably about the ideal size for most realms. Seems like big and small realms are super hit-or-miss on their ability to retain players.

lol like all 30 of the nobles talk... But anyways, I guess you have a point.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 08, 2013, 03:45:15 AM
lol like all 30 of the nobles talk... But anyways, I guess you have a point.

50% activity of 10 nobles is 5 active nobles, 25% activity of 40 nobles is 10 active nobles.

Sure, not all of them talk. Usually, a lower percentage do. But overall, you still tend to have more people to interact with.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 08, 2013, 05:25:54 AM
Ok you win this round. Less Alliances then...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 08, 2013, 07:12:30 AM
Ok you win this round. Less Alliances then...

Why would we want less alliances?

Forming alliances is fun.

Besides, if you never have allies, how will you ever backstab anybody?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 08, 2013, 07:32:03 AM
Ok you win this round. Less Alliances then...

Glaumring, if you don't form alliances, how are we going to get pissed at you when you don't do what we tell you to do!?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 08, 2013, 07:34:48 AM
What if Mendicant converted to SA all of a sudden, a la Constantine?

Candiels is a bit like Constantinople, bridging East and West, Europe and Asia, Toprak and the Occidens. AND Mendicant did essentially build Candiels.

Though I guess Valkyria is a bit more fitting geographically speaking.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 08, 2013, 02:46:25 PM
Why would we want less alliances?

Forming alliances is fun.

Besides, if you never have allies, how will you ever backstab anybody?

This, and if you are the only one not making alliances, you shouldn't surprise yourself if, by the time you start a war, you get seriously outnumbered.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 08, 2013, 02:57:58 PM
This, and if you are the only one not making alliances, you shouldn't surprise yourself if, by the time you start a war, you get seriously outnumbered.

When Asylon forms an alliance we mean it that is the difference between us and the Moot.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 08, 2013, 03:05:44 PM
Standard rebuttal #14.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 08, 2013, 03:12:40 PM
Allies of allies can't declare war. We've got an invulnerable shield of alliances!  Viva D'Hara! We are the alliance spiders! We are the dragons that hoard as many alliances as gold!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 08, 2013, 06:02:25 PM
And turn and burn them like peanuts when the right time comes. Asylon doesnt work like that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 08, 2013, 06:23:26 PM
And turn and burn them like peanuts when the right time comes. Asylon doesnt work like that.

Amusing then, that, D'hara, with lots of alliances, has managed to provide a diverse game experience with major components of politics, religion, trade, and war– multiple wars on multiple fronts.

When was the last time Asylon engaged in major geopolitics or fought a war?

Oh yeah. When Terran dragged you into it because you couldn't find anything fun to do yourself.

Alliances are catalysts of conflict, not preventatives of it. Read George Washington's farewell address from a descriptive rather than prescriptive stance.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 08, 2013, 08:08:28 PM
Being in the center of the map its only natural you feel the need for so many alliances. Your kingdom is as porous as swiss cheese since naval landings became a thing. Anyways I'll agree with you on some of your points.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 08, 2013, 08:35:07 PM
Amusing then, that, D'hara, with lots of alliances, has managed to provide a diverse game experience with major components of politics, religion, trade, and war– multiple wars on multiple fronts.

When was the last time Asylon engaged in major geopolitics or fought a war?

Oh yeah. When Terran dragged you into it because you couldn't find anything fun to do yourself.

Alliances are catalysts of conflict, not preventatives of it. Read George Washington's farewell address from a descriptive rather than prescriptive stance.

Alliances brought WWI. Who else would have cared for what went on in Serbia otherwise? :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 08, 2013, 10:09:22 PM
Alliances brought WWI. Who else would have cared for what went on in Serbia otherwise? :P

Further proof that massive entangled alliances are bad  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on March 08, 2013, 10:27:46 PM
...what.

Alliances provide something to be broken. Multialliances give for dynamic conflict, which is basically a big no to everything you've ever said about the matter.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: mikm on March 08, 2013, 10:43:30 PM
It is quite interesting when 2 allies of yours fight each other. You will have to chose who you help.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 08, 2013, 10:52:54 PM
...what.

Alliances provide something to be broken. Multialliances give for dynamic conflict, which is basically a big no to everything you've ever said about the matter.

Well I tend to look at alliances as friendships that should be cultivated. Coming from Feylonis who is hardly trustworthy and the likes of Chenier and Vellos no wonder no one should trust your word in an alliance. I look at alliances like England and Portugal, or Canada and the states. You guys look at them as mere stepping stones to a powergrab... And Im looked at like the bad guy here... :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 08, 2013, 10:54:19 PM
Well I tend to look at alliances as friendships that should be cultivated. Coming from Feylonis who is hardly trustworthy and the likes of Chenier and Vellos no wonder no one should trust your word in an alliance. I look at alliances like England and Portugal, or Canada and the states. You guys look at them as mere stepping stones to a powergrab... And Im looked at like the bad guy here... :P

Since when were the two alliances you named not stepping stones to a powergrab...?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 08, 2013, 11:33:41 PM
Well perhaps we have different definitions of how one does things. I prefer some quality, you prefer quantity.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on March 09, 2013, 12:31:09 AM
It is quite interesting when 2 allies of yours fight each other. You will have to chose who you help.

Quite explicitly, in fact, since your 2 allies cannot go to war (officially) as long as they are both allied with you.

So either one of them has to decide they like you less than they hate your other friend, or you have to decide which friend you like most, and drop relations with them.

Or you can just drop relations with both of them. :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 09, 2013, 03:46:30 AM
Isn't BM fun? Playing with so many people with so many conflicting ideas.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 09, 2013, 04:05:46 AM
Because it's way more fun to only have 10 people to talk to in your realm than 30.

I was once a huge fan of little realms. I still do think there's a vital place for little realms: nor do I think giant empires are necessary great either. But I'm getting to where I really think 20-40 nobles, 2-3 cities is probably about the ideal size for most realms. Seems like big and small realms are super hit-or-miss on their ability to retain players.
I have always maintained that you need a certain critical number of players (players not characters) in a realm to make it a fun and engaging realm. I don't feel that in most normal circumstances that you ca achieve that in realms of less than about two dozen players. These realms tend to be too quiet, and not enough action happens. That's not to say that in exceptional circumstances it *can't* happen (I have head that Republic of Fwuvoghor with  under a dozen characters was very active), that is definitely unusual. There is only a certain number of players that will really be active in a realm. The larger the realm, the greater the chance that you will exceed this inexact critical threshold and achieve a thriving, active realm. You can still get larger realms with high numbers of players that are boring and stagnant, but the chances are lower. At least on Dwilight, a 10-character realm would have ten actual people, and not five people doubled-up. I have also noticed that realms with a larger percentage of doubled-up characters tend to be quieter, more stagnant, and more elitist.

This has always been why I have so strongly opposed to "duchy as team" mentality. In order to really stress that concept, the game would need to make the duchy the default widest communication channel you have. For most multi-duchy realms, that's just too small of a circle to maintain an active, fun atmosphere.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on March 11, 2013, 12:39:48 AM
In recent discussion, a point was made that since King Turin was away "on a Crusade" the Church is partly to blame for his not being in the realm when the rebellion occurred. Rabisu meant to merely rebut this by saying this:

Quote
The Church bears no responsibility for Iashalur marching against Aurvandil. There is no Crusade.

But then he went on to say this:

Quote
This word.... Crusade. How I have come to loathe reading it. Every little conflict opens the door, and someone in this Church bandies about the word. Hoping. Lusting. Seeking to pervert even the idea of a Holy War... into just another convenient label for a fashionable conflict. Aurvandil. Allison. Swordfell. The Farronite Republic. Asylon! Iashalur!! It sickens me, it truly does, to see the desires some have... to blunt and dull the edge of the Sword... with repeated beatings against this stone or that stone. The Sword is not your Hammer, to shape the world into one better fitting your desires!

Are you all blind? You may all see - now that the Prophet has made it clear - that Allison is evil. But you do not see what it is that drove her to commit evil. So you do not see when your own feet walk down the same path she trod. To her, this very Church was of no more meaning than her current Cult - it was a vehicle for her lust for power. Her personal ambitions. Her pride, her all-consuming inability to see past her own machinations and agendas.

Who here amongst you would have us declare Crusade against someone? Have you thought why? Beyond the justifications - this man or that man is evil, that realm is a threat, etc. Beyond the noble-sounding, yet hollow arguments I have seen so many times. Have you ever considered that just because you desire it, that it may not be worthwhile for all of Sanguis Astroism? Or have you considered it, and with lizard-like cunning merely ignored it, favoring your own desires over any good that the Church has wrought? No, do not answer. I fear to know, in truth, just how many of you are only going through the motions of faith... when the real source of your devotion is yourselves.

Cease your excretions, sinners! Look to your own souls before you begin accusing others! Hold that mirror of pitiless examination to yourselves, and tell me that what you see is pure and benevolent... and listen as your fellows laugh! Everyone is pure in their own eyes, and everyone's enemies must always be devils.  Cease your excretions!

And if you cannot bear so much, then at least do this - refrain from speaking of Crusade as if it is a done or inevitable thing. It is not. The role I bear in my Holy Office is not some mere formality. Only I can declare a Crusade. And until and unless I have done so, one does not exist, so do not vomit up the word like a sickly cur, again and again! Is that... perfectly.... clear?

Going too far? You decide! It was fun to make this rant/sermon though.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 11, 2013, 01:37:25 AM
No, it was not too far. I was extremely happy to see that letter.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on March 11, 2013, 04:56:28 PM
Quote
Cease your excretions, sinners!

I LOL'ed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 11, 2013, 05:40:36 PM
I LOL'ed.

I can imagine him being a priest in warhammer 40k, who if you get too angry will pull out the oversized chainsaw he used back when he was attached to the Imperial Guard....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 11, 2013, 05:51:50 PM
Cease your excretions sinners!

(http://media.moddb.com/cache/images/mods/1/22/21228/thumb_620x2000/priest.jpg)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 11, 2013, 06:56:53 PM
Cease your excretions sinners!

(http://media.moddb.com/cache/images/mods/1/22/21228/thumb_620x2000/priest.jpg)

YES, THIS!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on March 11, 2013, 07:37:31 PM
Cease your excretions sinners!

(http://media.moddb.com/cache/images/mods/1/22/21228/thumb_620x2000/priest.jpg)

+1
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: D'Espana on March 13, 2013, 03:00:40 AM
Cease your excretions sinners!

(http://media.moddb.com/cache/images/mods/1/22/21228/thumb_620x2000/priest.jpg)

Never thought of this one, even though I should have :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daimall on March 13, 2013, 03:06:15 AM
So.... is SA going to sanction people to go depose Leopold?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 13, 2013, 03:18:40 AM
Dunno. He does have, in a sense, a legitimate claim on the throne. He is a member of the faith. And the people who supported him are joining the church. The elders haven't really come to any conclusion yet. I personally doubt there will be any kind of official sanction or effort to put Turin back on the throne.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 13, 2013, 03:44:19 AM
Honestly...

Hireshmont wants to hush the whole thing up and get everybody moving against Asylon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 13, 2013, 04:07:34 AM
I don't think you'll have to push very hard.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on March 13, 2013, 04:11:49 AM
Glaumring has always been the sort of fellow who, in the arena of verbal politics, if you give him enough rope he'll hang himself.

CEASE YOUR EXCRETIONS.

...Buy EZ-Dry Anti-Diarrhea Gelcaps!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 13, 2013, 04:17:38 AM
Glaumring has always been the sort of fellow who, in the arena of verbal politics, if you give him enough rope he'll hang himself.

CEASE YOUR EXCRETIONS.

...Buy EZ-Dry Anti-Diarrhea Gelcaps!

I've never been very good at lying or manipulating people... :'(

Its just my honest heart and pureness... :-[
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on March 13, 2013, 04:45:30 AM
It's not even about lying or intending to manipulate people so much. When you speak whatever's on your mind or let your feelings motivate your responses all the time, people can easily provoke you into doing or saying something that winds up against your best interests. Allison has that problem. Rabisu does too, though he struggles against it because he's seen how this trait can be the downfall of the great and powerful.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 13, 2013, 04:47:30 AM
I've never been very good at lying or manipulating people... :'(

Its just my honest heart and pureness... :-[
KK does it just fine. Its more that you are emotional, contradictory,  and/or insulting at times. That is not an insult just my thoughts on your character downfalls.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 13, 2013, 05:03:30 AM
KK does it just fine. Its more that you are emotional, contradictory,  and/or insulting at times. That is not an insult just my thoughts on your character downfalls.


Yes, you are correct. I believe a good character should have downfalls. For example I am watching Akira Kurosawa 'RAN' right now. Its a fairly good study of characters with downfall. I believe that BM is only interesting if it is not purely played as a game but as a story and sometimes that means playing a certain way not tried before. Like today I was playing Fallout 2 and rolled up a pure melee character who only used his fists. Just because I have never played that way before. Back to BM, I dont think anyone in Asylon wants to be the last realm standing out of pure boredom. We will continue to play in a dramatic way, we are not worried or particularly care if all of SA comes to fight us. We are used to it. And guaranteed we will win this war.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 13, 2013, 05:38:31 AM
And guaranteed we will win this war.  8)

I see Mendican'ts arrogance is rubbing off.  ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 13, 2013, 06:20:09 AM
I've never been very good at lying or manipulating people... :'(

Its just my honest heart and pureness... :-[

LOL

This is Battlemaster bro.

It's impossible to play without becoming a grade-a manipulator, and Glaumring is a pretty good one.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 13, 2013, 03:33:27 PM
I see Mendican'ts arrogance is rubbing off.  ::)

There is a difference between arrogance and confidence. Glaumring has well placed confidence, since he actually has an inkling of what Aurvandil is planning and the size of the army we are about to raise. And that is without even knowing what's going to happen on the eastern front. It would be arrogant to assume Aurvandil won't win.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 13, 2013, 04:55:22 PM
There is a difference between arrogance and confidence. Glaumring has well placed confidence, since he actually has an inkling of what Aurvandil is planning and the size of the army we are about to raise. And that is without even knowing what's going to happen on the eastern front. It would be arrogant to assume Aurvandil won't win.

I await your Aurvandil-Luria Nova-Swordfell-Farronite Republic-Asylon-Iashalur-Libero-Zuma coalition.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on March 13, 2013, 04:59:38 PM
I await your Aurvandil-Luria Nova-Swordfell-Farronite Republic-Asylon-Iashalur-Libero-Zuma coalition.

I can't tell if you're joking or not.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 13, 2013, 05:03:18 PM
I await your Aurvandil-Luria Nova-Swordfell-Farronite Republic-Asylon-Iashalur-Libero-Zuma coalition.

He is all of those kingdoms are already allied with D'Hara... ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 13, 2013, 05:08:27 PM
I can't tell if you're joking or not.

It's hard to tell, sometimes, isn't it?  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on March 13, 2013, 05:35:04 PM
It's hard to tell, sometimes, isn't it?  8)

Be more funny?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 13, 2013, 06:23:00 PM
the size of the army we are about to raise

From what little I do know, I am very interested to see this as well.

I think most of us in the Moot pretty much get that, after we've realized that northern realms basically cannot help us, we're pretty much screwed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 13, 2013, 07:23:59 PM
Well you can always join us , we all march north wipe out Astrum and reorder Dwilight.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 13, 2013, 07:35:20 PM
Well you can always join us , we all march north wipe out Astrum and reorder Dwilight.

Sounds..... really boring actually.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 13, 2013, 08:25:18 PM
You are boring and thats why you will be wiped out.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 13, 2013, 08:33:06 PM
You are boring and thats why you will be wiped out.

I find your lack of apostrophes... Disturbing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 13, 2013, 08:37:38 PM
You are boring and thats why you will be wiped out.

I find D'Haran internal politics more interesting than Asylon's backstab and the big ol' war as a whole.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: mikm on March 13, 2013, 08:50:46 PM
So much dialogue. Is Glaumring the king. It kind of seems like it the way things are going.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on March 13, 2013, 09:07:04 PM
So much dialogue. Is Glaumring the king. It kind of seems like it the way things are going.

No, play the King of Asylon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 13, 2013, 09:08:03 PM
I find D'Haran internal politics more interesting than Asylon's backstab and the big ol' war as a whole.

Such bias. And we have plenty of reasons. Not liking you is enough
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on March 13, 2013, 09:14:32 PM
*Picks up some leftover poop from the poop chucking contest.*

Can I participate?

*Proceeds to throw said poop at Chenier.*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on March 13, 2013, 10:34:42 PM
Silly SA. A Crusade doesn't need to be called to declare war against Aurvandil-Asylon. Just individually declare war!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 13, 2013, 10:59:54 PM
Crusades are so 1000A.D... 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 13, 2013, 11:19:24 PM
Perfect!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 13, 2013, 11:31:23 PM
No, play the King of Asylon.

You're KINO– King In Name Only.

The loudest voice from your realm, who commands the most sway with the nobles, is the King. Period. Until Grimrog starts talking and countering Glaumring's policies, Glaumring will still be the archon of Asylon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 14, 2013, 12:11:56 AM
You're KINO– King In Name Only.

The loudest voice from your realm, who commands the most sway with the nobles, is the King. Period. Until Grimrog starts talking and countering Glaumring's policies, Glaumring will still be the archon of Asylon.

 My policies are formed from consensus from the council of Asylon. There are like 6 or 7 voices in the council. Sir Grimrog and I have been friends on Dwilight for years and years. He was there in Thulsoma. We think alike because we both have had to put up with your blabber over the years. Priest Graeth is also an old old friend, and Lady Bucklefee. Who else, oh there is so many of us scattered around the land. That day so many years ago now we all landed here on these shores and went into each kingdom and wait in the shadows...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 14, 2013, 12:54:08 AM
It would be arrogant to assume Aurvandil won't win.

We... have literally never thought that.

We just think Aurvandil is evil and mean and we have struggled and struggled to defend ourselves and stay alive as long as possible. Duh Aurvandil is going to/can win. You have three times our Noble count and on top of that those Nobles are all freakishly active and participatory.

Why the hell do you think we've scambeled to bring the whole damn continent into the war on our side? We're scared out of our minds trying desperately to do anything to escape Aurvandil's conquest.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on March 14, 2013, 12:55:37 AM
You're KINO– King In Name Only.

The loudest voice from your realm, who commands the most sway with the nobles, is the King. Period. Until Grimrog starts talking and countering Glaumring's policies, Glaumring will still be the archon of Asylon.

I have next to no understanding of Asylon internal politics, but this is definitely the way it seems to be from the perspective of my D'Haran character. It appears Glaumring said 'lets go to war' and Grimrog said 'well if you say so.'
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 14, 2013, 12:59:48 AM
I have next to no understanding of Asylon internal politics, but this is definitely the way it seems to be from the perspective of my D'Haran character. It appears Glaumring said 'lets go to war' and Grimrog said 'well if you say so.'

If that's the case then I'm not entirely worried. We'll probably receive a request for cease fire any day now.

And then a few days later, after signing it, be invaded again.


If this week's flavor is invade Terran for Glaumy, we only need to wait until next week to be in clear.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on March 14, 2013, 01:09:05 AM
I have next to no understanding of Asylon internal politics, but this is definitely the way it seems to be from the perspective of my D'Haran character. It appears Glaumring said 'lets go to war' and Grimrog said 'well if you say so.'

haha, If it was that simple. Glaumring and Grimrog thinks alot like on many subjects, but they are far from the same. And Grimrog might listen to Glaumring, but he do not take orders from anyone. Nor do I as player.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on March 14, 2013, 01:58:00 AM
haha, If it was that simple. Glaumring and Grimrog thinks alot like on many subjects, but they are far from the same. And Grimrog might listen to Glaumring, but he do not take orders from anyone. Nor do I as player.

I don't mean to imply you do as a player. But in D'Hara, Asylon is largely regarded as a rampaging barbarian horde, so Ismail just kinda figured that whoever talks the best game will get the horde's attention the most. Mob psychology basically.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on March 14, 2013, 02:08:20 AM
I don't mean to imply you do as a player. But in D'Hara, Asylon is largely regarded as a rampaging barbarian horde, so Ismail just kinda figured that whoever talks the best game will get the horde's attention the most. Mob psychology basically.

Ah, roger that. And it makes sense, Glaumring is the most vocal character in Asylon that tend to spread his words all over the place, and I love him for it =).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 14, 2013, 02:45:32 AM
I constantly make suggestions to the council and then we either do them or not. Its just that I am constantly looking for a way to survive and not just looking at obvious paths but looking at really weird angles that deal in chain reactions/ fate /destiny/ cocky luck / and being totally awesome in a guacamole bowl.

I am far from the great power of Asylon, influential perhaps but the main thing about Asylon and even when I ruled it is allow independence of all the powers, in war the general/marshals make the rules and the king merely suggests strategy but its not the job of the king to run the war. We have a diplomatic council that is composed of volunteers who go out and meet people or talk to the Zuma/nobles etc once again the king makes suggestions and the diplomatic council goes and does it if they want too.

Everything in Asylon is basically volunteer and council. Everyone who wants merely requests and we find a way to make it happen. If someone wants land we get it for them, if they need gold we deal with it. Basically we create a system where everyone is able to achieve what they want if they want it. And if you are active you can rise very quickly in Asylon, just ask Halleria who had like 15 titles in Asylon and land. The king is there to suggest and the council is there to make it happen.

We have several councils all volunteer and anyone may join them on request. And then those people make stuff like laws and diplomacy through their own dialogue and ideas.

To tell the truth I dont even know our military strategy for this war it is entirely left up to him and his council. I trust him to do his job, it has always been that way since Thulsoma, the general leads how he wishes. With the aid of his council and Marshals/Vice-Marshals etc.

The magistrate makes his own laws and we can debate etc certain aspects like in Asylon dont abuse adventurers, but you may loot any land outside of Asylon unclaimed, duel whenever you wish, call for elections and even wage a coup. The coup being supported since Asylons foundation as long as the kingdom remains a monarchy, duchies may split when they have enough resources and or nobles.

Anyone may form a religion whenever they want at anytime. Conflict between lords is encouraged. Competition is encouraged, arguing is encouraged, getting drunk and exploring. Right now we have several long running excellent RP's they are not long and windy, a paragraph here or there a day. Its great.


You think its a dictatorship its not, the system , the mechanism of Asylon is that all the parts are important and everyone with motivation from a new knight to an old royal can take the kingdom any direction they want.  And thats why we oppose SA and other kingdoms controlling us because our system is fun and healthy and interesting for those who play there and they can fullfill so many things if they just imagine it.

That is why sometimes our diplomacy or military is sometimes chaotic, its because we believe that the nobles in that position should be responsible for that job. The king makes suggestions, the councils steer the realm.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on March 14, 2013, 03:09:08 AM
To Crusade or not to Crusade, that is the question.

Didn't I say that like fifty pages back too?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 14, 2013, 03:17:58 AM
To Crusade or not to Crusade, that is the question.

Didn't I say that like fifty pages back too?

How is acrusade possible? We aren't doing anything against the church... Unless the Moot counts as a religion now... :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on March 14, 2013, 03:25:45 AM
Oh, it's always possible. One needn't be a religion per se to be the target of a holy war.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 14, 2013, 03:34:23 AM
Oh, it's always possible. One needn't be a religion per se to be the target of a holy war.

Oh... Who cares? 8) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mznsEcZlM2I
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on March 14, 2013, 03:53:46 AM
You might care if you knew what a Crusade really meant. What it would really be.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 14, 2013, 04:21:28 AM
You might care if you knew what a Crusade really meant. What it would really be.

Every single Asylonian is waging a crusade every day they wake up. Their crusade is for freedom! Can your crusade do that?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 14, 2013, 04:50:44 AM
Every single Asylonian is waging a crusade every day they wake up. Their crusade is for freedom! Can your crusade do that?
That makes no sense. Crusades are holy wars/religious motives.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on March 14, 2013, 04:51:05 AM
Freedom through alliance with a stronger power? Aligning yourselves to the will of another? Putting yourselves in the same boat as Allison? A strange sort of freedom! Why, I remember when Glaumring left the Church, and why. Because Allison's presence was a corrupting influence, because they harbored and supported her always. Yet now she's no longer one of us, but being harbored and supported by Aurvandil... and you are fine with that now!

Can a SA Crusade do what you do? No. It can do much, much more.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on March 14, 2013, 05:18:03 AM
Your character is also taunting and making certain statements IG, you know. I mean you do know this, right?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 14, 2013, 05:23:24 AM
Your character is also taunting and making certain statements IG, you know. I mean you do know this, right?

I removed my comment because this is just going to turn into a etc etc flamefest and Im just gonna jump out now. Bye!  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 14, 2013, 06:24:09 AM
A crusade isn't going to mean much.  If its a crusade against Asylon, then SA will likely lose the SA followers they have in that realm and the temples.  It won't mean much because it is likely that most of Dwilight will/has declared war on Asylon. 

All of Dwilight is at war with Aurvandil and it means very little so far.  A "Crusade" isn't going to change much of anything.  SA has had plenty of chances to declare Crusades.  Hasn't declared one on Aurvandil nor on OA.  Why would they declare one on Asylon?  Probably because they know they can't beat Aurvandil or OA...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on March 14, 2013, 07:03:11 AM
Farronite Republic and Terran already out-gun Asylon, so, as far as I'm concerned the war is a foregone conclusion. A crusade won't matter one bit. Even if the outcome of the war was unsure, half of the crusaders are too far away to do anything. The other half have, or have probably, already made up their minds to join on their own volition. In any case, a crusade would merely be for show.

One thing that will be interesting to see is how the victors manage to overcome their lack of spare nobility. Ideally, the SA realms would want to destroy Asylon utterly and set up a new realm, drawing it's ranks from their own nobility. But they cannot do that, as, between all of them they have only an excess of roughly a dozen nobles. Even if all twelve of them wanted to migrate to the new realm they would be short by three, as Asylon has fifteen regions that would need to be governed. So, this conventional strategy of realm-founding wouldn't be particularly viable. Other strategies, such as looting Asylon's regions to revolt, in order to destroy it and leave the lands as empty husks, would probably be too much effort on the players' parts. Who would want to continually journey back and forth looting and refitting over and over again to the extent necessary for cleansing such a large area? Probably not many people. Asides from those two strategies, I cannot think of a way to resolve this war in a consequential manner. Any resolution which leads Asylon alive isn't much of a resolution at all, as Asylon could merely start the whole thing anew without suffering any consequences which it would have not already suffered. Basically, thanks to the lack of will-to-power on the part of it's enemies, Asylon is eternal.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 14, 2013, 11:14:14 AM
Farronite Republic and Terran already out-gun Asylon, so, as far as I'm concerned the war is a foregone conclusion. A crusade won't matter one bit. Even if the outcome of the war was unsure, half of the crusaders are too far away to do anything. The other half have, or have probably, already made up their minds to join on their own volition. In any case, a crusade would merely be for show.

One thing that will be interesting to see is how the victors manage to overcome their lack of spare nobility. Ideally, the SA realms would want to destroy Asylon utterly and set up a new realm, drawing it's ranks from their own nobility. But they cannot do that, as, between all of them they have only an excess of roughly a dozen nobles. Even if all twelve of them wanted to migrate to the new realm they would be short by three, as Asylon has fifteen regions that would need to be governed. So, this conventional strategy of realm-founding wouldn't be particularly viable. Other strategies, such as looting Asylon's regions to revolt, in order to destroy it and leave the lands as empty husks, would probably be too much effort on the players' parts. Who would want to continually journey back and forth looting and refitting over and over again to the extent necessary for cleansing such a large area? Probably not many people. Asides from those two strategies, I cannot think of a way to resolve this war in a consequential manner. Any resolution which leads Asylon alive isn't much of a resolution at all, as Asylon could merely start the whole thing anew without suffering any consequences which it would have not already suffered. Basically, thanks to the lack of will-to-power on the part of it's enemies, Asylon is eternal.

No need to cleanse a whole area. Just TO a few cities, loot the other cities rogue, and the realm will collapse. No need to focus on their bunch of rurals.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on March 14, 2013, 03:32:19 PM
Also, the Kosht area would be left untouched, since that's part of an agreement between Asylon and the Zuma (and we all know how hard it is to have the Zuma against you). So we're left with a dozen regions, fit for a new realm :D.

Or, like Chenier said, just loot them to revolt.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 14, 2013, 04:29:20 PM
You don't have to loot them rogue. Go in during autumn and burn the fields. No food = mass starvation and rogueness. You don't even have to touch the cities. Burn the food, and the cities go away. Just ask Caerwyn.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 14, 2013, 04:30:25 PM
Or, as demonstrated on Atamara, forced expulsion of prominent nobles, council-reshuffling, and subdivision of a realm can be powerful.

We spin off Itau into FR, Echiur and Koshtlom into a new realm, and leave "Asylon" in Via with about 1/3 as many nobles. Then we force everyone of city-lord or duke-rank or higher to leave the realms, and put 6-8 foreign nobles in one of the two parts of Asylon to keep it under control.

There are many options.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on March 14, 2013, 04:32:15 PM
We spin off Itau into FR, Echiur and Koshtlom into a new realm, and leave "Asylon" in Via with about 1/3 as many nobles.

Hey, Glaumring gets his wish of city states ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 14, 2013, 04:33:56 PM
Hey, Glaumring gets his wish of city states ;)

My thought exactly.

Except Glaumring will be expelled from all those lands.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 14, 2013, 05:10:16 PM
Or, as demonstrated on Atamara, forced expulsion of prominent nobles, council-reshuffling, and subdivision of a realm can be powerful.

We spin off Itau into FR, Echiur and Koshtlom into a new realm, and leave "Asylon" in Via with about 1/3 as many nobles. Then we force everyone of city-lord or duke-rank or higher to leave the realms, and put 6-8 foreign nobles in one of the two parts of Asylon to keep it under control.

There are many options.


You do realize that Terran is going to get smashed to dust very shortly right?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 14, 2013, 05:34:04 PM

You do realize that Terran is going to get smashed to dust very shortly right?

Which means we will have 20 extra nobles with which to colonize Asylon!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 14, 2013, 05:43:23 PM
We trading spots!?? Sweet  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 14, 2013, 05:46:20 PM
We trading spots!?? Sweet  ;D

Heh– it'd be an interesting rationalization of the continent for sure.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: mikm on March 14, 2013, 06:42:38 PM
A mech albilon guildhouse got smashed. ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on March 14, 2013, 06:51:32 PM
A mech albilon guildhouse got smashed. ::)

Muahahahahahaha! Burn it! Burn it all!

(http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/4cc0a5ba4bd7c89870160000-900/it-will-take-two-days-to-burn-it-all.jpg)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 14, 2013, 10:08:10 PM

You do realize that Terran is going to get smashed to dust very shortly right?

Which means we will have 20 extra nobles with which to colonize Asylon!

It will be interesting, if Aurvandil really does "destory the 'Moot" and all of its realms where will all those Nobles go?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 14, 2013, 10:20:05 PM
It will be interesting, if Aurvandil really does "destory the 'Moot" and all of its realms where will all those Nobles go?
Whether or not the 'Moot realms survive, I can't say for sure, but I don't see Asylon getting out of this with their current lands. Possibly moving towards Terrans position but probably more south but I don't see Aslyon retaining its current lands. Then if they can get quite a bit of nobles from the 'Moot to join the realm replacing Asylon, they would have a high noble count and could possibly reclaim the land.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on March 14, 2013, 10:21:06 PM
It will be interesting, if Aurvandil really does "destory the 'Moot" and all of its realms where will all those Nobles go?

I guess they probably would move to some of their allies for a while, then come back and re-settle their previous lands.

**Edit** I even offered some of them to join Asylon and remain lords of their regions, but they kept changing their minds back and forth, eventually they chose to remain with Terran, It was a long shot, but it was worth a shot.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 14, 2013, 10:28:18 PM
**Edit** I even offered some of them to join Asylon and remain lords of their regions, but they kept changing their minds back and forth, eventually they chose to remain with Terran, It was a long shot, but it was worth a shot.

Those bastards. If I find out who was even considering treason I will have them all hung!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on March 14, 2013, 10:39:49 PM
Those bastards. If I find out who was even considering treason I will have them all hung!

Do not worry, they stayed true to your cause. But the fear of the advancing Aurvandil army and the destruction it will bring compared to the saftey of Asylon from such harm did sound tempting at first, I guess.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 14, 2013, 11:20:42 PM
It will be interesting, if Aurvandil really does "destory the 'Moot" and all of its realms where will all those Nobles go?

It goes both ways, smash Asylon and 30 some odd nobles join Aurvandiil... oh yum, thats a big realm...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 14, 2013, 11:39:58 PM
It goes both ways, smash Asylon and 30 some odd nobles join Aurvandiil... oh yum, thats a big realm...

No, I mean I am legitimately wondering where they will all go. Asylon Nobles > Aurvandil is a logical conlusion. Moot Nobles could go a number of places. Some to SA realms, but which ones? Farronite? What about Luria or Fissoa?

Just wondering.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 14, 2013, 11:47:36 PM
It goes both ways, smash Asylon and 30 some odd nobles join Aurvandiil... oh yum, thats a big realm...
I highly doubt all of Asylon would join Aurvandil, for many reasons.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on March 14, 2013, 11:59:59 PM
No, I mean I am legitimately wondering where they will all go. Asylon Nobles > Aurvandil is a logical conlusion. Moot Nobles could go a number of places. Some to SA realms, but which ones? Farronite? What about Luria or Fissoa?

Just wondering.

D'Harans would probably go to Swordfell, Fissoa, or FR, perhaps even Iashalur as Gornak did already. Can't imagine many going to Luria.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 15, 2013, 12:33:11 AM
I highly doubt all of Asylon would join Aurvandil, for many reasons.

Perhaps true, we do not tell our nobles where to go. I would prefer they spread out and go to a multitude of realms so as to infect it with Asylonian culture and thought.... Muahahhahahahahaha 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 15, 2013, 02:41:29 AM
D'Harans would probably go to Swordfell, Fissoa, or FR, perhaps even Iashalur as Gornak did already. Can't imagine many going to Luria.

Astrum has a nice island city.

Machiavel likes islands.

The whole thing with Aurvandil smashing the 'moot, however, is that Mendicant got the peace he wanted with both Barca and D'Hara. And I really don't see Asylon doing anything to either of us.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 15, 2013, 03:23:46 AM
The whole thing with Aurvandil smashing the 'moot, however, is that Mendicant got the peace he wanted with both Barca and D'Hara. And I really don't see Asylon doing anything to either of us.

He strongly dislikes Terran, though.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 15, 2013, 03:25:30 AM
He strongly dislikes Terran, though.
I don't recall exactly why. I think he thinks Terran is bullying the rest of the moot into decisions or something.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 15, 2013, 03:36:55 AM
I don't recall exactly why. I think he thinks Terran is bullying the rest of the moot into decisions or something.

Probably. Also we've spewed a lot of "Aurvandil needs to die" rhetoric from time to time.

Not to mention Hireshy is basically responsible for building the island-wide kill Aurvandil coalition.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 15, 2013, 03:40:24 AM
Probably. Also we've spewed a lot of "Aurvandil needs to die" rhetoric from time to time.

Not to mention Hireshy is basically responsible for building the island-wide kill Aurvandil coalition.

True enough.

If Mendicant has any more coherence of thought than his barbaric buddy Glaumring, though, he wouldn't push for the creation of diversity by picking off the small blocs...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 15, 2013, 03:43:07 AM
I find the idea that Aurvandil wants diversity to be... lacking in credulity.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 15, 2013, 03:48:35 AM
I find the idea that Aurvandil wants diversity to be... lacking in credulity.

They spawned two realms, which nothing forced them to, which is more than Asylon could ever say.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 15, 2013, 03:49:33 AM
I find the idea that Aurvandil wants diversity to be... lacking in credulity.

Same.

I can see him ending the war, but only by demanding vassalage and public apology/recognition of responsibility.



I for one, as a player, would love to see the Aurvandil war end totally. It has been an RP sink for me and I think the entire region. With it over, everyone will be able to move on to new and more interesting things.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 15, 2013, 03:53:53 AM
Same.

I can see him ending the war, but only by demanding vassalage and public apology/recognition of responsibility.



I for one, as a player, would love to see the Aurvandil war end totally. It has been an RP sink for me and I think the entire region. With it over, everyone will be able to move on to new and more interesting things.

We sure have, and ideas for post-war action aren't hard to come by.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on March 15, 2013, 04:18:48 AM
Same.

I can see him ending the war, but only by demanding vassalage and public apology/recognition of responsibility.



I for one, as a player, would love to see the Aurvandil war end totally. It has been an RP sink for me and I think the entire region. With it over, everyone will be able to move on to new and more interesting things.

amen bruv.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 15, 2013, 04:33:01 AM
They spawned two realms, which nothing forced them to, which is more than Asylon could ever say.
The Provincia thing wasn't a serious attempt at a realm. It was a time waster, designed to occupy (and quite possibly insult) the Moot while Aurvandil went home. No one ever expected it to last.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 15, 2013, 06:44:48 AM
The Provincia thing wasn't a serious attempt at a realm. It was a time waster, designed to occupy (and quite possibly insult) the Moot while Aurvandil went home. No one ever expected it to last except for Asylon.

FTFY
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on March 15, 2013, 06:57:21 AM
Mendicant sort of thought it could live, too. Or, at least, he implied that much at one point. Only later on would Mendicant's player change his tune, saying he never expected the realm to live. So, either the player was separating his own beliefs from Mendicant's, he changed his mind, or he was lying in order to trick people.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on March 15, 2013, 07:02:01 AM
Moot Nobles could go a number of places. Some to SA realms, but which ones?

I'm sure Iashalur would be happy to help set them up in Asyloni territory should anything untoward happen to Terran :P besides, in the meantime they could enjoy 15% of Darfix's income.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on March 15, 2013, 11:36:51 AM
I don't recall exactly why. I think he thinks Terran is bullying the rest of the moot into decisions or something.

They sort of did  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 15, 2013, 12:24:00 PM
The Provincia thing wasn't a serious attempt at a realm. It was a time waster, designed to occupy (and quite possibly insult) the Moot while Aurvandil went home. No one ever expected it to last.

They still didn't have to.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 15, 2013, 02:03:43 PM
They spawned two realms, which nothing forced them to, which is more than Asylon could ever say.

Wtf are you talking about you goon? D'Hara has never founded a realm. Asylon formed Angroth. You really are a constant !@#$ disturber arent you?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 15, 2013, 02:07:14 PM
I find the idea that Aurvandil wants diversity to be... lacking in credulity.

Says the guy who supports unlimited clone realms and clone religion and threatens to wipe out any realm under their control who tries to do anything different.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 15, 2013, 02:15:19 PM
Despite the inaccuracy of your statements.... I never claimed to want diversity, did I?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 15, 2013, 03:29:29 PM
Despite the inaccuracy of your statements.... I never claimed to want diversity, did I?

Same here. D'Hara is a Marrocidentalist realm, we seek expansion of civilization. We never said we wanted to create a billion new realms.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 15, 2013, 03:49:43 PM
Mendicant would never demand vassalage from anyone.

If Aurvandil didn't want diversity, we wouldn't have invited Allison and the Averothoi over would we? Both of whom are vastly different from Orvandeaux culture.

The Provincia could have been saved as an actual realm, but it served more purpose as a throwaway chess piece, it wasn't long after it's founding that Aurvandil got hit badly by war protests, so we decided it would be better to offer up the Provincia for conquest and focus on repairing Aurvandil. Which, luckily our foes decided to hit Paisly rather than Aurvandil, they could actually have damaged the Commonwealth if they had. Mendicant could have gone either way over Paisly basically, but we never really wanted Paisly and never wanted to diminish the territory of the Moot.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Nosferatus on March 15, 2013, 03:54:55 PM
Mendicant would never demand vassalage from anyone.

If Aurvandil didn't want diversity, we wouldn't have invited Allison and the Averothoi over would we? Both of whom are vastly different from Orvandeaux culture.

The Provincia could have been saved as an actual realm, but it served more purpose as a throwaway chess piece, it wasn't long after it's founding that Aurvandil got hit badly by war protests, so we decided it would be better to offer up the Provincia for conquest and focus on repairing Aurvandil. Which, luckily our foes decided to hit Paisly rather than Aurvandil, they could actually have damaged the Commonwealth if they had. Mendicant could have gone either way over Paisly basically, but we never really wanted Paisly and never wanted to diminish the territory of the Moot.

So all he wants is fight Falkirk? or what does he want? or whom does he wish to fight?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 15, 2013, 04:10:17 PM
Despite the inaccuracy of your statements.... I never claimed to want diversity, did I?

And that is why we fight you. To preserve our own future cultures of tomorrow. Ironically enough im reading a book about the rise of Islam and crusader kings. SA is the HRE and Islam all in one.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 15, 2013, 04:13:55 PM
So all he wants is fight Falkirk? or what does he want? or whom does he wish to fight?

You assume Mendicant wants anything.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Nosferatus on March 15, 2013, 05:45:04 PM
You assume Mendicant wants anything.

Ow yes, the Vandil king, doesn't want anything.
Nothing in excess.
Sure.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 15, 2013, 05:51:54 PM
Well, from what Mendicant has told me Aurvandiil will be setting up McDonalds themed realms in the Marroccidens and each will have its own McDonalds theme.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on March 15, 2013, 06:49:32 PM
Thus the time of the Burger Kings shall come to pass.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 15, 2013, 07:05:02 PM
The Dairy Queen shall rule the Moot lands henceforth , Mendicant dost decree...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: DamnTaffer on March 15, 2013, 07:08:28 PM
And FangFang will dress in a clown suit and amuse children at birthday parties.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 15, 2013, 07:36:25 PM
You should try Asylons burgers...  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 15, 2013, 07:55:18 PM
Maybe there will be a new daimon named ClownClown...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: T Strike on March 15, 2013, 07:58:26 PM
Alien.. nuff said..
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on March 15, 2013, 10:59:07 PM
And that is why we fight you. To preserve our own future cultures of tomorrow. Ironically enough im reading a book about the rise of Islam and crusader kings. SA is the HRE and Islam all in one.

Maybe in said book you have read of how the Europeans in the Fourth Crusade got bored and looted Constantinople before they even got to the Holy Land?  And how the HRE lasted for 1000 years?

I think history is against you, if your characterization is accurate. ;)  I do see it though. SA has a very large degree of political control (like HRE) and the ample lore behind it gives so much that the doctrines tend to be culturally pervasive (like Islam). Of course Islam did tend to fall to political infighting every so often. Very often actually.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 15, 2013, 11:18:57 PM
Plenty of kingdoms have lasted a 1000 years. Dwilight is much too small though to compare it entirely on an HRE/Islamic scale and nor is any part of the game truly accurate to reality. There are aspects of these two systems or times of history in SA but really there is no complete scale of the history. Many people in Dwilight do not die in RL for their decisions and nor do we have to deal with a hostile environment in the same scale.

I the thing that puzzles me about many people in SA is that they genuinely seem flabbergasted that anyone would want to oppose SA. Like the very act is beyond all reasoning and just shouldn't happen. What fun would Dwilight be if we all got along and followed every rule diplomatically? SA is just a moment in time, it will rise and fall just like everything else. BM has changed so much in the time I started in a year or two it will be equally as different.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on March 15, 2013, 11:26:53 PM
I the thing that puzzles me about many people in SA is that they genuinely seem flabbergasted that anyone would want to oppose SA. Like the very act is beyond all reasoning and just shouldn't happen. What fun would Dwilight be if we all got along and followed every rule diplomatically? SA is just a moment in time, it will rise and fall just like everything else. BM has changed so much in the time I started in a year or two it will be equally as different.

Well "opposing SA" in the way you mean it tends to involve complete annihilation, so based on the assumption that most realms want to live, yes it is surprising when someone stands up with a painted target on their chest and screams "Kill me!".
Not that I'm complaining of course. Without Caerwyn and co. declaring war on SA we would be vastly less influential than we are now, and now that Asylon's done practically the same thing its nice to see SA get the opportunity to really expand again. Keep it up guys!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on March 15, 2013, 11:42:10 PM
Well "opposing SA" in the way you mean it tends to involve complete annihilation, so based on the assumption that most realms want to live, yes it is surprising when someone stands up with a painted target on their chest and screams "Kill me!".
Not that I'm complaining of course. Without Caerwyn and co. declaring war on SA we would be vastly less influential than we are now, and now that Asylon's done practically the same thing its nice to see SA get the opportunity to really expand again. Keep it up guys!

Well played, sir. I think you are winning the priest game.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 12:20:18 AM
Ow yes, the Vandil king, doesn't want anything.
Nothing in excess.
Sure.

Mendicant doesn't need to want anything. He has people to want things for him.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 16, 2013, 12:22:23 AM
Well "opposing SA" in the way you mean it tends to involve complete annihilation, so based on the assumption that most realms want to live, yes it is surprising when someone stands up with a painted target on their chest and screams "Kill me!".
Not that I'm complaining of course. Without Caerwyn and co. declaring war on SA we would be vastly less influential than we are now, and now that Asylon's done practically the same thing its nice to see SA get the opportunity to really expand again. Keep it up guys!

Assuming SA wins.. Which you all assume so much and we haven't even begun to fight yet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 12:29:09 AM
Since when did this become a war against Sanguis Astroism?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on March 16, 2013, 12:29:28 AM
Assuming SA wins.. Which you all assume so much and we haven't even begun to fight yet.

Well barring Zuma intervention or an astoundingly quick destruction of Terran (I don't rate their chances of survival too highly, but at the very least they should keep Aurvandil busy), I think its a pretty safe assumption. It might take some time for the Northern armies to get back into the swing of things after so long a peace, but considering we were able to destroy Caerwyn I would imagine that SA can at the very least drive Asylon back past Via and possibly destroy it altogether.

But nevertheless you are right that the war is not yet over; the victors shall be clear soon enough.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on March 16, 2013, 12:33:09 AM
Since when did this become a war against Sanguis Astroism?

Well technically its not but considering that Astrum, Morek and Corsanctum, along with possibly Iashalur and the Farronites (not sure about these two as all I've heard is forum references which are of course notoriously unreliable) are marching against Asylon it is effectively a war with SA (or at least most of the nobles within SA). And while its not an official crusade its pretty clear that upon a theocratic victory SA is going to expand and benefit greatly.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 12:39:04 AM
Well technically its not but considering that Astrum, Morek and Corsanctum, along with possibly Iashalur and the Farronites (not sure about these two as all I've heard is forum references which are of course notoriously unreliable) are marching against Asylon it is effectively a war with SA (or at least most of the nobles within SA). And while its not an official crusade its pretty clear that upon a theocratic victory SA is going to expand and benefit greatly.

Sanguis Astroism won't win this time, they may have beaten Caerwyn (Incompetents) and the Averothoi and Saxons (tiny fortress realms) but how do they intend to defeat Aurvandil? Even all of your mobile armies combined would be smaller than the army Aurvandil has currently raised, if we are basing this on the forty-thousand mobile combat strength you raised earlier in the year shortly after declaring war.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on March 16, 2013, 12:46:15 AM
Sanguis Astroism won't win this time, they may have beaten Caerwyn (Incompetents) and the Averothoi and Saxons (tiny fortress realms) but how do they intend to defeat Aurvandil? Even all of your mobile armies combined are smaller than Aurvandil's army currently is. Based on the forty-thousand mobile combat strength you raised earlier in the year.

I don't imagine they'll beat Aurvandil, but I can imagine them beating Asylon and I don't think that Aurvandil's arm is long enough to defend them sufficiently (though of course I may yet be proven horribly wrong on that assumption...)

I should clarify that my comments have been primarily regarding the conflict surrounding Asylon, being primarily a response to Glaumring's posts. I very much doubt that Mendicant really cares that much about SA (though of course only you know the truth about that) and as a player I know full well that the Northern "war" against Aurvandil is a logistical impossibility.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 12:50:13 AM
I don't imagine they'll beat Aurvandil, but I can imagine them beating Asylon and I don't think that Aurvandil's arm is long enough to defend them sufficiently (though of course I may yet be proven horribly wrong on that assumption...)

I should clarify that my comments have been primarily regarding the conflict surrounding Asylon, being primarily a response to Glaumring's posts. I very much doubt that Mendicant really cares that much about SA (though of course only you know the truth about that) and as a player I know full well that the Northern "war" against Aurvandil is a logistical impossibility.

As Mendicant recently told the Light of Maddening, he declines to be the enemy of Sanguis Astroism and disdains for their presumption that he would oblige them by opposing them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 16, 2013, 12:55:05 AM
Ya'll are all missing the strategic reality here.

Neither SA nor Aurvandil can meaningfully harm one another. Both have huge food surpluses and major cultural pulls that draw certain players.

If the war becomes an EC-style long-haul, we're going to have a bipolar continent with a wasteland between us. Terran will just be ground zero for a battle and will be destroyed/segmented. Asylon, Barca, and D'hara will be interesting diplomatic chess pieces.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on March 16, 2013, 12:56:31 AM
If the war becomes an EC-style long-haul, we're going to have a bipolar continent with a wasteland between us. Terran will just be ground zero for a battle and will be destroyed/segmented. Asylon, Barca, and D'hara will be interesting diplomatic chess pieces.

And Luria will continue to have one wave of civil strife after another, and remain utterly irrelevant to the broader continental political situation ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 16, 2013, 12:57:30 AM
Since when did this become a war against Sanguis Astroism?

No !@#$...  They are jumping in like it is though. This is a war against the Moot if anything. It is kind of annoying how fighting Terran and D'Hara somehow translate into a huge affront to SA that they just must wipe us out... Wasn't a few months ago they were all "GO KABRINSKIA!" against the Moot and now its "WE DONT KNOW WHAT WTF WE STAND FOR WE JUST OMG GLAUMRING KILLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL" 

Like seriously would be nice to fight a war that doesn't involve Morek/Corsanctum...OH OH don't forget us its you  Iashular who do nothing unless Astrum snaps their fingers. Even Iashulars coup was put on hold because OMG !@#$INCGHC GLAUMRING IS KILLING THE MOOT OMG... Like seriously guys. Do you have to join every war? Asylon didn't even attack an SA kingdom and its OMG WTF GLLAUMRING YOU !@#$EN TRYING TO WIPE OUT SA OMG WTF....

So you wonder where the hostility comes from SA can't stay out of any conflict and then they say "oh yeah we are just trying to survive if everyone just joined us we would totally fight amongst eachother like totally trust us...." No you wouldn't.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 12:59:02 AM
Ya'll are all missing the strategic reality here.

Neither SA nor Aurvandil can meaningfully harm one another. Both have huge food surpluses and major cultural pulls that draw certain players.

I disagree, within reason we can damage each other. It'll just be a challenge.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 12:59:59 AM
No !@#$...  They are jumping in like it is though. This is a war against the Moot if anything. It is kind of annoying how fighting Terran and D'Hara somehow translate into a huge affront to SA that they just must wipe us out... Wasn't a few months ago they were all "GO KABRINSKIA!" against the Moot and now its "WE DONT KNOW WHAT WTF WE STAND FOR WE JUST OMG GLAUMRING KILLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL" 

Like seriously would be nice to fight a war that doesn't involve Morek/Corsanctum...OH OH don't forget us its you  Iashular who do nothing unless Astrum snaps their fingers. Even Iashulars coup was put on hold because OMG !@#$INCGHC GLAUMRING IS KILLING THE MOOT OMG... Like seriously guys. Do you have to join every war? Asylon didn't even attack an SA kingdom and its OMG WTF GLLAUMRING YOU !@#$EN TRYING TO WIPE OUT SA OMG WTF....

So you wonder where the hostility comes from SA can't stay out of any conflict and then they say "oh yeah we are just trying to survive if everyone just joined us we would totally fight amongst eachother like totally trust us...." No you wouldn't.

From what Mendicant was told Glaumring was boasting of Sanguis Astroism's destruction at his hand.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 16, 2013, 01:03:29 AM
From what Mendicant was told Glaumring was boasting of Sanguis Astroism's destruction at his hand.

This is true.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 01:04:14 AM
This is true.

Hmm, maybe Mendicant should have given Glaumring a bollocking over it then.

No one speaks with the voice of Aurvandil but Mendicant.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 16, 2013, 01:05:21 AM
Hmm, maybe Mendicant should have given Glaumring a bollocking over it then.

No one speaks with the voice of Aurvandil but Mendicant.

Maybe Mendicant should realize that Glaumring is still king of Asylon and Glaumring is CRAZY.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 16, 2013, 01:05:33 AM
Quote
As Mendicant recently told the Light of Maddening,he declines to be the enemy of Sanguis Astroism and disdains for their presumption that he would oblige them by opposing them.
I don't think your consent is really required.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 16, 2013, 01:12:44 AM
Hmm, maybe Mendicant should have given Glaumring a bollocking over it then.

No one speaks with the voice of Aurvandil but Mendicant.

Ummm, thats complete bull!@#$. I never said anything about this being a war against SA. If anything I perhaps suggested that the SA nations involved in this conflict will get a shalacking but in no way did I mean that Aurvandiil and Asylon are at war with SA. If you start listening to !@#$ing Vellos you'll believe the sky is green if he told you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 16, 2013, 01:19:40 AM
From what Mendicant was told Glaumring was boasting of Sanguis Astroism's destruction at his hand.

Bull!@#$. How in the world is Aurvandiil going to destroy all of SA. Will they stop by Asylon and help us knock over the temples we have built there and protect? Whoever told you that is manipulating letters. Asylon is at war with the MOOT, If it was a religious war we'd have declared it and we would be killing Truinists and converting them in hordes. It is SA that or the Moot sending you bull!@#$ letters. What an insult.

I AM SUPER !@#$ING INSULTED... I wrote a pretty long big '!@#$ you' to many of you on this forum but decided to delete it but I am going to report people here and I ask the mods to delete some of the !@#$ on this... I am super insulted.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 01:21:07 AM
I don't think your consent is really required.

That is absolutely darling of you, but you see, it really is. Sanguis Astroism cannot make Mendicant be the foe they wish he would be no matter what they do, he simply declines.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 01:23:33 AM
Ummm, thats complete bull!@#$. I never said anything about this being a war against SA. If anything I perhaps suggested that the SA nations involved in this conflict will get a shalacking but in no way did I mean that Aurvandiil and Asylon are at war with SA. If you start listening to !@#$ing Vellos you'll believe the sky is green if he told you.

Yes well Mendicant isn't one to run under assumptions, that's why he hasn't mentioned it to Glaumring, he's waiting until they meet in person to calmly discuss it. Much as he did over the whole public orgy thing with Glaumring, he's not really one for giving his friends a bollocking when a quiet word suffices.

Oh, and it was Sanguis Astroism telling Mendicant that. The Veinsormoot were too busy telling me about how Asylon rape men, women and beast indiscriminately, painted and naked savages intoxicated on drugs committing all manner of atrocity.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 16, 2013, 01:28:31 AM
Yes well Mendicant isn't one to run under assumptions, that's why he hasn't mentioned it to Glaumring, he's waiting until they meet in person to calmly discuss it. Much as he did over the whole public orgy thing with Glaumring, he's not really one for giving his friends a bollocking when a quiet word suffices.

Dude? Do you think anyone in Asylon is under the delusion of what we are trying to do here? We were trying to go to war with D'Hara and the !@#$ing game told us we couldn't unless we dropped our alliance with the Farronites... This game code is against even us. I have said some pretty cocky !@#$ in my time but if you think I'm sitting there bragging about Aurvandiil like you are my big brother or something or like aschool yard kid, yeah !@#$ing right. I seriously have never been more insulted on this forum ever. You can call me crazy, you can call me a back stabbing knave but don't you ever !@#$ing think that I am snivelling twerp little prick... Holy !@#$ I am seriously pissed. Mendicant managed to piss me off with that one post more than CHenier or Vellos has ever... Amazing
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 01:30:52 AM
Dude? Do you think anyone in Asylon is under the delusion of what we are trying to do here? We were trying to go to war with D'Hara and the !@#$ing game told us we couldn't unless we dropped our alliance with the Farronites... This game code is against even us. I have said some pretty cocky !@#$ in my time but if you think I'm sitting there bragging about Aurvandiil like you are my big brother or something or like aschool yard kid, yeah !@#$ing right. I seriously have never been more insulted on this forum ever. You can call me crazy, you can call me a back stabbing knave but don't you ever !@#$ing think that I am snivelling twerp little prick... Holy !@#$ I am seriously pissed. Mendicant managed to piss me off with that one post more than CHenier or Vellos has ever... Amazing

As I said, this is merely what Mendicant was told, the fact he never mentioned it to Glaumring or Grimrog is rather proof that Mendicant didn't set much stock by it. I mentioned it in passing just out of interest, no need to get pissed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 16, 2013, 01:35:28 AM
Yes well Mendicant isn't one to run under assumptions, that's why he hasn't mentioned it to Glaumring, he's waiting until they meet in person to calmly discuss it. Much as he did over the whole public orgy thing with Glaumring, he's not really one for giving his friends a bollocking when a quiet word suffices.

Oh, and it was Sanguis Astroism telling Mendicant that. The Veinsormoot were too busy telling me about how Asylon rape men, women and beast indiscriminately, painted and naked savages intoxicated on drugs committing all manner of atrocity.

Well if it was SA telling you that, don't worry about it. They are aching so bad right now for a crusade. I have been chatting with Mathurin , chatting or ranting I can't remember which but we are hardly enemies in the sense that everyone wishes us to be. He did say I sounded like 'Allison Kabrinski' my retort is that his followers act like her... Either way there is a large contingent of coward players in SA  who wouldn't be able to beat this !@#$ out of a paperbag if it blew in their face on a windy day. And they use the church constantly to hide behind because they are incapable of surviving without it. They have an awful lot of jealousy and bull!@#$ that spews out of their mouths but they wouldn't dare fight as an underdog or even dare make a step out of line. At least in Asylon we take on half of Dwilight and we don't hide.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 01:37:20 AM
Well if it was SA telling you that, don't worry about it. They are aching so bad right now for a crusade. I have been chatting with Mathurin , chatting or ranting I can't remember which but we are hardly enemies in the sense that everyone wishes us to be. He did say I sounded like 'Allison Kabrinski' my retort is that his followers act like her... Either way there is a large contingent of coward players in SA  who wouldn't be able to beat this !@#$ out of a paperbag if it blew in their face on a windy day. And they use the church constantly to hide behind because they are incapable of surviving without it. They have an awful lot of jealousy and bull!@#$ that spews out of their mouths but they wouldn't dare fight as an underdog or even dare make a step out of line. At least in Asylon we take on half of Dwilight and we don't hide.

I can tell, Sanguis Astroism really want Aurvandil and Asylon to be their next League of Free Nations.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on March 16, 2013, 01:37:37 AM
This game code is against even us.

This is a terrible meme that needs to die in a fire, then get shot in the head.

The game code is not "against" anybody. If you asked nearly anyone who's ever been a ruler—and many people who haven't—they'd tell you that you can't go to war with someone that your ally is allied to. It's been that way since bloody forever.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 16, 2013, 01:38:25 AM
As I said, this is merely what Mendicant was told, the fact he never mentioned it to Glaumring or Grimrog is rather proof that Mendicant didn't set much stock by it. I mentioned it in passing just out of interest, no need to get pissed.

No, its cool. I seriously have never felt more insulted on this forum ever. Generally this !@#$ that I read about me on this forum rolls off but that one was seriously hit me super hard, because Glaumring might be a cocky asshead but I don't play my character like whoever said I was saying !@#$ like that... Seriously felt like wtf ... Im cool, but realize Glaumring is cocky but I aint no coward.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on March 16, 2013, 01:39:51 AM
That is absolutely darling of you, but you see, it really is. Sanguis Astroism cannot make Mendicant be the foe they wish he would be no matter what they do, he simply declines.

I'm not sure whether you're upset about something you can't change, or just misunderstanding.

It doesn't matter what Mendicant is, does, or says; it won't change the fact that he and Aurvandil have become a unifying common enemy for at least much of Sanguis Astroism. This is something that it's probably too late to change by any one person or small group; it's just become part of the common culture/mindset of SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 16, 2013, 01:40:47 AM
This is a terrible meme that needs to die in a fire, then get shot in the head.

The game code is not "against" anybody. If you asked nearly anyone who's ever been a ruler—and many people who haven't—they'd tell you that you can't go to war with someone that your ally is allied to. It's been that way since bloody forever.

I know and I am not starting a fight about it, just pissed us off because Asdylon was trying so hard to get along with SA/the Farronites and  now once again because of game code its back to square one and SA hates us because we dropped to peace with the Farronites and and went to war with the Moot, even though our relations with the Farronites were good but our relations with the Moot sucked, now SA wants to kill us and our relations with the Farronites suck even though they don't really suck...its sucks, thats what Im trying to say...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 01:42:51 AM
No, its cool. I seriously have never felt more insulted on this forum ever. Generally this !@#$ that I read about me on this forum rolls off but that one was seriously hit me super hard, because Glaumring might be a cocky asshead but I don't play my character like whoever said I was saying !@#$ like that... Seriously felt like wtf ... Im cool, but realize Glaumring is cocky but I aint no coward.

Yers, they would have Mendicant believe Glaumring was acting as the king of Asylon and Aurvandil. Mendicant knows better than that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on March 16, 2013, 01:45:12 AM
The code that blocked you from declaring war against an ally-of-an-ally should have made you stop and think. You did not; you forged ahead with your plans. That has consequences. RP does not trump mechanics.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 01:46:00 AM
I'm not sure whether you're upset about something you can't change, or just misunderstanding.

It doesn't matter what Mendicant is, does, or says; it won't change the fact that he and Aurvandil have become a unifying common enemy for at least much of Sanguis Astroism. This is something that it's probably too late to change by any one person or small group; it's just become part of the common culture/mindset of SA.

The term is indifferent, not upset.

Sanguis Astroism can believe whatever they like, Mendicant just declines to be their next Haruka.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 16, 2013, 01:49:10 AM
Yers, they would have Mendicant believe Glaumring was acting as the king of Asylon and Aurvandil. Mendicant knows better than that.

Remember the Iraq war , that General guy on the roof yelling out all this awesome propaganda? Thats me, im the mouthpiece. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntOE7Iquw_k
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 01:50:43 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RlgyQ9EDCQ

^ Now that is some propaganda. Quite a few laugh out loud moments.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 16, 2013, 01:50:58 AM
SA could destroy Aurvandil... Falkirk is basically dead, and now Luria Nova and Fissoa would have been ready to join in on the fight. But they would have needed to massively fund the 'moot for this to happen. As they didn't care for this to happen, and as the 'moot is pretty much going back to peace with Aurvandil, I can quite easily see the whole coalition falling apart, everybody taking Asylon's destruction as the victory required to go back home without the morale-crushing image of defeat and move on to other things.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 01:53:01 AM
SA could destroy Aurvandil... Falkirk is basically dead, and now Luria Nova and Fissoa would have been ready to join in on the fight. But they would have needed to massively fund the 'moot for this to happen. As they didn't care for this to happen, and as the 'moot is pretty much going back to peace with Aurvandil, I can quite easily see the whole coalition falling apart, everybody taking Asylon's destruction as the victory required to go back home without the morale-crushing image of defeat and move on to other things.

Sanguis Astroism have failed every attack, can't raise the army Aurvandil can, can't fight a campaign so far south.

Falkirk is basically dead? Oh well, they're irrelevant. But they're alive as they need to be in order to be my wasp cake. Not that Mendicant will let them fall, it's not going to happen. Realms only fail after all, by choice, you never fall unless you intend to.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 16, 2013, 01:54:18 AM
SA could destroy Aurvandil... Falkirk is basically dead, and now Luria Nova and Fissoa would have been ready to join in on the fight. But they would have needed to massively fund the 'moot for this to happen. As they didn't care for this to happen, and as the 'moot is pretty much going back to peace with Aurvandil, I can quite easily see the whole coalition falling apart, everybody taking Asylon's destruction as the victory required to go back home without the morale-crushing image of defeat and move on to other things.

Oh Chenier you metagame the best...

I think you are such a flake Chenier, its funny how for weeks and weeks Aurvandiil is the big bad enemy and now that Asylon joins the battle, you know you can't beat Aurvandiil so now you are sucking up to Aurvandiil on the forums and IG and turning your focus to Asylon because you know Asylon can be beat easier. You are the ultimate flake and coward and double faced snake. I can see you writing up some big flakey peace treaty. I just hope Mendicant sees through your bul!@#$ and sees the poopy-panted snake that you are and tells you to !@#$ off

Many of you guys will go to any length to win BM... This is the sense I am getting, the two-pronged war of forum warfare and IG... I cannot believe how flakey some of this !@#$ is getting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 16, 2013, 02:31:36 AM
Sanguis Astroism can believe whatever they like, Mendicant just declines to be their next Haruka.
He can decline all he wants. That doesn't mean that the label couldn't be hung on Mendicant, assuming that's what SA would want to do. You really have little to no control over how someone else refers to you, or how they view you. You can "decline" all you want. It simply doesn't matter. Mendicant has already done everything that needs to be done. No further actions is required, meaningful, or relevant.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 02:34:42 AM
He can decline all he wants. That doesn't mean that the label couldn't be hung on Mendicant, assuming that's what SA would want to do. You really have little to no control over how someone else refers to you, or how they view you. You can "decline" all you want. It simply doesn't matter. Mendicant has already done everything that needs to be done. No further actions is required, meaningful, or relevant.

Yers, they'd like Mendicant to be their enemy wouldn't they?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 16, 2013, 02:38:27 AM
Yers, they'd like Mendicant to be their enemy wouldn't they?
He already is.

As I said, Mendicant's permission is not required. He can decline all he wants, but it is irrelevant.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 02:46:31 AM
He already is.

As I said, Mendicant's permission is not required. He can decline all he wants, but it is irrelevant.

Oh I'm sure Sanguis Astroism has convinced themselves of that, deluded fellows that they are.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on March 16, 2013, 02:47:19 AM
He already is.

As I said, Mendicant's permission is not required. He can decline all he wants, but it is irrelevant.

Think of this like the Joker trying to get the Batman's attention in THE DARK KNIGHT. The Joker continuously blows things up, takes hostages and even attempts to kill Rachel in attempt to force Batman to retaliate. Batman kind of loses his cool a little bit at first, but by the end of the film he's just like "Meh. Joker, I have caught you in my net, so to speak, but I will not do what you want me to, I will not harm you. Instead, I will just leave you hanging here so that others may deal with you. I've got to go talk to Harvey Dent now, later!" So, as you can see, Indirik, the SA players desperately want to forge a rivalry between themselves (the Joker) and Mendicant (the Batman), however their shrill voices and pathetic attempts at mischief are of no avail and the Batman simply bothers to keep them from causing trouble -- nothing more. This is why you cannot make Mendicant your enemy. He simply does not care for your shenanigans. He is not the hero you deserve.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 16, 2013, 02:48:40 AM
Since when did this become a war against Sanguis Astroism?

Since you allied with Asylon and they declared war.

whoever said I was saying !@#$ like that... Seriously felt like wtf ...

I have no idea what Glaumring the character has been saying. But on the forums you have been saying A LOT about how the 'Moot is doomed and how Asylon is going to win, etc. because of Aurvandil.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 02:51:07 AM
Think of this like the Joker trying to get the Batman's attention in THE DARK KNIGHT. The Joker continuously blows things up, takes hostages and even attempts to kill Rachel in attempt to force Batman to retaliate. Batman kind of loses his cool a little bit at first, but by the end of the film he's just like "Meh. Joker, I have caught you in my net, so to speak, but I will not do what you want me to, I will not harm you. Instead, I will just leave you hanging here so that others may deal with you. I've got to go talk to Harvey Dent now, later!" So, as you can see, Indirik, the SA players desperately want to forge a rivalry between themselves (the Joker) and Mendicant (the Batman), however their shrill voices and pathetic attempts at mischief are of no avail and the Batman simply bothers to keep them from causing trouble -- nothing more. This is why you cannot make Mendicant your enemy. He simply does not care for your shenanigans. He is not the hero you deserve.

That is an insanely accurate and concise way of putting it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 16, 2013, 03:01:52 AM
It is a cute analogy. But irreparably flawed, because you really don't understand. SA doesn't require Mendicant's attention, or even care if he notices. He could literally do anything. Or nothing. It doesn't matter. He has *already* done everything that he needed to do in order to set himself and his realm up as the rallying point and focus. The only thing he could possibly do to change that is to either convert to SA, or die. And the dying would only matter if the resulting regime change produced a radical political shift.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 03:11:03 AM
Sanguis Astroism sounds like the antisocial kid in the classroom corner.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 16, 2013, 03:27:35 AM
Oh Chenier you metagame the best...

I think you are such a flake Chenier, its funny how for weeks and weeks Aurvandiil is the big bad enemy and now that Asylon joins the battle, you know you can't beat Aurvandiil so now you are sucking up to Aurvandiil on the forums and IG and turning your focus to Asylon because you know Asylon can be beat easier. You are the ultimate flake and coward and double faced snake. I can see you writing up some big flakey peace treaty. I just hope Mendicant sees through your bul!@#$ and sees the poopy-panted snake that you are and tells you to !@#$ off

Many of you guys will go to any length to win BM... This is the sense I am getting, the two-pronged war of forum warfare and IG... I cannot believe how flakey some of this !@#$ is getting.

I really don't get where you pull this stuff out of... makes no sense with neither reality nor the text you quote.

Fact 1: D'Hara and Aurvandil already signed a cease-fire long ago. Machiavel doesn't need to do squat. Only Terran needs to settle peace with them now, and they don't need my help for that.
Fact 2: Where did I try to woo Aurvandil? I still think its might is highly suspicious, and strongly dislike it. I've never, nowhere on the forums, complimented them or try to befriend Mendicant's player.
Fact 3: The first phrase  of what you quoted me on explicitly states I think that Aurvandil can be defeated. The North just doesn't have the heart to make it happen. They'd rather hog the glory then send tens of thousands of gold to Terran, Barca, and D'Hara every week. But they can't hog the glory, because they are too far, so they just fail instead. Doesn't mean they need to fail, they just chose to.

And yea, people will focus on Asylon IG... Did you seriously expect otherwise? You truly are an atrocious strategist and diplomat. And with all of this hatred you guys have with D'Hara, don't act so surprised that maybe the feeling's mutual, for some D'Harans at least.

It is a cute analogy. But irreparably flawed, because you really don't understand. SA doesn't require Mendicant's attention, or even care if he notices. He could literally do anything. Or nothing. It doesn't matter. He has *already* done everything that he needed to do in order to set himself and his realm up as the rallying point and focus. The only thing he could possibly do to change that is to either convert to SA, or die. And the dying would only matter if the resulting regime change produced a radical political shift.

I think you overestimate his focus potential... SA failed to do what was necessary to crush Aurvandil, and the non-theocractic realms are not willing to sacrifice themselves for the glory of others. The coalition will break apart after Asylon is defeated, and a new world order will come to be. Aurvandil, having won against the 'moot and being left stronger than ever, will have free reign to decide what happens next. It'll be their move. They'll be able to start new wars, turtle for a while, or shift their diplomacy. Terran may or may not be allowed to survive. I don't like it, but with things as they are now, I don't see things evolving any other way. I could be wrong, for, as anyone else, I don't have all of the cards. And who knows, maybe the war will re-ignite soon after waning, and the coalition will rebuild itself... But with D'Hara and Barca out of the war with Aurvandil, Falkirk's eminent destruction and Asylon's inevitable defeat, it seems unlikely that there will be anyone else to unite against, because SA is just too far from Aurvandil and isn't willing to do what's required to defeat it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 16, 2013, 03:46:03 AM
Fact 3: The first phrase  of what you quoted me on explicitly states I think that Aurvandil can be defeated. The North just doesn't have the heart to make it happen. They'd rather hog the glory then send tens of thousands of gold to Terran, Barca, and D'Hara every week. But they can't hog the glory, because they are too far, so they just fail instead. Doesn't mean they need to fail, they just chose to.
Even assuming that the north *could* send tens of thousands of gold a week to Terran, it wouldn't work. There are limits to how much you can prop up a low-noble realm with gold. Continuing to pour more gold into it simply doesn't increase the power in a linear fashion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 16, 2013, 04:23:03 AM
Even assuming that the north *could* send tens of thousands of gold a week to Terran, it wouldn't work. There are limits to how much you can prop up a low-noble realm with gold. Continuing to pour more gold into it simply doesn't increase the power in a linear fashion.
I think Machiavel was exaggerating, but maxing out every nobles unit's size with the best units available would be something all that gold could do. It could also be used to make recruitment centres, build up fortifications, place militia. Ten thousand gold could be used pretty quickly.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on March 16, 2013, 04:29:39 AM
I think Machiavel was exaggerating, but maxing out every nobles unit's size with the best units available would be something all that gold could do. It could also be used to make recruitment centres, build up fortifications, place militia. Ten thousand gold could be used pretty quickly.

Recruitment centres are abundant and fortifications are already in place. Militia does not win wars. Maximising unit size could help a bit, but not by much; most Terran warriors already have huge units. The added gold would yield, I'm estimating, perhaps an additional two to four thousand combat strength worth of mobile soldiers. Barely enough to make a dent, if that. My own character has one thousand gold on hand at all times, for no particular reason other than that there's nothing to spend it on.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 16, 2013, 04:49:23 AM
Recruitment centres are abundant and fortifications are already in place. Militia does not win wars. Maximising unit size could help a bit, but not by much; most Terran warriors already have huge units. The added gold would yield, I'm estimating, perhaps an additional two to four thousand combat strength worth of mobile soldiers. Barely enough to make a dent, if that. My own character has one thousand gold on hand at all times, for no particular reason other than that there's nothing to spend it on.
That may be true for Terrran, but it is not the same for D'hara and Barca. Also, since Aurvandil likes to attack cities, militia is good for winning those battles.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on March 16, 2013, 05:01:32 AM
Sanguis Astroism sounds like the antisocial kid in the classroom corner.
That's funny, how come SA has all the friends, and Aurvandil is stuck with Asylon  ::)

That is an insanely accurate and concise way of putting it.
A far better parallel would be that SA has convicted Mendicant of a crime, and as he is being dragged off to to the gallows, he is screaming that he doesn't accept it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 16, 2013, 05:47:57 AM
Even assuming that the north *could* send tens of thousands of gold a week to Terran, it wouldn't work. There are limits to how much you can prop up a low-noble realm with gold. Continuing to pour more gold into it simply doesn't increase the power in a linear fashion.

You're right. We needed gold AND Nobles to come to Terran.

If Terran received an additional 10-20 Nobles from all corners of SA, plus some funding, it really would have changed some things.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 16, 2013, 12:36:42 PM
I think Machiavel was exaggerating, but maxing out every nobles unit's size with the best units available would be something all that gold could do. It could also be used to make recruitment centres, build up fortifications, place militia. Ten thousand gold could be used pretty quickly.

I was not exagerating. D'Hara has massively funded our allies in the past, and we are but a single realm. Morek and Astrum, alone, should be able to give at least thousands weekly, near the 10,000 mark at least. But with all of them? With Iashalur, Corsanctum, Farronite Republic, and Libero (which basically did nothing but could have easilly been bullied to do something), I think that 20,000 gold a week is very ambitious, but not impossible.

Terran has too few nobles? There was a time where Barca and D'Hara were also in the war. No need to dump it on Terran alone. They also could have incited nobles to pack up and go to Barca. But how many rulers encouraged their nobles to leave?

So considering this, if some people, be them the rulers of the astrocracies (doubtful) or the church elders (more likely) want to turn Mendicant into a rallying figure to oppose... Well, good luck. You could turn him into a devil figure you never actually act against, perhaps, but for some reason I doubt this is what's desired. If you wanted to use a war against him to get everyone working together, I just don't see that happening... You are too far yourselves, and those who aren't won't sacrifice their realms for people who don't really care to win the war anyways.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 03:04:18 PM
That's funny, how come SA has all the friends, and Aurvandil is stuck with Asylon  ::)

Isn't it obvious? 'Cause we're too cool for school, swag and all that (whatever the kids are saying these days).

A far better parallel would be that SA has convicted Mendicant of a crime, and as he is being dragged off to to the gallows, he is screaming that he doesn't accept it.

An even better parallel would be that Sanguis Astroism want to convict Mendicant and drag him off the to the gallows, but Mendicant doesn't accept it and stands in front of them simply declining, and Sanguis Astroism are powerless.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: NoblesseChevaleresque on March 16, 2013, 03:05:26 PM
That may be true for Terrran, but it is not the same for D'hara and Barca. Also, since Aurvandil likes to attack cities, militia is good for winning those battles.

Allomere is a proven wall breaker, no fortification has stood against us successfully.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 16, 2013, 07:51:59 PM
To the claims no one can raise an army to match Aurvandil, if you will note the statistics pages, exactly three realms on their own have more military strength than Aurvandil: Morek, Astrum and Luria Nova.

Aurvandil isn't unbeatable. The failures in the Moot's war against Aurvandil are a result of the Moot's politics. Terran has done a fine job, but Barca doesn't have clout, and D'hara's singular contribution to the war against Aurvandil directly resulted in them losing Paisly. They've done a fine job against Falkirk, but that doesn't really hinder Aurvandil any.

Had certain members of the moot appeased certain individuals throughout the faith, rather than just calling time and time again for a Crusade, they likely could have found themselves some significant aid.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 16, 2013, 08:01:48 PM
Aurvandil has almost no militia...  whereas those realms mentioned have lots of militia....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 16, 2013, 08:12:16 PM
None of those realms mentioned have made any serious attempt to field large mobile forces, either. Astrum could, if they decided, field a 30k mobile force without too much difficulty, without weakening their militia. Morek could undoubtedly do more. A church force of nearly 100k cs is not impossible, with the right motivation and leadership. And lots of planning. (Busto could do it!)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 16, 2013, 10:25:20 PM
To the claims no one can raise an army to match Aurvandil, if you will note the statistics pages, exactly three realms on their own have more military strength than Aurvandil: Morek, Astrum and Luria Nova.

Aurvandil isn't unbeatable. The failures in the Moot's war against Aurvandil are a result of the Moot's politics. Terran has done a fine job, but Barca doesn't have clout, and D'hara's singular contribution to the war against Aurvandil directly resulted in them losing Paisly. They've done a fine job against Falkirk, but that doesn't really hinder Aurvandil any.

Had certain members of the moot appeased certain individuals throughout the faith, rather than just calling time and time again for a Crusade, they likely could have found themselves some significant aid.

D'Hara fought before the long winter, then starvation pretty near killed our realm, and then the Lurias decided to backstab us in our moment of greatest weakness. Were it not for both the Long Winter and the Lurias, D'Hara could have done a lot more. But nobody in the north wanted to sanction LN, or made any significant effort to save us from the massive starvation.

There's really a ton of things the northern realms could have done, both directly and indirectly, to put even more pressure on Aurvandil. The list of things would be too long to enumerate. But they just didn't care enough for it. And now, it's too late.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on March 16, 2013, 10:38:13 PM
Oh, Chénier, are you starting a pity party again? Can I join?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 16, 2013, 10:46:52 PM
Oh, Chénier, are you starting a pity party again? Can I join?

D'Hara is rebuilding, I'm more concerned with Terran's fate right now. I was just saying, there were a lot of external factors that limited D'Hara's contributions against Aurvandil.

And hey, we get to rip Asylon apart now. No need for self-pity, this is great! :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 16, 2013, 11:07:07 PM
I have no comment on any of this.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 17, 2013, 12:03:11 AM
There's really a ton of things the northern realms could have done, both directly and indirectly, to put even more pressure on Aurvandil. The list of things would be too long to enumerate. But they just didn't care enough for it. And now, it's too late.
I have to agree that, in a way, you are correct. The northern realms didn't care enough about the survival of the moot realms to bother putting the time and effort into it. If you really wanted the assistance of the northern realms badly enough, then you should have done more to secure it. As it was, the only urging I ever saw were efforts to get the church to declare crusade on Aurvandil. Now, perhaps some diplomatic concerns were raised among rulers that didn't get passed along. But I don't remember Sergio saying that the moot was asking for help, and for thousands of gold a week in donations to fund their war effort. I do remember Vellos asking for help among the SA elders, mostly urging crusade, but that was really kind of pointless, as the realm rulers were then not part of the elders of SA. And since the church wasn't going all crusade on Aurvandil, the elders really weren't involved. If you wanted help from the realms, you should have gone through the realms, not the religion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 17, 2013, 12:06:47 AM
I have to agree that, in a way, you are correct. The northern realms didn't care enough about the survival of the moot realms to bother putting the time and effort into it. If you really wanted the assistance of the northern realms badly enough, then you should have done more to secure it. As it was, the only urging I ever saw were efforts to get the church to declare crusade on Aurvandil. Now, perhaps some diplomatic concerns were raised among rulers that didn't get passed along. But I don't remember Sergio saying that the moot was asking for help, and for thousands of gold a week in donations to fund their war effort. I do remember Vellos asking for help among the SA elders, mostly urging crusade, but that was really kind of pointless, as the realm rulers were then not part of the elders of SA. And since the church wasn't going all crusade on Aurvandil, the elders really weren't involved. If you wanted help from the realms, you should have gone through the realms, not the religion.

Fair enough.

I'm not convinced we could have succeeded in convicning them to do as much, but we indeed could have done more to try to make it happen.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on March 17, 2013, 01:28:06 AM
That's not very fair at all.

From a Lurian perspective, it was SA's endeavor to attack Aurvandil. If it wanted to keep up the campaign against them, it should have done more to preserve its best assets. It just so happens that the 'Moot is being destroyed now.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 17, 2013, 01:38:39 AM
That's not very fair at all.

From a Lurian perspective, it was SA's endeavor to attack Aurvandil. If it wanted to keep up the campaign against them, it should have done more to preserve its best assets. It just so happens that the 'Moot is being destroyed now.

Aurvandil started the war in conquest of Barca, the 'moot retaliated and brought in as many allies as it could to even the odds. It wasn't an SA initiative in any way...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 17, 2013, 02:17:43 AM
After Aurvandil invaded Barca, Terran chose to escalate the war, and continue to fight it. (OOC I understand that they refused several offers. Good or not, they would be better than being destroyed.) D'Hara decided not to join the war in defense of their allies, and after being forced in, decided to bow out again.

So, if Terran is on the verge of destruction, why wasn't D'Hara helping? You'd think they would want their moot ally to survive and prosper. Since D'Hara isn't helping, it can't be all that bad, can it?

In addition, to us in the north the war seems pretty tame. A bunch of nothing happening. Again, if it was so desparate and urgent, where are the battle reports and tales of massive armies marching to destruction of their enemies? Why aren't they sending messages to their allies asking for help? Terran seems to have pegged all their hopes on convincing the church to crusade or declare a massed war, rather than try to deal with the theocracies individually.

(Again, maybe they did, but I don't remember a lot of discussion about Terran requesting help and gold.)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 17, 2013, 02:30:30 AM
1. Why no battle reports
Because it was futile and useless. Aurvandil is fairly predictable; we realized that Mendicant ws pompous and isolated enough that he wouldn't respond much as long as we didn't poke him, provided that we kept our distance.

2. Why go through SA instead of realms
Because SA is available for foreigners. Hireshmont can't (or can't very easily) become Vasilif of Astrum. He can become Light of Sanguis Astroism. And Hireshmont tried to incite other key conversions too, with little success. SA was the tool we had on hand; and it's a useful investment long-run too, and is lots of fun gameplay (main reason for conversion was that actually). But going through the realms is harder than you might think.

3. D'hara's uninvolvement
Again, diplomatic maneuver. Mendicant said he would honor the truce. He's arrogant enough to do so, even at significant personal disadvantage. We were trying to play a long-game to wipe out Falkirk, then move the front to Aurvandil.

Honestly, this war was winnable if there were just two things different:
1. If we had wiped out Falkirk in the Feb. 26 campaign
2. If Asylon hadn't entered

Taking out Falkirk might have been possible if we hadn't had so many diplomatic mixups and if we hadn't been fighting the western campaign. Now it looks like a very distant possibility, if ever (though I'm still cheering for D'Hara/Fissoa/LN on that front!).

Asylon's entrance simply makes war impossible for the Moot. We can't be fighting on both fronts.

With Falkirk still in the game, and thus no military aid coming west against Aurvandil, we can't keep up the fight.

And thus, in hindsight, the failure here is one of over-reach: Terran/Barca should have sat out the Feb. 26 campaign to avoid ticking off Mendicant and provoking a series of counter-measures, like Asylon's invasion. We should have contributed to an attack on Falkirk if anything, or just sat in Barca yelling across the border.

I still think, even with the distance, if Falkirk had been knocked out at the Lurias could have been kept on track, Aurvandil would have been beatable; maybe even with Asylonian attacks. But now? Nope. Not gonna win this one.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on March 17, 2013, 02:31:45 AM
Terran became so "good" at politics that they really cant be trusted.  Terrans offer for surrender was laughable.  It would be silly for Aurvandil to abandon Asylon. They are the only realm to help them out.  If they betrsy Asylon, then Terran gets larger and Aurvandil has to deal with them later.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 17, 2013, 03:23:35 AM
1. Why no battle reports
Because it was futile and useless. Aurvandil is fairly predictable; we realized that Mendicant ws pompous and isolated enough that he wouldn't respond much as long as we didn't poke him, provided that we kept our distance.
The lack of battles and battle reports removed all sense of urgency. Why hurry, and why go through all the trouble if nothing is happening? If there were no battles, you should have tried harder to explain to all involved why there were no battles, and what the consequences would be of renewing the conflict.

Quote
2. Why go through SA instead of realms
Because SA is available for foreigners. Hireshmont can't (or can't very easily) become Vasilif of Astrum. He can become Light of Sanguis Astroism. And Hireshmont tried to incite other key conversions too, with little success. SA was the tool we had on hand; and it's a useful investment long-run too, and is lots of fun gameplay (main reason for conversion was that actually). But going through the realms is harder than you might think.
You could still have gone through a parallel path of rulers and/or diplomats. When SA repeatedly refused to crusade, you must have realized that it just wasnt going to happen, and that other measures would be needed.

Although, I do have to admit that seeing all flailing that people were doing trying to get troops all the way down to Aurvandil was embarrassing. I told them long, long ago that there was no way that Astrum was gong to get troops down there for battle. The best we could conceivably do was defend Terran. And that's a boring job that no one is going to do long term.

Quote
3. D'hara's uninvolvement
Again, diplomatic maneuver. Mendicant said he would honor the truce. He's arrogant enough to do so, even at significant personal disadvantage. We were trying to play a long-game to wipe out Falkirk, then move the front to Aurvandil.
I can see that. But you do have to admit that it really took a lot of the sense of urgency and need out of the war. If the moot can't bother to defend themselves, then what's the point of everyone else jumping in to do it?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 17, 2013, 05:10:44 AM
Terran became so "good" at politics that they really cant be trusted.  Terrans offer for surrender was laughable.  It would be silly for Aurvandil to abandon Asylon. They are the only realm to help them out.  If they betrsy Asylon, then Terran gets larger and Aurvandil has to deal with them later.

Because Mendicant doesn't care for alliances really? And because he doesn't even really need them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on March 17, 2013, 05:45:10 AM
Aurvandil started the war in conquest of Barca, the 'moot retaliated and brought in as many allies as it could to even the odds. It wasn't an SA initiative in any way...

Wrong on that last bit. Morek was pressuring D'Hara and Lurian Nova for quite some time, so that both of them would stop fighting each other and turn their efforts southwards. If that's not initiative, then I don't know what is. So while I understood who started the whole thing, from a Lurian perspective, it seemed like the theocracies had more to do with this than everyone's letting on. That's echoed by Corsanctum's commitment in mediating between D'Hara and Luria Nova as well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 17, 2013, 08:42:41 AM
Wrong on that last bit. Morek was pressuring D'Hara and Lurian Nova for quite some time, so that both of them would stop fighting each other and turn their efforts southwards. If that's not initiative, then I don't know what is. So while I understood who started the whole thing, from a Lurian perspective, it seemed like the theocracies had more to do with this than everyone's letting on. That's echoed by Corsanctum's commitment in mediating between D'Hara and Luria Nova as well.

But the Moot-Aurvandil war was already going by then, and had been for a while. Yeah, by that point the theocracies had committed to the cause so of course they wanted D'Hara and Luria to focus on the task at hand, but that doesn't mean the theocracies started it. If it is the Lurian perspective that the theocracies started it, then they simply were not paying attention to what was going on before they started their war with D'Hara.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 17, 2013, 12:09:47 PM
I can see that. But you do have to admit that it really took a lot of the sense of urgency and need out of the war. If the moot can't bother to defend themselves, then what's the point of everyone else jumping in to do it?

Obviously not how we are seeing things, but I can see how the North would see it that way.

Wrong on that last bit. Morek was pressuring D'Hara and Lurian Nova for quite some time, so that both of them would stop fighting each other and turn their efforts southwards. If that's not initiative, then I don't know what is. So while I understood who started the whole thing, from a Lurian perspective, it seemed like the theocracies had more to do with this than everyone's letting on. That's echoed by Corsanctum's commitment in mediating between D'Hara and Luria Nova as well.

Lurian dillusions are  so grandiose it's amusing. As Perth said, D'Hara had fought Aurvandil plenty before the Lurias backstabbed us. Morek did not pressure much, nor long, and did so only way after the war started. And why did they do this pressure? Because Terran convinced them it was the right thing to do.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on March 17, 2013, 03:21:37 PM
Lurian dillusions are  so grandiose it's amusing.

Do you not understand the difference between delusions and perspectives different from your own?

'Cause, y'know, if you don't, then that would actually explain a lot.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lorgan on March 17, 2013, 03:24:39 PM
I thought it was established years ago - before the forum even came into existence - that he doesn't.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 17, 2013, 03:41:24 PM
But the Moot-Aurvandil war was already going by then, and had been for a while. Yeah, by that point the theocracies had committed to the cause so of course they wanted D'Hara and Luria to focus on the task at hand, but that doesn't mean the theocracies started it. If it is the Lurian perspective that the theocracies started it, then they simply were not paying attention to what was going on before they started their war with D'Hara.

Please, stop, and read. Okay. Do it again.

From a Lurian Perspective, the theocracies had more to do with the war effort than is being let on in this forum. It is NOT the Lurian perspective that the theocracies STARTED the war.

Next time pay a little attention before getting bigoted, Chenier, Perth.

But honestly, the theocracies intervening in the D'haran War of Interference was probably their most notable contribution to the war.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on March 17, 2013, 05:14:00 PM
Why did the Astroists care about the Falkirkian-D'Haran-Lurian love triangle to begin with? That just makes no sense.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 17, 2013, 05:30:45 PM
Why did the Astroists care about the Falkirkian-D'Haran-Lurian love triangle to begin with? That just makes no sense.

That is a very good question. You will understand much if you can figure out the answer.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 17, 2013, 05:52:36 PM
After everything that has been said in all these various Dwilight war threads, you can't even venture to make a guess as to the reason?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on March 17, 2013, 06:12:20 PM
I think the doctrine was that killing off Falkirk would have hindered Aurvandil somehow, but I don't see any logic behind that. I also don't see why the SA realms were concerned with Aurvandil to begin with. One could say that Aurvandil is a heathen realm, but that falls short of an explanation when you consider that all of the realms Aurvandil is beating up on are also heathen realms, along with Luria Nova and Asylon, both of which are closer and actually in range of striking against. So basically SA going out of it's way to advocate war against Falkirk seems arbitrary.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on March 17, 2013, 06:24:35 PM
"Not an SA theocracy" does not equate to "heathen realm."

There's a lot of SA in Luria. In fact, the Queen and at least one of the Dukes are followers of the Stars.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 17, 2013, 06:37:55 PM
There are many reasons that various SA realms could want to attack Aurvandil. None of it has anything to do with them being "heathen".

1) Aurvandil is the last of the self-proclaimed "League of Free Nations" that declared war on Sanguis Astroism in general, and Astrum specifically, in an effort to destroy it. (That's an approximate description, but close enough.)  This was spear-headed by Averoth and Caerwyn, with moral support from Madina. All three of those are dead. It turns out that everyone forgot about Aurvandil's participation in this, probably because they mostly kept their mouth shut, and were not publicly vocal about it. It was forgotten about until various new nobles joined SA, and brought it back to the forefront.

2) Mendicant declared that he wanted to "destroy religion", and that he views gods as nothing more than a pale imitation of monarchs. Aurvandil follows "monarchism", which is not a worship of monarchs, but a view that all you need is a monarch, and that gods are worthless/useless/powerless/etc. This is a paraphrasing, and Mendicant says that he supposedly never meant that he wanted to destroy all religion. Nevertheless, he said it. It is easily interpretable as "I'm better than any mere gods." Just about every religion on the island took this as a direct threat to them, and referred to it as Aurvandil's war on religion.

3) Aurvandil is sheltering Orthodox Astroism, a heretical Astroist faith led by there heretical Allison Kabrinski. Aurvandil even helped her establish her heretical faith by giving her a lordship from which to found the religion.

4) Falkirk is a buffer realm between the Lurias and Aurvandil. Having Falkirk wiped out frees up the Luria, Fissoa, and D'Hara to join the war on Aurvandil. In a way, Falkirk is nothing more than a pawn to everyone concerned. (Except perhaps to Falkirk themselves. :P ) Aurvandil wants it to survive as a continued distraction and buffer against the Lurias. (Although Aurvandil will vehemently deny this, that is the very function it performs, intended or not.) Everyone else wants it dead so that the Lurias and Fissoa can get on with the true business of wiping out Aurvandil. That and damn near everyone involved finds them to be extremely rude.

5) Falkirk and Aurvandil are inhabited by a lot of nobles that were in Thulsoma and Averoth, both of whom defied and attacked Sanguis Astroism, and Astroist realms. They are vocal opponents of Sanguis Astroism in general.

I'm sure there are probably a few other reasons, but those are the ones off the top of my head.

I hope you can see that in order to figure out why things are happening, you need to look beyond the immediate present. You need to look back into the past and learn the history of the various realms involved. And then you need to look at the effects of each of these intermediate situations, and figure out what this will accomplishing the global picture. Dwilight is a huge island with lots of realms. They are all interwoven to a great extent. Now that almost all the rogue lands are taken, and the realms are all bordering each other, politics gets pretty hectic and tangled. Nothing is as simple as it seems.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on March 17, 2013, 06:45:40 PM
Ah, I see that a lot of those things happened before I joined, so thanks for explaining them. Now the war against Aurvandil actually makes sense beyond Terran alliance whoring :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on March 17, 2013, 08:36:58 PM
From a Lurian Perspective, the theocracies had more to do with the war effort than is being let on in this forum. It is NOT the Lurian perspective that the theocracies STARTED the war.

Right. To clarify even further, I'd like to highlight the word "attack." For the duration of the war prior to Luria's involvement, the republics were on the defensive. It was SA who managed to form an attacking force out of its Toprakian neighbors, not the republics.

Also, in reference to Indirik's most recent post, there seems to be two different conflicts going on. There's the Aurvandil + Asylon war against the 'Moot, and there's the Aurvandil vs. SA coldwar. My criticism was directed towards SA because they should have preserved the 'Moot, since the 'Moot was one of their more valuable assets in their own struggle against Aurvandil.

Edit: was for is in the last sentence.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on March 17, 2013, 09:35:45 PM
There are many reasons that various SA realms could want to attack Aurvandil. None of it has anything to do with them being "heathen".

1) Aurvandil is the last of the self-proclaimed "League of Free Nations" that declared war on Sanguis Astroism in general, and Astrum specifically, in an effort to destroy it. (That's an approximate description, but close enough.)  This was spear-headed by Averoth and Caerwyn, with moral support from Madina. All three of those are dead. It turns out that everyone forgot about Aurvandil's participation in this, probably because they mostly kept their mouth shut, and were not publicly vocal about it. It was forgotten about until various new nobles joined SA, and brought it back to the forefront.

2) Mendicant declared that he wanted to "destroy religion", and that he views gods as nothing more than a pale imitation of monarchs. Aurvandil follows "monarchism", which is not a worship of monarchs, but a view that all you need is a monarch, and that gods are worthless/useless/powerless/etc. This is a paraphrasing, and Mendicant says that he supposedly never meant that he wanted to destroy all religion. Nevertheless, he said it. It is easily interpretable as "I'm better than any mere gods." Just about every religion on the island took this as a direct threat to them, and referred to it as Aurvandil's war on religion.

3) Aurvandil is sheltering Orthodox Astroism, a heretical Astroist faith led by there heretical Allison Kabrinski. Aurvandil even helped her establish her heretical faith by giving her a lordship from which to found the religion.

4) Falkirk is a buffer realm between the Lurias and Aurvandil. Having Falkirk wiped out frees up the Luria, Fissoa, and D'Hara to join the war on Aurvandil. In a way, Falkirk is nothing more than a pawn to everyone concerned. (Except perhaps to Falkirk themselves. :P ) Aurvandil wants it to survive as a continued distraction and buffer against the Lurias. (Although Aurvandil will vehemently deny this, that is the very function it performs, intended or not.) Everyone else wants it dead so that the Lurias and Fissoa can get on with the true business of wiping out Aurvandil. That and damn near everyone involved finds them to be extremely rude.

5) Falkirk and Aurvandil are inhabited by a lot of nobles that were in Thulsoma and Averoth, both of whom defied and attacked Sanguis Astroism, and Astroist realms. They are vocal opponents of Sanguis Astroism in general.

I'm sure there are probably a few other reasons, but those are the ones off the top of my head.

I hope you can see that in order to figure out why things are happening, you need to look beyond the immediate present. You need to look back into the past and learn the history of the various realms involved. And then you need to look at the effects of each of these intermediate situations, and figure out what this will accomplishing the global picture. Dwilight is a huge island with lots of realms. They are all interwoven to a great extent. Now that almost all the rogue lands are taken, and the realms are all bordering each other, politics gets pretty hectic and tangled. Nothing is as simple as it seems.

Wow, well said.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 17, 2013, 09:40:59 PM
Please, stop, and read. Okay. Do it again.

From a Lurian Perspective, the theocracies had more to do with the war effort than is being let on in this forum. It is NOT the Lurian perspective that the theocracies STARTED the war.

Next time pay a little attention before getting bigoted, Chenier, Perth.

But honestly, the theocracies intervening in the D'haran War of Interference was probably their most notable contribution to the war.

The D'HARAN WAR OF INTERFERENCE? Hahahahahahahaha! Good one.

This is not perspective. The Astroists seeing the war as of relative importance due to moot members not all being active in it is perspective. Crap like this, however, is pure dillusion. Because the "D'Haran war of interference" is likely a reference to D'Hara backing LV up, with no regards whatsoever to the fact that the Lurias started the war and that LV was the last party to make any declaration of war in the conflict. The name given couldn't be any less accurate of what the war really was, unless you mean it in a "the war to interfere with D'Hara's contributions to the 'moot" kind of way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 17, 2013, 09:53:16 PM
Please, stop, and read. Okay. Do it again.

From a Lurian Perspective, the theocracies had more to do with the war effort than is being let on in this forum. It is NOT the Lurian perspective that the theocracies STARTED the war.

Next time pay a little attention before getting bigoted, Chenier, Perth.

But honestly, the theocracies intervening in the D'haran War of Interference was probably their most notable contribution to the war.


Um, not sure how in any way I was being "bigoted." But okay.

I clearly acknowledged that he was talking about Luria's perspective. I was just saying that they weren't paying much attention, then.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 17, 2013, 10:06:15 PM

Um, not sure how in any way I was being "bigoted." But okay.

I clearly acknowledged that he was talking about Luria's perspective. I was just saying that they weren't paying much attention, then.

They don't even pay attention to what they do themselves. I bet most Lurians are utterly clueless to the fact that they were the ones to declare war on D'Hara, and not the other way around, and that LV was the one to declare war to support D'Hara, and not the other way around, from what a few of them have stated on the forums. Utterly clueless people, don't hire them to write any history books...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 17, 2013, 10:37:59 PM
They don't even pay attention to what they do themselves. I bet most Lurians are utterly clueless to the fact that they were the ones to declare war on D'Hara, and not the other way around, and that LV was the one to declare war to support D'Hara, and not the other way around, from what a few of them have stated on the forums. Utterly clueless people, don't hire them to write any history books...

Just shows D'hara is, and continues to be completely ignorant of Lurian politics, even when (perhaps especially) it concerns them. Especially the long building rift between Luria Vesperi, and the rest of Luria. Luria declared war on D'hara initially, then pretty much ignored D'hara for a significant period of time. D'hara being incapable of staging any sort of invasion against Luria in the time period between the initial war declaration by Luria Nova/Solaria and the new outbreak of conflict when D'hara got involved with LV. In that time frame, Luria reorganized with Luria Nova absorbing Solaria. During all of this, Luria really could care less about D'hara. However, rising tensions were present due to Luria Vesperi's breaking of the articles of the Lurian Confederacy by refusing to aid in the initial war against D'hara. War broke out between LN and LV, and D'hara placed itself in it. Thus, the second war (only a single war declaration was made, but it was two distinct periods of conflict) is the D'haran War of Interference. Lurians don't appreciate auslanders meddling in our affairs.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on March 17, 2013, 10:40:24 PM
I thought Luria considered D'Hara one of theirs...?

Or is that reasoning used only when it's convenient?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 17, 2013, 10:41:45 PM
I thought Luria considered D'Hara one of theirs...?

Or is that reasoning used only when it's convenient?

Just their lands.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 17, 2013, 10:48:38 PM
There are many reasons that various SA realms could want to attack Aurvandil. None of it has anything to do with them being "heathen".

1) Aurvandil is the last of the self-proclaimed "League of Free Nations" that declared war on Sanguis Astroism in general, and Astrum specifically, in an effort to destroy it. (That's an approximate description, but close enough.)  This was spear-headed by Averoth and Caerwyn, with moral support from Madina. All three of those are dead. It turns out that everyone forgot about Aurvandil's participation in this, probably because they mostly kept their mouth shut, and were not publicly vocal about it. It was forgotten about until various new nobles joined SA, and brought it back to the forefront.

2) Mendicant declared that he wanted to "destroy religion", and that he views gods as nothing more than a pale imitation of monarchs. Aurvandil follows "monarchism", which is not a worship of monarchs, but a view that all you need is a monarch, and that gods are worthless/useless/powerless/etc. This is a paraphrasing, and Mendicant says that he supposedly never meant that he wanted to destroy all religion. Nevertheless, he said it. It is easily interpretable as "I'm better than any mere gods." Just about every religion on the island took this as a direct threat to them, and referred to it as Aurvandil's war on religion.

3) Aurvandil is sheltering Orthodox Astroism, a heretical Astroist faith led by there heretical Allison Kabrinski. Aurvandil even helped her establish her heretical faith by giving her a lordship from which to found the religion.

4) Falkirk is a buffer realm between the Lurias and Aurvandil. Having Falkirk wiped out frees up the Luria, Fissoa, and D'Hara to join the war on Aurvandil. In a way, Falkirk is nothing more than a pawn to everyone concerned. (Except perhaps to Falkirk themselves. :P ) Aurvandil wants it to survive as a continued distraction and buffer against the Lurias. (Although Aurvandil will vehemently deny this, that is the very function it performs, intended or not.) Everyone else wants it dead so that the Lurias and Fissoa can get on with the true business of wiping out Aurvandil. That and damn near everyone involved finds them to be extremely rude.

5) Falkirk and Aurvandil are inhabited by a lot of nobles that were in Thulsoma and Averoth, both of whom defied and attacked Sanguis Astroism, and Astroist realms. They are vocal opponents of Sanguis Astroism in general.

I'm sure there are probably a few other reasons, but those are the ones off the top of my head.

I hope you can see that in order to figure out why things are happening, you need to look beyond the immediate present. You need to look back into the past and learn the history of the various realms involved. And then you need to look at the effects of each of these intermediate situations, and figure out what this will accomplishing the global picture. Dwilight is a huge island with lots of realms. They are all interwoven to a great extent. Now that almost all the rogue lands are taken, and the realms are all bordering each other, politics gets pretty hectic and tangled. Nothing is as simple as it seems.

This is an excellent summary.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on March 17, 2013, 11:57:14 PM
Just shows D'hara is, and continues to be completely ignorant of Lurian politics, even when (perhaps especially) it concerns them. Especially the long building rift between Luria Vesperi, and the rest of Luria. Luria declared war on D'hara initially, then pretty much ignored D'hara for a significant period of time. D'hara being incapable of staging any sort of invasion against Luria in the time period between the initial war declaration by Luria Nova/Solaria and the new outbreak of conflict when D'hara got involved with LV. In that time frame, Luria reorganized with Luria Nova absorbing Solaria. During all of this, Luria really could care less about D'hara. However, rising tensions were present due to Luria Vesperi's breaking of the articles of the Lurian Confederacy by refusing to aid in the initial war against D'hara. War broke out between LN and LV, and D'hara placed itself in it. Thus, the second war (only a single war declaration was made, but it was two distinct periods of conflict) is the D'haran War of Interference. Lurians don't appreciate auslanders meddling in our affairs.

I think if tensions decreased, there might be more intermingling and thus learning of each other's cultural ways, histories, and perspectives. During the last campaign against Falkirk, it was pretty cool to see Lurians and D'Harans fighting alongside and exchanging pleasantries. So it's possible.

 
Just their lands.

And this is why tensions haven't decreased ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 18, 2013, 12:13:44 AM
I thought Luria considered D'Hara one of theirs...?

Or is that reasoning used only when it's convenient?

This.

Just shows D'hara is, and continues to be completely ignorant of Lurian politics, even when (perhaps especially) it concerns them. Especially the long building rift between Luria Vesperi, and the rest of Luria. Luria declared war on D'hara initially, then pretty much ignored D'hara for a significant period of time. D'hara being incapable of staging any sort of invasion against Luria in the time period between the initial war declaration by Luria Nova/Solaria and the new outbreak of conflict when D'hara got involved with LV. In that time frame, Luria reorganized with Luria Nova absorbing Solaria. During all of this, Luria really could care less about D'hara. However, rising tensions were present due to Luria Vesperi's breaking of the articles of the Lurian Confederacy by refusing to aid in the initial war against D'hara. War broke out between LN and LV, and D'hara placed itself in it. Thus, the second war (only a single war declaration was made, but it was two distinct periods of conflict) is the D'haran War of Interference. Lurians don't appreciate auslanders meddling in our affairs.

Two periods doesn't mean two wars. And if battles were few, they were not inexistant. Small skirmishes occured all through the war, even when D'Hara was focused West to reclaim their lost lands. It wasn't unable to land in the Lurias, because it proved otherwise later on, it just chose not to. And when it did come back against LN, it had nothing to do with LV, it was just because we were done reclaiming the duchy of Paisly in the West. And I couldn't care less about Lurian politics. It was one war declaration, one war. That make up ridiculous fluffy stories to say otherwise is of no importance to me. I know of the restructuration, and I know that Lurians can easily get extremely self-absorbed and completely forget that the world continues existing even when they don't pay attention to it. And war did not "break out between LN and LV". LV declared war. That's a big nuance to make there.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on March 18, 2013, 08:34:45 AM
So as much as I like D'Hara taking over threads as much as the next guy, maybe we should start talking about SA again....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 18, 2013, 10:23:18 AM
So as much as I like D'Hara taking over threads as much as the next guy, maybe we should start talking about SA again....

Oh, this is about SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 18, 2013, 11:49:09 AM
Oh, this is about SA.

Indeed. And I would further add that SA did absolutely NOTHING in the D'Hara/Luria war. They "offered mediation" at some point, which really wasn't offering anything satisfying to either party whatsoever, and when the war did come to a conclusion due to LV's collapse, they refused to do the mediation and to back the peace they once said they'd back up.

The Lurian "perspective" on SA's involvement in the war is outright ridiculous.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lorgan on March 18, 2013, 12:11:10 PM
Except that Luria would have invaded D'Hara after LV's collapse in stead of signing peace and launching the offensive on Falkirk. So yeah... that's a pretty big involvement.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 18, 2013, 12:30:27 PM
Except that Luria would have invaded D'Hara after LV's collapse in stead of signing peace and launching the offensive on Falkirk. So yeah... that's a pretty big involvement.

We woulda kicked yo' sorry asses!  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on March 18, 2013, 12:37:01 PM
We woulda kicked yo' sorry asses!  8)

And you're entirely welcome to your opinion on that.

Not so much on the fact that SA absolutely, 100% had a huge involvement in the war between us.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 18, 2013, 03:09:19 PM

And if by "Landing in the Lurias" you mean landing in LV's lands, and then proceeding to follow along with LV's grand plan to attack a superior army in waves, then good job. Gold star for D'hara. Or do you mean the attempted attack on Girich where like, a couple nobles from the home guard foiled that?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on March 18, 2013, 04:40:59 PM
Is there any thread that won't turn into a Luria-DH bitchfest? Jeez. It's like a broken record.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on March 18, 2013, 06:08:10 PM
Is there any thread that won't turn into a Luria-DH bitchfest? Jeez. It's like a broken record.

Seriously.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 18, 2013, 08:42:35 PM
Is there any thread that won't turn into a Luria-DH bitchfest? Jeez. It's like a broken record.

Well, there's the ones that turn into a Terran-Glaumring bitchfest!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 18, 2013, 08:44:56 PM
Well, there's the ones that turn into a Terran-Glaumring bitchfest!

I prefer the Luria D'hara discourse to the Terran/Glaumring, Aurvandil/Terran, Glaumring/SA, Glaumring/Glaumring....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 18, 2013, 09:00:22 PM
I prefer the Luria D'hara discourse to the Terran/Glaumring, Aurvandil/Terran, Glaumring/SA, Glaumring/Glaumring....
We use a bit more reasoning? Or is it because Luria D'hara actually involves you?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 18, 2013, 09:02:45 PM
Well at the very least you and Chenier don't resort to circular glaumring logic and preposterous claims. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 18, 2013, 09:12:00 PM
Well at the very least you and Chenier don't resort to circular glaumring logic and preposterous claims.
That's good. By the way, I see several of Luria's views as semi-idiotic, but I do see how you got them. (Not supposed to be an insult.)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 18, 2013, 09:13:05 PM
That's good. By the way, I see several of Luria's views as semi-idiotic, but I do see how you got them. (Not supposed to be an insult.)

The reverse is true, I assure you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on March 18, 2013, 09:17:23 PM
That's good. By the way, I see several of Luria's views as semi-idiotic, but I do see how you got them. (Not supposed to be an insult.)

Well, if you're given deeply incomplete (and often highly biased) information, but demanded to form opinions anyway, naturally some of them will look idiotic from the perspective of someone who knows the whole story.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 18, 2013, 09:33:00 PM
The reverse is true, I assure you.
Feel free to state whatever views of D'hara you find idiotic.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 18, 2013, 09:46:15 PM
Feel free to state whatever views of D'hara you find idiotic.

Well there was that discussion in the moot when orders from Aurvandil leaked about them preparing to assault Barca, and as a part of of the orders Aurvandillian nobles were told not to enter D'hara. IMMEDIATELY D'harans began spouting conspiracy theories how that Order was indicative of an imminent attack on D'hara, and that everyone should move to protect D'haran lands. For starters.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 18, 2013, 09:54:18 PM
Well there was that discussion in the moot when orders from Aurvandil leaked about them preparing to assault Barca, and as a part of of the orders Aurvandillian nobles were told not to enter D'hara. IMMEDIATELY D'harans began spouting conspiracy theories how that Order was indicative of an imminent attack on D'hara, and that everyone should move to protect D'haran lands. For starters.
Chenier being an idiot is only one D'haran. Any more views, preferably those that don't only include Machiavel in it?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on March 18, 2013, 09:59:51 PM
Chenier being an idiot is only one D'haran. Any more views, preferably those that don't only include Machiavel in it?

Rynn's fear of a blind woman willing to kill him personally?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 18, 2013, 10:03:40 PM
Chenier being an idiot is only one D'haran. Any more views, preferably those that don't only include Machiavel in it?


Machiavel wasn't the only involved in the discussion, and that was a time where I was getting almost 200 messages a day, so I'm not digging that deep for names.

I could name several incidents. Aiding Luria Vesperi, agreeing to their suicidal strategy of attacking in waves... The D'haran proclamations of "Great Victories" over Solaria (when in truth, it was a noble or two who arrived ahead of time), demanding Girich be handed over for restitution after the destruction of Luria Vesperi, D'hara in general wondering why Luria was so hostile when Rynn refused to hand over the defecting Vesperian regions...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 18, 2013, 10:17:17 PM

Machiavel wasn't the only involved in the discussion, and that was a time where I was getting almost 200 messages a day, so I'm not digging that deep for names.

I could name several incidents. Aiding Luria Vesperi, agreeing to their suicidal strategy of attacking in waves... The D'haran proclamations of "Great Victories" over Solaria (when in truth, it was a noble or two who arrived ahead of time), demanding Girich be handed over for restitution after the destruction of Luria Vesperi, D'hara in general wondering why Luria was so hostile when Rynn refused to hand over the defecting Vesperian regions...
We didn't really agree to attack in waves, there was confusion with the leaders and LV attacked in waves with one D'haran while the rest of the D'harans sat there. Aiding LV was due to Rynn wanting to be honorable and not abandon his ally right after they declared war for him. Also, Girich was less of a demand more of a bargaining chip, ie we remove that clause and look like we gave something up in negotiations. If you actually let us have we would have been happy, but as others within D'hara said, it backfired as you just got insulted over it. Also, I doubt there was another D'haran arguing for that, though I can't be sure and am not asking you look for names, its not a huge issue. As to the defection, we weren't surprised but you were being a bit overly pissy. Within in the turn the defection happened I am pretty sure Rynn said he was going to have to give them back, but Tybalt took forever.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 18, 2013, 10:30:00 PM
We didn't really agree to attack in waves, there was confusion with the leaders and LV attacked in waves with one D'haran while the rest of the D'harans sat there. Aiding LV was due to Rynn wanting to be honorable and not abandon his ally right after they declared war for him. Also, Girich was less of a demand more of a bargaining chip, ie we remove that clause and look like we gave something up in negotiations. If you actually let us have we would have been happy, but as others within D'hara said, it backfired as you just got insulted over it. Also, I doubt there was another D'haran arguing for that, though I can't be sure and am not asking you look for names, its not a huge issue. As to the defection, we weren't surprised but you were being a bit overly pissy. Within in the turn the defection happened I am pretty sure Rynn said he was going to have to give them back, but Tybalt took forever.

Rynn attempted to hang onto the regions "at least until falkirk is dealt with" he claimed. Then proceeded to claim he couldn't possibly come and hand them over because he possessed one of the largest units on all of Dwilight. Which wasn't factual. Alice did come across a little harsh, but Rynn came across as completely stubborn and childish. I mean who demands a woman bears their children if they fail to live up to a treaty and expects to be taken seriously?

Girich was insulting, because from our point of view D'hara is/was completely incapable of holding the region, or even taking it save through a major fluke.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 18, 2013, 11:12:15 PM
And you're entirely welcome to your opinion on that.

Not so much on the fact that SA absolutely, 100% had a huge involvement in the war between us.

Okay, let's agree that this is a matter of perspective.  ;)

SA had nothing to do on D'Hara's side, but may had a lot to do with what the Lurian side decided to do, how and when.

Well there was that discussion in the moot when orders from Aurvandil leaked about them preparing to assault Barca, and as a part of of the orders Aurvandillian nobles were told not to enter D'hara. IMMEDIATELY D'harans began spouting conspiracy theories how that Order was indicative of an imminent attack on D'hara, and that everyone should move to protect D'haran lands. For starters.

Do you trust Aurvandil? I don't!  ;D

Yea, I'm paranoid about sea attacks...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 18, 2013, 11:39:30 PM
How many realms broadcast realm wide orders that are a complete and total lie? Overly Paranoid.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 18, 2013, 11:46:46 PM
How many realms broadcast realm wide orders that are a complete and total lie? Overly Paranoid.

I've known it to happen...

And hey, look at who shared it... JONSU. And to whom? ALL members of the 'moot, not just full members, or elders, or the generals or rulers of conerned realms. When you have sensitive info like that, you usually don't show it all around like that...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 19, 2013, 12:27:44 AM
Well, if you're given deeply incomplete (and often highly biased) information, but demanded to form opinions anyway, naturally some of them will look idiotic from the perspective of someone who knows the whole story.

On the other hand, if you're given the whole story, naturally some of your views will look idiotic from the perspective of someone who has only a biased account to go by.

Idioticness of opinions is a very bad measure.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on March 19, 2013, 12:57:38 AM
On the other hand, if you're given the whole story, naturally some of your views will look idiotic from the perspective of someone who has only a biased account to go by.

Idioticness of opinions is a very bad measure.

That's pretty much my point.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on March 19, 2013, 05:09:44 AM
So is there a system in place for assisting non-SA realms to implement SA as their state religion? Like, can I get military backing and funding? Maybe some priests?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on March 19, 2013, 05:14:27 AM
So is there a system in place for assisting non-SA realms to implement SA as their state religion? Like, can I get military backing and funding? Maybe some priests?

Rent-A-Crusade?

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on March 19, 2013, 05:14:54 AM
So is there a system in place for assisting non-SA realms to implement SA as their state religion? Like, can I get military backing and funding? Maybe some priests?
I'm sure some elders would be happy to oblige  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on March 19, 2013, 05:15:57 AM
Rent-A-Crusade?
pretty much.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on March 19, 2013, 06:05:03 AM
Rent-A-Crusade?

lol, qft, but isn't that religion's true purpose anyway?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on March 19, 2013, 04:18:31 PM
So is there a system in place for assisting non-SA realms to implement SA as their state religion? Like, can I get military backing and funding? Maybe some priests?

If you steal armies from the war on Asylon, I will be most displeased.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 19, 2013, 04:21:15 PM
So is there a system in place for assisting non-SA realms to implement SA as their state religion?
What kind of assistance do you really need? Just make the declaration and you're done, right? ;)

Quote
Like, can I get military backing and funding? Maybe some priests?
Oh, I see. You're anticipating internal unrest and armed resistance to the declaration. :p
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on March 19, 2013, 04:27:38 PM
Oh, I see. You're anticipating internal unrest and armed resistance to the declaration. it will be fun :p

I can't wait!

OTOH, it seems this should be said IC, does it not?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on March 19, 2013, 05:09:35 PM
If you steal armies from the war on Asylon, I will be most displeased.

You are going to need more armies... Guaranteed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on March 19, 2013, 06:56:19 PM
Oh, I see. You're anticipating internal unrest and armed resistance to the declaration. :p

Potentially. I don't leave things to chance.

If you steal armies from the war on Asylon, I will be most displeased.

Displease you? I would never!  ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 13, 2013, 08:36:28 PM
*beats the dust out of the thread with a cat* Ahem.

News of sorts, I guess. Gustav has expressed his wish to leave the church. Only to find that the bureaucracy was incredibly thick and slow-witted, leaving him stuck in a mire of paperwork and exasperation. No amount of cajouling and threats can persuade them to make the process faster, as if one bureaucrat falls, two more step in with piles of paperwork regarding the death of said person and his arrangements.(Yay for bugs...)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 13, 2013, 09:15:24 PM
Whats the bug specifically causing/doing?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 13, 2013, 09:46:16 PM
Just won't let me leave the church when I try to. It is already listed on the bugtracker. I just thought I would speak of it in my own idiosyncratic manner here.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 13, 2013, 09:50:13 PM
Just won't let me leave the church when I try to. It is already listed on the bugtracker. I just thought I would speak of it in my own idiosyncratic manner here.
Like you click leave SA and nothing happens or what? And really nice roleplay with it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 13, 2013, 10:31:39 PM
Well that and an error message appears on the temple page. D:
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 14, 2013, 05:02:08 AM
Well that and an error message appears on the temple page. D:
Duh, the bloodstars are trying to give you a sign to stay in the church instead of leaving it because we need more like you, not less. Gustav should totally run for consul. I am considering it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 14, 2013, 07:46:49 AM
Duh, the bloodstars are trying to give you a sign to stay in the church instead of leaving it because we need more like you, not less. Gustav should totally run for consul. I am considering it.

Your wish is my command. I blame you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 14, 2013, 07:53:20 AM
Your wish is my command. I blame you.
Great letter, and that's the funniest thing ever. There is a crappy bureaucracy, so I can't leave and thus will run for consul, to improve the bureaucracy (and maybe leave then?). Gustav seems to actually care about the church, or at minimum, care about making the church less annoying with everyone getting attacked just for saying something.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 14, 2013, 08:04:55 AM
Of course he cares about the Church. Unfortunately, the way he sees it is that much of it just seems to beyond his ability to save, and nothing beyond the word of the Prophet could turn it around.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on April 15, 2013, 06:54:02 PM
Of course he cares about the Church. Unfortunately, the way he sees it is that much of it just seems to beyond his ability to save, and nothing beyond the word of the Prophet could turn it around.

Gustav, the Martin Luther of SA?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 15, 2013, 07:04:58 PM
Gustav, the Martin Luther of SA?

<.<
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on April 15, 2013, 09:05:19 PM
Gustav is just as frustrated with SA as I am. Most of the current elders only care aboUt the theocracies and how they can control the other realms.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on April 15, 2013, 09:06:44 PM
Gustav is just as frustrated with SA as I am. Most of the current elders only care aboUt the theocracies and how they can control the other realms.

Erm... a whole lot of those Elders aren't even in Theocratic realms. I wonder if people sounded them out as to their opinions?  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 15, 2013, 10:09:17 PM
From inside the Elder circle, it sounds the exact opposite. The elders seem all gung-ho about controling the crap out of the theocracies, while leaving the other realms untouched. A bit of hypocrisy, really, since they aren't members of theocracies.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 15, 2013, 10:42:33 PM
The changing of the charter really surprised me.  It didn't include much of what had been discussed in the past and seemed to include mostly new stuff about controlling the Theocracies. 

Maybe it should be changed more to include a section about how some of the Elder positions should be limited to Theocractic members only
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 15, 2013, 11:00:47 PM
Most of it wasn't so much changing things, but in clarifying and codifying lots of ambiguities. The original was pretty slipshod, and missing a lot of detail.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 15, 2013, 11:33:50 PM
All in all, Theocracies have lost a lot of their power in the church over the years.   Would be nice to see them get some of it back rather than being shackled even more.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 15, 2013, 11:47:15 PM
Power in exchange for converts.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on April 16, 2013, 12:55:48 AM
Constantine has long been an advocate of greater ecclesiastical authority, though in the past it's been a secondary concern to Allison's shenanigans. Constantine still sees himself as a theocrat on an extended missionary trip, which is why he still favors the theocratic system, though I don't know how many even remember his time in Astrum.

IMO the movement of power away from the theocracies is very much the doing of the theocracies themselves. In the past prominent theocrats, often rulers, were also very prominent Elders which prevented the council from acting against theocratic interests, allowing them to get away with the very things that would now earn condemnation (like Bustorsenzio harboring Bowie). The new generation of theocratic leaders however seem to have taken this for granted and shown little interest in church politics leading to the current situation of a nearly entirely non-theocratic Elders Council that has much to gain but little to lose in extending it's power over the theocracies. If the rulers of the theocracies take more interest in the church, perhaps even have their nobles vote in blocs during Consul elections, we could see quite a reversal in this trend.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 16, 2013, 12:59:37 AM
Constantine has long been an advocate of greater ecclesiastical authority, though in the past it's been a secondary concern to Allison's shenanigans. Constantine still sees himself as a theocrat on an extended missionary trip, which is why he still favors the theocratic system, though I don't know how many even remember his time in Astrum.

IMO the movement of power away from the theocracies is very much the doing of the theocracies themselves. In the past prominent theocrats, often rulers, were also very prominent Elders which prevented the council from acting against theocratic interests, allowing them to get away with the very things that would now earn condemnation (like Bustorsenzio harboring Bowie). The new generation of theocratic leaders however seem to have taken this for granted and shown little interest in church politics leading to the current situation of a nearly entirely non-theocratic Elders Council that has much to gain but little to lose in extending it's power over the theocracies. If the rulers of the theocracies take more interest in the church, perhaps even have their nobles vote in blocs during Consul elections, we could see quite a reversal in this trend.

Indeed. Theocracies wanted to use the church to vassalize the non-theocracies, but now that they stopped caring as much, the non-theocracies want to use the church to vassalize the theocracies.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on April 16, 2013, 01:08:44 AM
Indeed. Theocracies wanted to use the church to vassalize the non-theocracies, but now that they stopped caring as much, the non-theocracies want to use the church to vassalize the theocracies.

I wouldn't say that- I would say the current situation is more about the Elders Council desiring to subordinate the theocracies to themselves rather than to their realms. Constantine often acts against D'Haran official policy for example and apart from perhaps Hireshmont and Jonsu there is considerably less "fighting for the realm"  from non-theocratic Elders than we used to get from the theocratic ones,
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 16, 2013, 03:32:37 AM
Indeed. Theocracies wanted to use the church to vassalize the non-theocracies...
OK, that's simply wrong. No one ever tried to do that using the church. That never happened.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on April 16, 2013, 03:56:25 AM
All in all, Theocracies have lost a lot of their power in the church over the years.   Would be nice to see them get some of it back rather than being shackled even more.
Exactly why some want theocracies to have it, and not republics  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 16, 2013, 04:27:41 AM
OK, that's simply wrong. No one ever tried to do that using the church. That never happened.

You've evidently never seen it from the Farronite Republic side of things... god forbid we create our own realm after Allison's "Theocracy" imploded when she left...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on April 16, 2013, 04:59:44 AM
You've evidently never seen it from the Farronite Republic side of things... god forbid we create our own realm after Allison's "Theocracy" imploded when she left...

Forming Farronite as a republic was basically spitting in the face of the church. If they didn't want people in the church reacting badly to that, they should've formed as a theocracy. Now they should deal with the consequences, and expect angry reactions when they demand to benefit from privileges given to the theocracies. It doesn't help that they tried to lead their armies against faithful to usurp a city for a heathen, and again were seen to be consorting with multiple enemes of the church.

Ironic that when everyone wanted Farronite to be the newest theocracy, they went republican, and now that they're a republic, they yearn to be recognised as a theocracy. If they'd been a theocracy from the get go, they'd have everything they wanted- a cushy seat on the elder council, their fancy republican titles, and their voting system.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 16, 2013, 05:01:13 AM
No on ever attempted to "vassalize" FR, in any way, shape, or form. Many people took extreme offense to the way FR flipped off the entire church by becoming a republic, with no warning at all. The backlash you got was entirely predictable to anyone who knows how the church works. If you had ever bothered to ask the church, the entire episode could have been avoided.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on April 16, 2013, 05:44:09 AM
Forming Farronite as a republic was basically spitting in the face of the church. If they didn't want people in the church reacting badly to that, they should've formed as a theocracy. Now they should deal with the consequences, and expect angry reactions when they demand to benefit from privileges given to the theocracies. It doesn't help that they tried to lead their armies against faithful to usurp a city for a heathen, and again were seen to be consorting with multiple enemes of the church.

Ironic that when everyone wanted Farronite to be the newest theocracy, they went republican, and now that they're a republic, they yearn to be recognised as a theocracy. If they'd been a theocracy from the get go, they'd have everything they wanted- a cushy seat on the elder council, their fancy republican titles, and their voting system.

See, this is the type of stuff I've been wanting to steer the church away. Granted, a few benefits should be reserved to theocracies, but they should be awarded based on merit. Having a republic devoted to SA is as useful to having a theocracy, it is the responsibility of the theocracy to show they are more involved (and a better investment) than the republic (as a theocracy should entail).

The issue with Farronite marching against the faithful (Sevastian) was a secular issue which was immediately quashed by the church. More faithful supported the use of Farronite forces than the amount of heathens who were involved. It left the faithful in Swordfell feeling ostracized and limited. This was before he was Consul or priest, so I could understand involvement now but now then. Granted, I appreciate the inter-politics of SA, but it seems toxic to the church.

Enoch is pushing to see the church unite against the other (heathens), and to allow those who are involved in SA freedom. Those who have not converted should feel the wrath and angry attention of the church...not those who follow. I'd still prefer to see SA as a third party to be called upon for faithful realms as a guaranteer rather than a ruler of nations. Too much micromanagement seems to be hurting the faith. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 16, 2013, 05:54:21 AM
See, this is the type of stuff I've been wanting to steer the church away. Granted, a few benefits should be reserved to theocracies, but they should be awarded based on merit. Having a republic devoted to SA is as useful to having a theocracy, it is the responsibility of the theocracy to show they are more involved (and a better investment) than the republic (as a theocracy should entail).
The problem with a "faithful republic" is the with the frequent changes in ruler, it is entirely too possible for the realm to end up with a non-SA ruler. Realm laws such as "only an SA member can be ruler" are just words, and really have little or no power. And once the ruler is non-SA, the realm is no longer a "faithful republic". You'll end up with someone like Bowie in charge, who will backstab the church the instant it becomes advantageous to him, and he thinks he can get away with it.

Quote
Enoch is pushing to see the church unite against the other (heathens), and to allow those who are involved in SA freedom. Those who have not converted should feel the wrath and angry attention of the church...not those who follow.
That's not really the way of the church. Conversion by conquest doesn't work, unless someone stands up and puts on the red shirt. Then all bets are off.

Quote
I'd still prefer to see SA as a third party to be called upon for faithful realms as a guaranteer rather than a ruler of nations. Too much micromanagement seems to be hurting the faith.
SA doesn't rule realms. If you think it does, then you have a deeply rooted, fundamental misunderstanding of how the church works.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on April 16, 2013, 08:28:19 AM
This conversation makes me want to join SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 16, 2013, 08:49:41 AM
Enoch is pushing to see the church unite against the other (heathens), (...) Those who have not converted should feel the wrath and angry attention of the church...not those who follow.

So, what you really mean is "Death to Bowie!"? That's a program I could rally behind!  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 16, 2013, 09:22:49 AM
Creed wasn't just a heathen. He's a known heretic. Its not toxic to prevent your enemies from marching an army on your own. Its common sense.

As for this Farronite "we want all the privelleges of a theocracy" stuff. If the Farronites, I don't know... Listened to the Church without having to make an ordeal out of it every time. The difference between the theocracies and the Farronites is this:

Prophet: Don't put your hand on the stove its hot.

Theocracies: Okay.

Farronite Republic: I'm gonna put my face on it!!!!

Elders: Hey, don't do it man, its a bad idea.

FR: You're not our Dad!

Elders: Listen mister, keep this up and you're grounded.

FR: NO!

Elders: Alright then you and D'hara can't have your sleep over then...
 

FR: Come on...

Elders: Get away from there now...

FR: Okay...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 16, 2013, 12:26:48 PM
The problem with a "faithful republic" is the with the frequent changes in ruler, it is entirely too possible for the realm to end up with a non-SA ruler. Realm laws such as "only an SA member can be ruler" are just words, and really have little or no power. And once the ruler is non-SA, the realm is no longer a "faithful republic". You'll end up with someone like Bowie in charge, who will backstab the church the instant it becomes advantageous to him, and he thinks he can get away with it.

That applies to everything, and everyone. Elections do happen in theocracies as well. If not every month, when the ruler needs replacement. And having that government system in no way binds elected rulers to do anything in particular. Nor does it prevent faithful rulers from going rogue. Morek had non-faithful government members, after all, that very same Bowie you seem to dread.

The ruler is really often mostly a figurehead, you give too much importance to rotation of power in republics. Most republics just elect the same guys over and over and over and over anyways.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 16, 2013, 03:45:36 PM
Creed wasn't just a heathen. He's a known heretic. Its not toxic to prevent your enemies from marching an army on your own. Its common sense.

As for this Farronite "we want all the privelleges of a theocracy" stuff. If the Farronites, I don't know... Listened to the Church without having to make an ordeal out of it every time. The difference between the theocracies and the Farronites is this:

Prophet: Don't put your hand on the stove its hot.

Theocracies: Okay.

Farronite Republic: I'm gonna put my face on it!!!!

Elders: Hey, don't do it man, its a bad idea.

FR: You're not our Dad!

Elders: Listen mister, keep this up and you're grounded.

FR: NO!

Elders: Alright then you and D'hara can't have your sleep over then...
 

FR: Come on...

Elders: Get away from there now...

FR: Okay...

Ok, now you're just being a dick. Furthermore, we don't want the "privileges" of a theocracy. Khari might or might not, I don't know, but Gustav and the rest of the realm sure as hell doesn't. "Oh god, that realm's a republic, JUST LIKE TERRAN AND D'HARA. It's truly spitting in our faces that they have a government type like other realms!" Hypocrisy much? What right do you have to tell us what secular decisions we should make? Swordfell I can understand, but being a Republic is suddenly bad? I could understand if the argument WAS that we had an elected ruler IF other theocracies didn't already have that. Instead the argument that is spouted most is "They aren't a theocracy."

Perhaps I'm just venting my anger about what happened in Boston towards this, and if so, I'm sorry, but I'm really, really not in the mood for !@#$ for brains idiocy like I quoted above from Stabbity.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 16, 2013, 03:50:14 PM
Perhaps I'm just venting my anger about what happened in Boston towards this, and if so, I'm sorry, but I'm really, really not in the mood for !@#$ for brains idiocy like I quoted above from Stabbity.

It's just a game.... Have Gustav worry about Jonsu, and don't worry so much about Stabbity.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 16, 2013, 03:50:45 PM
Yes, theocracies do have elections. Just onceevery other year or so, not every month. So yes you could get a bad ruler, but it will, on average, happen much, much less often. In fact, it has yet to happen for SA. Ever. I'd say that's a damn good set of examples to follow.

Also, I find that theocracy engenders a mindset in the players who have characters there. (This happens, more or less, in all government styles, too.) The people who play there go along with the idea of the realm dedicated to the church. It is, after all, a theocracy. So, no, there is nothing game-mechanics wise that forces the realms to fall in line with the church. It's the players who play in that realm that willingly go along with the whole concept that make it work.

So while technically just about everything you said is true, it's also all wrong. You are describing only the strict game mechanics. You have completely disregarded the player' willingness and desire to "play along" with the realm concept and idea. The whole SA phenomenon is based mostly on the players involved "playing along" with the theocracy and religion concept without needing any kind of game mechanics hammer to keep them in line.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 16, 2013, 03:56:03 PM
So yes you could get a bad ruler, but it will, on average, happen much, much less often. In fact, it has yet to happen for SA. Ever. I'd say that's a damn good set of examples to follow.

Have you already forgotten about the three theocracies that Allison has been ruler of over the years?

Or about the "theocracy" of Averoth?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 16, 2013, 04:01:10 PM
Have you already forgotten about the three theocracies that Allison has been ruler of over the years?

Or about the "theocracy" of Averoth?


Allison wasn't a bad ruler.  She did well for Morek and for Kabrinskia.  Averoth she joined simply to try and destroy it since it was deemed an illegal spin off  from Morek.  If it wasn't for bugs she would have destroyed it.  She couldn't ban anyone because they kept all their positive marks from their previous realm.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 16, 2013, 04:05:34 PM

Allison wasn't a bad ruler.  She did well for Morek and for Kabrinskia.  Averoth she joined simply to try and destroy it since it was deemed an illegal spin off  from Morek.  If it wasn't for bugs she would have destroyed it.  She couldn't ban anyone because they kept all their positive marks from their previous realm.

Sorry, four realms. I had forgotten she ruled Averoth; I was thinking about Aegir. She did well for Morek (Xinhai), yes, but I think you can count Aegir and Kabrinskia as bad marks. She did destroy Kabrinskia.....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 16, 2013, 04:24:16 PM
Sorry, four realms. I had forgotten she ruled Averoth; I was thinking about Aegir. She did well for Morek (Xinhai), yes, but I think you can count Aegir and Kabrinskia as bad marks. She did destroy Kabrinskia.....

But she was not ruler when she did that.  Also while she ruled in Aegir she was able to cash that in to a better realm.  Kabrinskia.  Those that followed her stayed in power in Aegir and are power in Farronite.

I would say that is quite a good mark in both cases.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on April 16, 2013, 04:24:38 PM
The deal with FR and SA is that it was SA who initially took the regions from Caerwyn with the express intention of establishing a theocracy. This was fulfilled by Kabrinskia. When Kabrinskia was destroyed, SA expected another theocracy to be set up -- reasonable, since SA members still controlled the regions. The SA lords/ladies of the GF duchy, though, wanted a realm where power would be decentralized through a republican government -- reasonable as well, considering Kabrinskia was destroyed in one move of one person.

FR was founded with the idea that it would still be loyal to the SA Church, but with decentralized power through the Senate rather than a central power in the Ruler. FR is a republic of the SA. This is the one that is missed most often by both FR and SA. SA is going wild about how being a non-theocracy gives way for non-SA, and then FR is going wild whenever SA cracks down on moves that do give way for non-SA to take power in FR.

Consider:

There's a law in FR that restricts townsland and city senators to be full members of SA. Laws require the 2/3 majority of senators to pass. However, FR now has 12 regions, only 2 of which are either townsland or city. Theoretically, non-SA members could flood into FR and support each other every time a rural/townsland position opens up. Once they secure 8 senate seats, they could change laws and effectively remove FR from being an SA Republic, like it was envisioned.

FR and SA are at odds regarding the rights of the former as an independent realm, and the integrity of the latter as the power that secured the lands upon which the former lies. Both concerns are valid. Most of the players (as seen in this thread) find it frustrating; personally, it's all very interesting to me.

Now I'm just giving those Kabrinski followers ideas :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 16, 2013, 04:48:33 PM
Have you already forgotten about the three theocracies that Allison has been ruler of over the years?
As dustole already said, Allison was not a bad ruler. She did quite well. As a matter of fact, all her really over-the-top stuff was done when she wasn't a ruler. Including the destruction of Kabrinskia. (Something which the reformation of the realm into a Republic does *nothing* to prevent a recurrence of. In fact, becoming a republic does nothing to address *any* of the problems they supposedly had with a theocracy.)

Quote
Or about the "theocracy" of Averoth?
What about it? It wasn't a realm devoted to SA. It was barely even a realm. It was founded by a bunch of malcontents and saboteurs.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 16, 2013, 04:52:52 PM
FR and SA are at odds regarding the rights of the former as an independent realm, and the integrity of the latter as the power that secured the lands upon which the former lies. Both concerns are valid. Most of the players (as seen in this thread) find it frustrating; personally, it's all very interesting to me.
Again, you are missing the point. The *entire* point of the controversy.

The problem has nothing whatsoever to do with the way you run the realm. No one cares how you do elections, or elect lords, or pass whatever laws you want. The problem is that you're a "Republic" and not a "Theocracy". If you could reach into the game DB and change the name of your government style from "Republic" to"Theocracy", changing nothing else at all, then everyone would be perfectly happy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 16, 2013, 05:01:18 PM
What about it? It wasn't a realm devoted to SA. It was barely even a realm. It was founded by a bunch of malcontents and saboteurs.

That's exactly my point. Averoth was founded as a SA theocracy; but that did nothing to prevent it from not being astroist or a theocracy at all. Conversely, there are realms which are, in fact, devoted to SA even though they were not founded as such.

Being a church realm is a state of mind. The DB state only tells you about the little governmental differences like the ruler increasing morale in a region. It does not tell you about the relationship with the religion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 16, 2013, 05:09:01 PM
That's exactly my point. Averoth was founded as a SA theocracy; but that did nothing to prevent it from not being astroist or a theocracy at all. Conversely, there are realms which are, in fact, devoted to SA even though they were not founded as such.
No, it most emphatically was NOT formed as an SA theocracy. It was formed by a small group of people trying to sneak out of Morek and found a rogue colony, actually attempting to form a realm to betray everyone and provide support to the enemies of SA.

Quote
Being a church realm is a state of mind. The DB state only tells you about the little governmental differences like the ruler increasing morale in a region. It does not tell you about the relationship with the religion.
Being a republic defines a state of mind and a set of expectations for both parties, the realm and the church. It obviously sets the tone for the relationship. You have only to look at what happened when the realm was formed to see that. Empirical evidence plainly shows that your hypothesis is flat out wrong.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on April 16, 2013, 05:16:38 PM
The problem has nothing whatsoever to do with the way you run the realm. No one cares how you do elections, or elect lords, or pass whatever laws you want. The problem is that you're a "Republic" and not a "Theocracy". If you could reach into the game DB and change the name of your government style from "Republic" to"Theocracy", changing nothing else at all, then everyone would be perfectly happy.

+1. Exactly what I wanted to say.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 16, 2013, 05:36:22 PM
No, it most emphatically was NOT formed as an SA theocracy. It was formed by a small group of people trying to sneak out of Morek and found a rogue colony, actually attempting to form a realm to betray everyone and provide support to the enemies of SA.

You apply a double standard. For Averoth you put aside the game mechanics (it was founded as a theocracy by a full member of SA) to consider the roleplayed intent of the characters. However in the case of the Farronite Republic you put aside the RPed intent of the realm's ruler to stick to game mechanics.

OOC, I don't see your point. IC Brance may very well be still sore about history and not want to give them a free pass, that's fine, but I don't understand the OOC sticking point of the government form.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 16, 2013, 05:37:05 PM
You apply a double standard. For Averoth you put aside the game mechanics (it was founded as a theocracy by a full member of SA) to consider the roleplayed intent of the characters. However in the case of the Farronite Republic you put aside the RPed intent of the realm's ruler to stick to game mechanics.

OOC, I don't see your point. IC Brance may very well be still sore about history and not want to give them a free pass, that's fine, but I don't understand the OOC sticking point of the government form.

This is what I've been saying all along...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 16, 2013, 06:20:20 PM
It seems as if your SA schism has already happened with the foundation of these republics, instead of a religious schism it has come down to both parties desiring the control and protection of the massive alliances and federation. Both sides are wresting control for the power and protection of the armies of the Bloodstars without admitting to themselves that a schism of ideals has already happened. What will happen is if the fundamentalists let the republics change the church then its a free for all and they can start changing any of the traditional rules and even the prophet if he did not become more moderate than  fundamentalist. If the fundamentalists regain control the republics will be overthrown and theocracies reinstalled. The church has fractured, it is only a matter of time to wait until you all realize it and start fighting for control of the future of the Bloodstars.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 16, 2013, 06:25:46 PM
My point is that Averoth was never a theocracy of SA. It was never formed for that purpose, and the founders had exactly the opposite intent in mind. It was also never intended to *be* a theocracy. Allison made it a theocracy to spite the rogue founders. As soon as they could, they kicked her out and reformed as, I think, a tyranny.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 16, 2013, 07:00:55 PM
My point is that Averoth was never a theocracy of SA. It was never formed for that purpose, and the founders had exactly the opposite intent in mind. It was also never intended to *be* a theocracy. Allison made it a theocracy to spite the rogue founders. As soon as they could, they kicked her out and reformed as, I think, a tyranny.

It was founded by Althenar (can't remember the first name, but not Helm) through a CTO. Allison then ran for ruler because it was unauthorized by Morek. Only after did the Everguardians took over. Allison had nothing to do with the government form, CTO inherited the parent's realm form of government.

But history isn't relevant. I can take your argument at face value and apply exactly the same to the Farronite Republic. Its founders intended for it to be a theocratic realm. Why do you think intent is important is important in ine case but not the other?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 16, 2013, 07:31:28 PM
Yes, you are correct that CTO follows the parent government style. That slipped my mind. Regardless, intent always matters. Averoth intended to be an enemy of the faith. It was never a true theocracy dedicated to SA. Claiming it is such, and needs to be treated and considered as that, is nonsense.

However, names and labels also matter. FR is not a theocracy, and never will be one. It is a republic. This label is a powerful statement. Why did FR choose this label, when they could have been a theocracy and behaved the exact same as they do now, but be a real theocracy? Obviously FR considers the label important to their existence. And judging by the reaction of the church, many people in the church feel the same way. Trying to argue that it doesn't matter is arguing a falsehood. It does matter, and quite obviously so. If it didn't matter, we wouldn't be arguing this issue, would we?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 16, 2013, 07:50:47 PM
I agree that intent matters. When it was founded many people were angered, and rightly so. As I said, it is legitimate to begrudge a special status to the Farronite Republic for historical reasons.

However, it seems to me the objections you and Lefanis are making IC and here are not based on this, but on pure game-mechanical grounds. I don't think the actual mechanics support that point.

You can make all kind of hoops for the FR to jump through if you want. You can require their government members to be unelected. You can ask the ruler to be named Grandmaster. You can ask for all Duchies to be named "the theocratic duchy of x". These are all within the realm of the possible. You can even flat-out say you will never accept them on historical grounds.

However, you cannot say "you must do exactly what you are doing but have a made-up rebellion to fit with the DB." That's just not SMA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on April 16, 2013, 07:56:53 PM
However, you cannot say "you must do exactly what you are doing but have a made-up rebellion to fit with the DB." That's just not SMA.

I very much agree with this.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on April 16, 2013, 08:01:27 PM
The problem with a "faithful republic" is the with the frequent changes in ruler, it is entirely too possible for the realm to end up with a non-SA ruler. Realm laws such as "only an SA member can be ruler" are just words, and really have little or no power. And once the ruler is non-SA, the realm is no longer a "faithful republic". You'll end up with someone like Bowie in charge, who will backstab the church the instant it becomes advantageous to him, and he thinks he can get away with it.
Guess that's why the theocracy of Morek never let Bowie rise in ranks, didn't get him elected as Ruler of their new colony, why when he was elected by a mostly SA realm...that he immediately attacked the church and Swordfell was excommunicated and disbanded. I suppose laws are useless words, but the word "Theocracy" rather than "Republic" isn't arbitrary at all.

Especially for areas hurting for nobles, the church is going to have to find a way to use heathens rather than spurn them. Some heathens in the ranks can help out the SA realms, others can be used as a focal point of the church's vitriol. Probably both.
That's not really the way of the church. Conversion by conquest doesn't work, unless someone stands up and puts on the red shirt. Then all bets are off.
So there is no point in fighting heathens? Maybe we should change the role of Maddening to a romantic rather than the fighter I imagined.
SA doesn't rule realms. If you think it does, then you have a deeply rooted, fundamental misunderstanding of how the church works.
Apparently I'm not the only one who sees it this way. Several people feel that the church attempts to vassalize realms to others (although I can't attest to that). I've simply seen that the church dictates diplomacy (war on Aurvandil, peace between faithful), it dictates religion (and apparently tries to dictate government type, considering the Farronite debate), it tries to dictate who can rise and who can't (limiting heathens, even when there aren't enough nobles let alone faithful)...rulers wish they had that power.
The problem has nothing whatsoever to do with the way you run the realm. No one cares how you do elections, or elect lords, or pass whatever laws you want. The problem is that you're a "Republic" and not a "Theocracy". If you could reach into the game DB and change the name of your government style from "Republic" to"Theocracy", changing nothing else at all, then everyone would be perfectly happy.
This is what seems strange to me. A purely arbitrary mechanic shouldn't upset people. Though, the divisiveness of the church over silly things is so SMA that I do appreciate it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on April 16, 2013, 08:11:06 PM
If the DB says you're a republic, not a theocracy, then the game says you're a republic, not a theocracy. That means that, for everyone in the game world, that is reality.

You can't just say, "Ignore the fact that everyone agrees our government is a republic. We're really a theocracy, honest!"

Just like you can't just say, "He's not really the Lord of that region, whatever anyone tells you. He's just holding the place for the real Lord until he comes back!"

If the game can say that X is true, but does not, then you saying that X is true does not make it so.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 16, 2013, 08:16:21 PM
The same reasons applied to Asylon when it was ruled by Astroists but was a monarchy. The church would not accept that government style why are republics now allowed within the church? The reason Asylon chose monarchy was so that we could include the others in our realm who were not Astroist which was half our realm at the time. I think everyone wants to eat the same piece of cake without actually fighting for it. What will happen is a kinder gentler more inclusive SA, one where the faith is merely a back drop to the realms and eventually not even important and eventually disregarded. The end is nigh.

In with a bang... Out with a whimper...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 16, 2013, 08:49:38 PM
You can't just say, "Ignore the fact that everyone agrees our government is a republic. We're really a theocracy, honest!"

No one is ignoring it. If it was simply ignored I'd agree with you.

Because it has not been ignored, FR has had to change many of its policies. Basically, they are telling SA "We were wrong, we're sorry, mea maxima culpa, can you please tell us what we need to do to to get back in your good graces?"

And the Elders of SA have come up with a set of rules, using the occasion to try to impose those rules on other theocracies also (but that's another story that will only resolves when someone tries to call on those rules).

The Elders of SA could keeping coming up with rules, all more rigid and unreasonable than the last, as long as it is kept IC and SMA. After all these rules are just RPed rules within the religion. They have no game mechanic effet. 

There are characters who don't want the sets of rules to apply to FR. That's fair. They could argue "Because FR was founded as a republic, I refuse to recognize them as a theocracy". That's a fair argument, and we could see where it leads IC. By bringing the "game mechanics trumps RP" card, the actual gameplay is stifled for no good reason. No one is suggesting to ignore any game mechanic. What is suggested is to extend a set of RPed religious rules to a republic because its ruler is willing to humour the religious Elder. No game mechanics comes into play in that.

"Hold a rebellion against yourself to change the DB" can't be one of these rules. It's not SMA. It would probably be against the rules for them to do that. I reiterate that "stop having elections" would be a perfectly fair rule. "Your ruler must step down" would also be one. "We will only consider it if the knights of Golden Farrow would spill the blood of the ruler to cleanse the realm" would also work. It's IC. But those who ask for that would have to live with it ICly; they don't get to say "game mechanics says no, so hey, not my fault!".

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 17, 2013, 01:15:22 AM
No one is demanding FR change its government type. Khari asked to be added to the Elder council like the theocratic rulers. As FR has adamantly stated every time the Church has tried to get them to do something (very reasonable things like don't let heathen priests preach in your realm, don't harbor enemies of the faith) that they're not a theocracy. The whole argument presented to the Elder council on the side of FR and not excommunicating Khari for allowing Allison was that they aren't a theocracy. FR made a HUGE deal when they were formed about being a republic.

FR made its bed. They now have to lie in it. Theocracy or Republic, you can't be both. If FR wants to be a theocracy they will need to rebel. Plenty of reasons for a hardline conservative religous movement to overthrow Khari.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on April 17, 2013, 02:43:16 AM
Also, I find that theocracy engenders a mindset in the players who have characters there. (This happens, more or less, in all government styles, too.) The people who play there go along with the idea of the realm dedicated to the church. It is, after all, a theocracy. So, no, there is nothing game-mechanics wise that forces the realms to fall in line with the church. It's the players who play in that realm that willingly go along with the whole concept that make it work.
^This

The mindset of the Farronite Republic, or at least the mindset that Khari appears to portray, is most definitely republican over theocratic, valuing he sovereignty and rights of their lords over religious principles. This can be seen in the fact that they refused to pass even the most basic of religious laws without a vote and that they explicitly reserve the right to remove those laws at any time they desire. Even in the recent controversies, when they essentially buckled to ecclesiastical pressure, Khari made a point to inform the Elders that these were not acts of submission or piety but rather the free decisions of a realm that had no obligation to comply but rather only choose to do so out if convenience.

Now of course, as the player of a character who has frequently criticized the theocracies for perceived "impiety", I recognize that a theocracy can still cause trouble. But it cannot be denied that in the majority of theocracies to date there has been an implicit recognition, enshrined in game-mechanics that can be changed only with rebellion, of the vital role that SA plays in their realms. However
I do not see this in the Farronite Republic, the closest being a set of laws that they have explicitly stated exist only at the pleasure of their lords.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 17, 2013, 03:09:50 AM
No one is demanding FR change its government type. Khari asked to be added to the Elder council like the theocratic rulers. As FR has adamantly stated every time the Church has tried to get them to do something (very reasonable things like don't let heathen priests preach in your realm, don't harbor enemies of the faith) that they're not a theocracy. The whole argument presented to the Elder council on the side of FR and not excommunicating Khari for allowing Allison was that they aren't a theocracy. FR made a HUGE deal when they were formed about being a republic.

FR made its bed. They now have to lie in it. Theocracy or Republic, you can't be both. If FR wants to be a theocracy they will need to rebel. Plenty of reasons for a hardline conservative religous movement to overthrow Khari.

Please keep in mind this is what Khari what, not necessarily what we want.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on April 17, 2013, 05:00:02 AM
Khari wants a seat on the elder council 'because' FR already follows every single point listed in Article XI. From her point of view as long as thats the case a elder position should be available. If one law changed she would fully expect the elder position to be revoked.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 17, 2013, 05:33:06 AM
Except the part, you know, that says, theocracy. Not republic.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on April 17, 2013, 07:38:24 AM
Oh yes that part, the very same part that many of the elders say is no different if we changed our goverment type to Theocracy and kept our republican form of rule. So yes its a wording and a game Label only.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 17, 2013, 07:44:20 AM
No one is demanding FR change its government type. Khari asked to be added to the Elder council like the theocratic rulers. As FR has adamantly stated every time the Church has tried to get them to do something (very reasonable things like don't let heathen priests preach in your realm, don't harbor enemies of the faith) that they're not a theocracy. The whole argument presented to the Elder council on the side of FR and not excommunicating Khari for allowing Allison was that they aren't a theocracy. FR made a HUGE deal when they were formed about being a republic.

That is an argument from game history. It's a perfectly valid point. Jonsu could make that point, but I haven't seen her make it yet.

Except the part, you know, that says, theocracy. Not republic.

This is not an in-game argument. It makes no sense for Jonsu to make this point.

See my point? Nothing forces you to accept Kharie in the Elder Council, but at least play the game, don't bring an OOC trump card to the argument.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on April 17, 2013, 07:45:52 AM
*beats the dust out of the thread with a cat* Ahem.

News of sorts, I guess. Gustav has expressed his wish to leave the church. Only to find that the bureaucracy was incredibly thick and slow-witted, leaving him stuck in a mire of paperwork and exasperation. No amount of cajouling and threats can persuade them to make the process faster, as if one bureaucrat falls, two more step in with piles of paperwork regarding the death of said person and his arrangements.(Yay for bugs...)

Then Khari informed him he would have to step down as Governor of Golden Farrow per FR laws if he left... :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 17, 2013, 08:02:25 AM
That is an argument from game history. It's a perfectly valid point. Jonsu could make that point, but I haven't seen her make it yet.

This is not an in-game argument. It makes no sense for Jonsu to make this point.

See my point? Nothing forces you to accept Kharie in the Elder Council, but at least play the game, don't bring an OOC trump card to the argument.

There is nothing about that that is OOC. The form of government is COMPLETELY IC. Its in the name of the realm. Furthermore, Jonsu has her own motivations.

Also the majority of the Elders don't care if a theocracy periodically holds elections for its rulers, as long as its a theocracy. Apples and oranges.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 17, 2013, 08:11:46 AM
There is nothing about that that is OOC. The form of government is COMPLETELY IC. Its in the name of the realm. (...) Also the majority of the Elders don't care if a theocracy periodically holds elections for its rulers, as long as its a theocracy. Apples and oranges.

So what happened to this?

No one is demanding FR change its government type.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 17, 2013, 08:18:39 AM
There is a difference between demanding something, and not treating something like something it isn't.

Khari wanted theocratic privileges. There is one way to get them. FR seems to the be ones hell bent on gaining theocratic status, no one is forcing them to want that. But it isn't free.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 17, 2013, 08:28:44 AM
There is a difference between demanding something, and not treating something like something it isn't.

Khari wanted theocratic privileges. There is one way to get them. FR seems to the be ones hell bent on gaining theocratic status, no one is forcing them to want that. But it isn't free.

When someone asks you "What do I need to do to achieve X?" and you answer "Do Y", you are demanding Y. You may not get it in the end, but you are demanding it. And what you are demanding in answer to an IC question should be something that is possible and SMA, otherwise what you are really saying is "No".

If you want to say no, just say no. Don't say "Well, I'd say yes, but see there's this game mechanic label, so you lose anyway and it's not my fault". That's hiding your character's IC desires behind a rule to avoid having to play the game.

I imagine Jonsu has her own motivations, but if she wants to achieve her goals, I expect her to have to lay them down on the table at some point. Calling game mechanic is playing a trump card to avoid playing your own.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 17, 2013, 08:39:59 AM
NO ONE IS FORCING FR TO BE A THEOCRACY.

However, if they want to be treated like a theocracy, they well... HAVE TO BE A THEOCRACY. Government type is in character information. Always has been, always will be. I agree, there should be a better way to change government type, but there isn't.

Your argument has zero merit. Nobody is just going to bend over and give FR everything they want. They knew what would happen when they formed the republic.

And maybe, just maybe, Jonsu doesn't want Khari as an elder. Something about resisting the Church every step of of the way on everything, and then suddenly "oh I want to be an elder!"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on April 17, 2013, 08:42:54 AM
Upon reading the Charter, specifically, contested Article X XI, it's worded in such a way that makes a distinction between the Church (SA itself), theocratic realms (Astrum, Corsanctum, Morek, etc.), and "those states whose existence is in their entirety dependent upon the historical conquests and benevolence of theocracies" (FR).

The Article goes on to outline the rights, privileges, and duties of theocratic realms. These include having representation through Archons (equal to Consuls), which is what Khari is asking for. FR, however, is not a theocratic realm -- it is the latter, a state whose existence is in their entirety dependent upon the historical conquests and benevolence of theocracies.

With this considered, FR really has its hands tied -- it can either become a theocratic realm, or leave the umbrella of the Church completely. The second option leaves FR with only the 'Moot as possible allies (unless it decides to buddy up with the Aurvandil-Asylon-Luria coalition). The first option leaves FR as not a republic.

Or, FR can challenge the definition. By adhering to all the requirements of Article X XI, FR is essentially 'theocratic', that is, 'like a theocracy'. That's what's not clear regarding Khari's campaign to get FR an Archon.

:)

Let us ponder why I am playing the forums instead of the game.   ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on April 17, 2013, 08:51:54 AM
And what you are demanding in answer to an IC question should be something that is possible and SMA, otherwise what you are really saying is "No".
I don't accept your premise that anything is demanded from Farronite. On the contrary, they demanded privileges, so they should meet the requirements. Part of those requirements are being a theocracy and following the charter rules.

No one is asking them to stage a rebellion, but if the theocratic elements there want to overthrow the Republic, that's perfectly SMA. Alternatively, they could decide that they were wrong about the republican method, and not vote in the rulership elections, destroying their old government by letting it slip into anarchy out of penance for their error, and then reform into a theocracy.

Is there a game block to them? Not at all. Would it be difficult for them to get what they want? Of course, but then its up to the Farronites to decide how much being recognised as a theocracy is really worth to them, and not expect handouts.

Oh yes that part, the very same part that many of the elders say is no different if we changed our goverment type to Theocracy and kept our republican form of rule. So yes its a wording and a game Label only.
If its just a game label, how come characters are getting so worked up about it?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 17, 2013, 09:19:36 AM
And maybe, just maybe, Jonsu doesn't want Khari as an elder. Something about resisting the Church every step of of the way on everything, and then suddenly "oh I want to be an elder!"

I know that. It's fine. She'll probably win too.

Pierre wants Kharie on the Elder Council because it gives him leverage to bind D'Hara further to the church. He also thinks church expansion is more important than purity. We can fight it out. It's a game, let's see who win! But we can't play the game in a SMA way if you insist on framing your argument on a DB label.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 17, 2013, 10:54:38 AM
I'm framing it on REALITY. If the Database says X, then X is reality.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 17, 2013, 02:34:28 PM
I'm framing it on REALITY. If the Database says X, then X is reality.

The database does not say Kharie cannot be an Elder. You are saying Kharie cannot be an Elder because of the database. That is what I take issue with. You can say you don't want Kharie to be an Elder all you want, but don't invoke the database to prove your point.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 17, 2013, 02:48:53 PM
No, he's saying that she can't be an elder because FR isn't a theocracy. It's a provable IC fact, because government style *is* an IC thing. It is obvious that the label is more important to FR than being a full partner in the church. That's fine, it's their choice.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 17, 2013, 03:05:47 PM
It is obvious that the label is more important to FR than being a full partner in the church. That's fine, it's their choice.

It's your choice, not theirs, to base the level of partnership on government style. Other people would rather base it on adherence to church rules. You are treating the issue as if basing it on government style was mandatory, and therefore accepting Kharie as an Elder would break the rules. It wouldn't.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 17, 2013, 03:21:22 PM
It breaks the rules we just voted on and accepted as Church Law. So yes, unless Khari wins a consul or regent election, or takes up the cloth and gets appointed Luminary or Light, or joins a theocracy and becomes ruler, she will not be an elder.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on April 17, 2013, 03:24:13 PM
In reference to the observation of game mechanics whereby a nation can be theocratic in name but totally republican in practice, and the confirmation that that would be OK, I am just curious as to a realm has to do to be considered a Theocracy by the Church. Does the ruler have to be a priest? all the government positions as well? What does it take?

The reason I bring this up is because the Catholic Church absolutely dominated the politics of European realms, all of which were monarchies, rather than actual theocracies. So looking from the outside in, both IC and OOC, I see all the smoke but am a little unsure where the fire is.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 17, 2013, 03:34:58 PM
In reference to the observation of game mechanics whereby a nation can be theocratic in name but totally republican in practice, and the confirmation that that would be OK, I am just curious as to a realm has to do to be considered a Theocracy by the Church. Does the ruler have to be a priest? all the government positions as well? What does it take?

That's exactly what we're arguing. The church has defined a set of rules here:

http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Sanguis_Astroism/Charter#Article_X.2C_XI:_The_Theocracies

I and others are arguing that the Elders are free to consider that these rules are the definition of theocracy in the eyes of the church, and that any realm that follows these rules is a theocracy.

Others are arguing that only those realms which are theocracies by game mechanics can be considered theocracies, and that the rules and privileges apply only to them, and that extending these rules to other realms would be against the rules of the game.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 17, 2013, 03:43:14 PM
The Elders haven't. The Elders are going by the clearly documented government type of every realm readily available, which states  the Farronite Republic is a republic. Not a theocracy. Furthermore, nothing in their defines a theocracy. It outlines privileges a theocracy enjoys in Sanguis Astroism, and the responsibilities the Church expects in return. However, nowhere does it say "This defines a theocracy."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on April 17, 2013, 03:51:28 PM
The Elders haven't. The Elders are going by the clearly documented government type of every realm readily available, which states  the Farronite Republic is a republic. Not a theocracy. Furthermore, nothing in their defines a theocracy. It outlines privileges a theocracy enjoys in Sanguis Astroism, and the responsibilities the Church expects in return. However, nowhere does it say "This defines a theocracy."

I'm an Elder, and I disagree. I'm not the only one. But we can't discuss it in game because you make it a game mechanic issue.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on April 17, 2013, 03:58:29 PM
vonGenf, please stop claiming that government type is an OOC matter. It is not. It is, always has been, and always will be IC. It can be talked about IC by our characters, understood in an IC context, referenced for IC rules, and changed for completely IC reasons. Just because it serves your character's purposes for government type to be ignored IC in this case does not change the fact that it is, in every way that anything in BattleMaster ever is, in-character.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on April 17, 2013, 04:21:13 PM
That's exactly what we're arguing. The church has defined a set of rules here:

http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Sanguis_Astroism/Charter#Article_X.2C_XI:_The_Theocracies

I and others are arguing that the Elders are free to consider that these rules are the definition of theocracy in the eyes of the church, and that any realm that follows these rules is a theocracy.

Others are arguing that only those realms which are theocracies by game mechanics can be considered theocracies, and that the rules and privileges apply only to them, and that extending these rules to other realms would be against the rules of the game.

After reading through it, I did not see anywhere that a realm applying for an Elder seat must technically be a theocracy. All that was listed were requirements that were deemed "theocratic." In short, this is all semantics, no? Am I missing something, or is this entire argument over some ruffled feathers?

To support this observation, Classically, OOC, theocratic realms are where the priest double as the ruling class. That would mean ever regional lord, duke, and ruler, must be of the priest class. While I personally think that this would be a supremely interesting development, it is not in the game mechanics and is thus a moot point. As I understand it, no single realm in SA follows this model.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 17, 2013, 04:23:07 PM
Quote
and that extending these rules to other realms would be against the rules of the game.
No. This is 100% wrong. No one says it is against the rules "of the game".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on April 17, 2013, 04:41:40 PM
When Fr was created the nobles did talk quite a bit about our government style. Sergio was there and made his recommendations as well. As we all know we choose republic and I for one and quite glad we did. This single act has caused quite a spark and still does, thus making things interesting.

But as said by several elders we could have choosen Theocracy and had republician ideals of rule and thus bypassed all this. That is simply a game label then used as some see fit.

Lettfer from Khari to FR:
"It is my belief that many of the church elders wish to hinder our development and influence as we have seen in the past. They imposed all the laws we currently have, which are the very same points required of the theocracies (from the new charter), yet give us no representation among the elder ranks as the theocracies have. It is my belief that as long as we follow our current laws we should have such representation. If in the future our laws were to change then I would fully expect such representation to be withheld."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on April 17, 2013, 05:15:23 PM
Reading this thread is making me consider coming back to Dwilight. Politicking in SA was a lot of fun back in the day. Sounds like it's still fairly lively.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 17, 2013, 05:23:04 PM
After reading through it, I did not see anywhere that a realm applying for an Elder seat must technically be a theocracy. All that was listed were requirements that were deemed "theocratic." In short, this is all semantics, no? Am I missing something, or is this entire argument over some ruffled feathers?

To support this observation, Classically, OOC, theocratic realms are where the priest double as the ruling class. That would mean ever regional lord, duke, and ruler, must be of the priest class. While I personally think that this would be a supremely interesting development, it is not in the game mechanics and is thus a moot point. As I understand it, no single realm in SA follows this model.

One would call a realm that governs itself by theocratic principles is, a theocracy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on April 17, 2013, 05:55:37 PM
One would call a realm that governs itself by theocratic principles is, a theocracy.

But doesn't FR do this? Khari doesn't bug Rynn about the FR's internals, nor is he in the Church. SO this is just me as a player trying to get it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 17, 2013, 05:58:18 PM
No. They consistently attempt to defy the church every step of the way and have to be heckled and cajoled into doing anything. I'd say not.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on April 17, 2013, 06:24:29 PM
So they in fact do not abide by those theocratic principles outlined in Article X and XI? If that's true, then they need to get with the program or otherwise get comfortable with not having an Elder seat.

However,

If they can prove they abide by those rules that were outlined, then I don't really see the problem. Just because they butt political heads with the church should not be sufficient grounds to deny them. Right?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 17, 2013, 06:36:27 PM
They aren't  a theocracy. That pissed off a lot of people. They were stubborn, bull-headed, and self-righteous about ut. Now they are paying for it. Case closed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on April 17, 2013, 06:50:03 PM
They aren't  a theocracy. That pissed off a lot of people. They were stubborn, bull-headed, and self-righteous about ut. Now they are paying for it. Case closed.

Not quite, imo.

Seems like it comes down to FR's self-determination versus Church-determination. I can't blame FR for wanting some self-determination after all Allison's shenanigans. The more bull-headed party here seems to be the theocrats. The shield-banging didn't really squash FR's independence-streak, it just inflamed it.

In summary, there's no guilty party and no innocent party, just a bunch of people butting heads over power. Good ol' SA doing its job as our Dwili Catholic Church. :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on April 17, 2013, 07:12:04 PM
The relationship between the Church and the theocracies has always been interesting. When Rowan was around, there was little separation between the two, but that was because the most influential Elders, like Brance, Rowan, Allison and Bustoarsenzio, were all also heavyweights in their respective theocracies. Hence, Church policy typically reflected the interests of the theocracies in the end and vice versa. Policy was often made on behalf of theocracies, such as when the Church declared a crusade against Torenism, giving Astrum a degree of political cover for what was otherwise a fairly transparent land grab from Everguard. Likewise, proposed Church policies that weren't in the interest of the big theocracies typically died on the vine. On the other hand both of the big theocracies typically worked to expand the influence of the Church in Dwilight.

When Lysander was around, this status quo was definitely changing. It seemed to me that the theocracies were becoming less tied to the Church hierarchy, making room for the Church to make its own policies with less deference to the theocracies' secular interests, but also imperiling the Church's ability to unite the theocracies around its chosen policies. A case in point might be the Aurvandil war.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 17, 2013, 08:01:48 PM
I can't blame FR for wanting some self-determination after all Allison's shenanigans.
They can have all the self-determination they want. The church historically never interfered in theocratic business. All of this mess about things the theocracies need to do, and these new sections of the charter are a response to the foundation of the Farronite Republic. If FR hadn't bucked the church and gone Republic, it ever would have happened.

Quote
Good ol' SA doing its job as our Dwili Catholic Church. :)
Damn right. None of this wishy-washy tolerance most religions seem to push.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dante Silverfire on April 17, 2013, 08:06:05 PM
Damn right. None of this wishy-washy tolerance most religions seem to push.

Yep, the Prophet of SA, certainly didn't give a Sermon regarding tolerance of other faiths in the recent past.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on April 17, 2013, 08:36:07 PM
Yep, the Prophet of SA, certainly didn't give a Sermon regarding tolerance of other faiths in the recent past.

Nope, Rynn def did not hear anything remotely like that during his wedding to Khari. Not at all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 17, 2013, 08:54:48 PM
Pft... he's just the Prophet. He doesn't run the church. ;)

You need to get on the ball, and figure out who really runs the church.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on April 17, 2013, 09:16:43 PM
So they in fact do not abide by those theocratic principles outlined in Article X and XI? If that's true, then they need to get with the program or otherwise get comfortable with not having an Elder seat.

However,

If they can prove they abide by those rules that were outlined, then I don't really see the problem. Just because they butt political heads with the church should not be sufficient grounds to deny them. Right?

Article XI is fully in compliance and written into FR laws long before those same point were officially in the charter.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 17, 2013, 09:39:45 PM
Article XI is fully in compliance and written into FR laws long before those same point were officially in the charter.
Indeed, this article was patterned after the agreement that was made with FR. I think Turin submitted something like it to the Elders shortly before the FR debacle happened. It was then modified and presented to FR as a compromise to get the church off of FR's back, and forestall war against FR. It did not grant FR theocracy status.

In any case, FR can be as compliant as it wants. Articles X and XI only apply to theocracies.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on April 17, 2013, 09:50:49 PM
Yep, the Prophet of SA, certainly didn't give a Sermon regarding tolerance of other faiths in the recent past.

Of course, he also followed that up by using Allison and Orthodox Astroism as props with which to reassert the supreme truth of the revelations, as received by him, from the Bloodstars. Indirik has a point in that the machinery of the Faith can be manipulated pretty well without the Prophet's involvement or knowledge. That said, I wonder how many Elders hold the Prophet in such high regard that they would set themselves on fire if the Prophet commanded it. I know of at least two.  :-X
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on April 17, 2013, 10:51:26 PM
I do find it interesting how it seems that as SA grows, it is stuck in the position of losing it's hardliner edge to placating the diverse wills of its growing body, or alienate it's followers and hold tight to its previous zeal.

I wonder if there is a tipping point where SA gets a genuine schism, rather than the pseduo-schism Allison created.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on April 17, 2013, 11:21:20 PM
Articles X and XI only apply to theocracies.

Do not assert as fact what is, in fact, just your opinion.

I know at least one of the church's chief canon lawyers disagrees with this position.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 17, 2013, 11:28:02 PM
Then that canon lawyers shouldn't have explicitly written that the articles apply to theocracies.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on April 17, 2013, 11:33:42 PM
Then that canon lawyers shouldn't have explicitly written that the articles apply to theocracies.

That depends on how you read it, and how you define "theocracy of Sanguis Astroism."

Again, it's a debate that will be had extensively IC, I am sure.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on April 17, 2013, 11:37:33 PM
That depends on how you read it, and how you define "theocracy of Sanguis Astroism."

Again, it's a debate that will be had extensively IC, I am sure.

It will have to be, because so far, I really do not see any reason why an Elder seat should be withheld. The church has virtually everything they want, regardless if they feel they had to pull teeth to get it.

On another note, would the Church implode if Khari, Constantine, and Chernier convinced Rynn to convert?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on April 17, 2013, 11:41:24 PM
Rynn, dear are you saying my pillow talk is working?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on April 17, 2013, 11:49:08 PM
On another note, would the Church implode if Khari, Constantine, and Chernier convinced Rynn to convert?

Turn to the dark side, Rynn.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 17, 2013, 11:49:36 PM
Determining if FR is or isn't a theocracy as far as the church is involved really seems like it should be debated IC, not here on the forums. This whole debate seems utterly pointless... not to mention extremely repetitive in argument.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 18, 2013, 12:09:59 AM
Good, seems like the framework to allow Asylon to join SA as a monarchy/theocracy with multiple religions is ok then?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 18, 2013, 12:34:20 AM
This debate has hapened IC, and I have no doubt it will again. I am really not sure how it will end up. There are big names on both sides of the debate.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 18, 2013, 12:37:40 AM
Good, seems like the framework to allow Asylon to join SA as a monarchy/theocracy with multiple religions is ok then?

They're about as close the definition of a theocracy as FR is.

What everyone is missing here, well at least the mootlings on the Elder council, is that the charter identifies there is a difference between a realm such as FR and the theocracies, and despite what they seem to have convinced themselves: Provides zero definition of what constitutes a theocracy. It outlines privileges and responsibilities sure, but if a bird and glaumring have the same privileges and responsibilities, does it stand to argue that glaumring is a bird, or stand to argue that glaumring is only a bird if he lays eggs, has feathers, and flies around all day? Sure, Glaumring and the bird can sit in a cage all day nibbling at seed and crapping on everything, required only to sing an occasional song but that doesn't make the bird a raving blood moon fruit consuming lunatic with a persecution conflict and bad taste in allies.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 18, 2013, 12:38:10 AM
No, he's saying that she can't be an elder because FR isn't a theocracy. It's a provable IC fact, because government style *is* an IC thing. It is obvious that the label is more important to FR than being a full partner in the church. That's fine, it's their choice.
This is something that I consider BS. For one, there is not a single theocracy of SA not led by a heretic. There are though some ecclesiocracy's of SA. Btw, theocratic Republic is a government form that would make FR fitting to the definition of a theocracy, which they are so bam. That's like saying D'hara is a just a monarchy. We are a monarchy technically, but we are very specific in our type as it changes it greatly to the extent we are the opposite of a traditional monarchy. Found it:
Quote
D'Hara is a constitutional monarchy with strong republican traditions. The realm is known as the Kingdom of D'Hara or the Merchant Republic of D'Hara, though the latter is generally preferred at present
So touting around that one of the BS things that can't be changed makes them it impossible for FR to be a theocracy while a republic, is BS. Btw, the charter does not specify that FR is in the third catergory, nor does the lack of a defintion of a theocracy mean that FR can't be one.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on April 18, 2013, 12:38:51 AM
They're about as close the definition of a theocracy as FR is.

What everyone is missing here, well at least the mootlings on the Elder council, is that the charter identifies there is a difference between a realm such as FR and the theocracies, and despite what they seem to have convinced themselves: Provides zero definition of what constitutes a theocracy. It outlines privileges and responsibilities sure, but if a bird and glaumring have the same privileges and responsibilities, does it stand to argue that glaumring is a bird, or stand to argue that glaumring is only a bird if he lays eggs, has feathers, and flies around all day? Sure, Glaumring and the bird can sit in a cage all day nibbling at seed and crapping on everything, required only to sing an occasional song but that doesn't make the bird a raving blood moon fruit consuming lunatic with a persecution conflict and bad taste in allies.

I love your example! =D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 18, 2013, 12:41:43 AM
I love your example! =D
Stabbity is pretty !@#$ing awesome with things like that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 18, 2013, 12:55:55 AM
This is something that I consider BS. For one, there is not a single theocracy of SA not led by a heretic. There are though some ecclesiocracy's of SA. Btw, theocratic Republic is a government form that would make FR fitting to the definition of a theocracy, which they are so bam. That's like saying D'hara is a just a monarchy. We are a monarchy technically, but we are very specific in our type as it changes it greatly to the extent we are the opposite of a traditional monarchy. Found it:So touting around that one of the BS things that can't be changed makes them it impossible for FR to be a theocracy while a republic, is BS.

Saying "So bam" doesn't prove a point, especially when there is little, or no evidence or explanation backing any of your arguments.

Every SA theocracy is lead by a heretic? Let me check.... Oh wait, they're not. However, when you look at D'hara, it is beyond all doubts, a Monarchy. It has a King. Granted it has a constitution, and embraces some vaguely republican ideals, but it is still a monarchy.

FR had a chance to be a theocracy. They spit in the church's eye and chose to place Republican ideology above the Church. That is the most important thing everyone is missing here. If you place another ideal above the church, guess what the makes you? Not a theocracy. That is the absolute most defining portion of a theocracy, is that the Church is held above all else.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on April 18, 2013, 01:04:57 AM
Really hope the IC arguments against FR's rights go as venomously as they do on the forums. I really do.  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on April 18, 2013, 01:12:39 AM
I'm sure they will i'm getting ready to address the faithful...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 18, 2013, 01:24:44 AM
Oh, they usually are. Arguments in SA are legendary.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 18, 2013, 01:31:02 AM
They're about as close the definition of a theocracy as FR is.

What everyone is missing here, well at least the mootlings on the Elder council, is that the charter identifies there is a difference between a realm such as FR and the theocracies, and despite what they seem to have convinced themselves: Provides zero definition of what constitutes a theocracy. It outlines privileges and responsibilities sure, but if a bird and glaumring have the same privileges and responsibilities, does it stand to argue that glaumring is a bird, or stand to argue that glaumring is only a bird if he lays eggs, has feathers, and flies around all day? Sure, Glaumring and the bird can sit in a cage all day nibbling at seed and crapping on everything, required only to sing an occasional song but that doesn't make the bird a raving blood moon fruit consuming lunatic with a persecution conflict and bad taste in allies.

I had to read that a few times to wrap my head around it.... You rock. ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on April 18, 2013, 01:47:29 AM
...the charter...Provides zero definition of what constitutes a theocracy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 18, 2013, 01:58:32 AM


It does not define a theocracy. Outlining privelleges and responsibilities is not defining something.  Plus we all know Rynn doesn't have a good history with charters though ;).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 18, 2013, 02:01:23 AM
The charter also doesn't define the word "is". It's not a dictionary.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 18, 2013, 02:04:22 AM
The charter also doesn't define the word "is". It's not a dictionary.

This.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on April 18, 2013, 03:23:30 AM
The charter also doesn't define the word "is". It's not a dictionary.

Except "is" isn't the term being contested. "Theocracy", however, is.


There's a reason why debates have a part at the beginning wherein terms and concepts are defined. It provides a common ground for the debate to even begin, before splitting up into the different views. Otherwise, no debate is possible: We are debating regarding the merits of red over blue, but if your 'blue' is actually my 'green' because of a lack of definition, then the entire thing is pointless.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on April 18, 2013, 03:27:10 AM
Except "is" isn't the term being contested. "Theocracy", however, is.


There's a reason why debates have a part at the beginning wherein terms and concepts are defined. It provides a common ground for the debate to even begin, before splitting up into the different views. Otherwise, no debate is possible: We are debating regarding the merits of red over blue, but if your 'blue' is actually my 'green' because of a lack of definition, then the entire thing is pointless.

Which is why I asked for the Church's definition of theocracy, as Articles X and XI don't provide one. I feel as though this whole thing hinges upon defining that IC. Have fun guys.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 18, 2013, 03:56:49 AM
Have fun guys.
Oh, definitely. However it turns out, much fun will be had.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 18, 2013, 05:08:54 AM
Saying "So bam" doesn't prove a point, especially when there is little, or no evidence or explanation backing any of your arguments.

Every SA theocracy is lead by a heretic? Let me check.... Oh wait, they're not. However, when you look at D'hara, it is beyond all doubts, a Monarchy. It has a King. Granted it has a constitution, and embraces some vaguely republican ideals, but it is still a monarchy.

FR had a chance to be a theocracy. They spit in the church's eye and chose to place Republican ideology above the Church. That is the most important thing everyone is missing here. If you place another ideal above the church, guess what the makes you? Not a theocracy. That is the absolute most defining portion of a theocracy, is that the Church is held above all else.
Quote
Theocracy means rule by God or gods and refers primarily to an internal "rule of the heart", especially in its biblical application... The common, generic use of the term, as defined above in terms of rule by a church or analogous religious leadership, would be more accurately described as an ecclesiocracy... An ecclesiocracy, on the other hand, is a situation where the religious leaders assume a leading role in the state, but do not claim that they are instruments of divine revelation.
As to D'hara, it is a monarchy, but simply stating it as a monarchy is extremely misleading as it is inaccurate, which I believe goes with FR. It is a republic yes, but it is truly a theocratic republic.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 18, 2013, 05:41:00 AM
D'hara is a constitutional monarchy. FR is a "theocratic" republic. However Republic is the noun and thus what defines the government. Now if you had a Republican Theocracy, that would be different. Semantics yes, but FR made such a big deal about it when formed that semantics are important.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on April 18, 2013, 12:37:13 PM
As to D'hara, it is a monarchy, but simply stating it as a monarchy is extremely misleading as it is inaccurate, which I believe goes with FR. It is a republic yes, but it is truly a theocratic republic.

A realm that has to be dragged kicking and screaming to pass even the most basic "theocratic" laws, hardly qualifies as "theocratic".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on April 18, 2013, 12:55:18 PM
A realm that has to be dragged kicking and screaming to pass even the most basic "theocratic" laws, hardly qualifies as "theocratic".

Ahh, but they HAVE passed them...
(http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/p480x480/427289_10151771570964741_70845401_n.png)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on April 18, 2013, 03:51:54 PM
D'hara is a constitutional monarchy. FR is a "theocratic" republic. However Republic is the noun and thus what defines the government. Now if you had a Republican Theocracy, that would be different. Semantics yes, but FR made such a big deal about it when formed that semantics are important.

This!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on April 18, 2013, 04:33:03 PM
A realm that has to be dragged kicking and screaming to pass even the most basic "theocratic" laws, hardly qualifies as "theocratic".

Not so. All our laws came of FRs free will when requested by Vellos. The kicking and screaming came from the church when we passed the open preaching law which we then revoked by a new vote.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 18, 2013, 06:34:51 PM
Passing an open preaching law and triggering serious debate about excommunicating your ruler for allowing a convicted heretic into the realm doesn't qualify as good theocratic behavior.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Norrel on April 18, 2013, 06:59:46 PM
the·oc·ra·cy 
/THēˈäkrəsē/
Noun
A system of government in which priests rule in the name of God or a god.


Theocracies don't exist in BM
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on April 18, 2013, 07:10:50 PM
Wait, the Charter provides NO GUIDANCE WHATSOEVER ABOUT HOW TO DEFINE THEOCRACY?

Oh my goodness! What an ACCIDENTAL OVERSIGHT!

Wait a second... Astrum and Morek and Corsanctum don't abide by all the responsibilities listed?

ZOMG! How could the person writing the Charter have been so careless!

I don't know what to say, guys, this is all just one big terrible mixup that the Farronite Republic might be more eligible for theocratic status than Morek! I swear I didn't mean it!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daimall on April 18, 2013, 07:35:14 PM
Why does everybody talks as if though Niselur did not exist?!?  :'(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 18, 2013, 07:36:26 PM
What's Niselur?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on April 18, 2013, 08:23:50 PM
This is all Chernier's fault.  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 18, 2013, 10:54:25 PM
the·oc·ra·cy 
/THēˈäkrəsē/
Noun
A system of government in which priests rule in the name of God or a god.


Theocracies don't exist in BM

However, these do, at least since "Theocracy" leaders have been added to the Elder's council:
An ecclesiocracy is a situation where the religious leaders assume a leading role in the state, but do not claim that they are instruments of divine revelation.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 18, 2013, 10:56:43 PM
However, these do, at least since "Theocracy" leaders have been added to the Elder's council:
An ecclesiocracy is a situation where the religious leaders assume a leading role in the state, but do not claim that they are instruments of divine revelation.
Exactly, we have SA ecclesiocracies not theocracies. It was what I was trying to get across earlier, btw go wikipedia since we both went there!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on April 19, 2013, 12:21:35 AM
I Think its integrating that way back when I first joined SA I had no desire to be caught up in the politics of the religion. Yet now as Khari is developed more I find that occupies most of my thoughts when I think of this game.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on April 19, 2013, 12:27:50 AM
Not so. All our laws came of FRs free will when requested by Vellos. The kicking and screaming came from the church when we passed the open preaching law which we then revoked by a new vote.

So it's entirely a coincidence that the new vote in which the Farronite Lords changed their minds came after the church berated and condemned them for passing it? Perhaps I'm mistaken because I'm not in FR but it certainly seems to me that were it not for the church's nagging, Farronite law would have remained quite un-theocratic in this area. And quite frankly I think most of the Elders do not see much appeal in having to nag one of their "theocracies" to death every time a new crisis crops up requiring a new law or other service from them.

Furthermore I was also specifically thinking about the situation with Allison- while that is not mentioned in the Charter, harboring Allison was a very un-theocratic action and Khari made a point of emphasizing that she did not care whatsoever what the church thought on the matter and that the execution was done entirely for personal reasons. A "theocracy" whose ruler makes a point of deliberately ignoring the Elders Council on important issues is again not something I think most Elders want to deal with.

Wait, the Charter provides NO GUIDANCE WHATSOEVER ABOUT HOW TO DEFINE THEOCRACY?

Oh my goodness! What an ACCIDENTAL OVERSIGHT!

Wait a second... Astrum and Morek and Corsanctum don't abide by all the responsibilities listed?

ZOMG! How could the person writing the Charter have been so careless!

I don't know what to say, guys, this is all just one big terrible mixup that the Farronite Republic might be more eligible for theocratic status than Morek! I swear I didn't mean it!

The ambiguity cuts both ways however. As Constantine pointed out when the new Charter was being voted for, there are no details whatsoever as to how or if a realm could become a theocracy. All that is listed are the requirements for already existing and future theocracies. So while the ambiguity does mean that an Elders Council favorable to FR could admit them on the grounds they meet the requirements, there is absolutely nothing in the Charter that requires an Elders Council less friendly to FR to do so. And I would argue that the majority of the current Elders Council seems certainly quite against the notion of giving FR theocracy status.

As I said Constantine has noted this ambiguity, and is quite happy with it- he is not against FR becoming a theocracy on principle, and if circumstances were different may have in fact been favorable to their entry (though perhaps as a "faithful realm" rather than using the word theocracy). However he feels that with the current leadership of FR being as it is, making them a theocracy will merely give Khari more excuses to ignore the Elders when it suits her and thereby actually harm the church rather than benefit it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 19, 2013, 01:38:29 AM
Quote
A "theocracy" whose ruler makes a point of deliberately ignoring the Elders Council on important issues is again not something I think most Elders want to deal with.
It's not just the Elders, they have snubbed the Prophet. When the Prophet declared that Allison couldn't come back to the theocracies, FR said that didn't apply to them because they weren't a theocracy, and allowed her in. They actually decided to /vote/ on whether or not to comply with the Prophet's decree for the theocracies.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on April 19, 2013, 01:43:50 AM
It's not just the Elders, they have snubbed the Prophet. When the Prophet declared that Allison couldn't come back to the theocracies, FR said that didn't apply to them because they weren't a theocracy, and allowed her in. They actually decided to /vote/ on whether or not to comply with the Prophet's decree for the theocracies.

I don't think he even limited it to Astrocracies. He said any realm friendly to Sanguis Astroism.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 19, 2013, 02:19:51 AM
I forget the exact wording at the moment. He made different requirements for theocracies and for realms following the Stars, or something. In any case, all the theocracies immediately indicated they would do it, and FR said something like "no thanks, we need the nobles, we are going to keep her". Only later did they vote to ban her.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on April 19, 2013, 02:35:51 AM
Quote
Orders from Mathurin Hossenfeffer   (21 days, 15 hours ago)
Message sent to all elder members of "Sanguis Astroism" (14 recipients)

Elders,

The problem with Allison Kabsinski is that she will say whatever she thinks the listener wishes to hear in order to get her way.  She was cast from the Faith once before, and swore penitence to be readmitted.  She was shown the Open Hand but once granted membership again, her penitence faded entirely and she reshaped the entire event as the fault of others, or as part of a ruse (the convoluted 'benefit' of which I have long since forgotten).

I have no doubt she misses the validity that membership of the true Church of Sanguis Astroism gave her.  I have no doubt that she would swear to abide by any penance or punishment we proposed to regain entry to the Faith.  And I have no doubt that once readmitted she would immediately begin trying to rebuild her base of influence within the Church with a view to challenging for leadership as she has done before.

I commend those of you who have maintained friendships with Allison and I have no disagreement with you remaining on cordial terms with her.  However, given her apparent desire to return to us, I think perhaps it would be best to make my position clear.

I oppose the return of Allison Kabrinski to the Faith.
I oppose the admission of Allison Kabrinski to any Theocracy of the Faith.
I counsel against the admission of Allison Kabrinski to any realm which professes to be friendly to the Faith.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on April 19, 2013, 02:46:04 AM
True, but you can't really knock them for letting her in when they killed her.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on April 19, 2013, 02:49:25 AM
True, but you can't really knock them for letting her in when they killed her.

Malus tried to get Luria to do that intentionally. Buncha sissies.  :'(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on April 19, 2013, 02:49:55 AM
Hey, one of you high-falootin' elder types has got to be near a temple.  Does SA not auto-promote neophytes anymore?  Or did my request get lost in the six-billion messages a day you have to sift through?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 19, 2013, 02:51:19 AM
Hey, one of you high-falootin' elder types has got to be near a temple.  Does SA not auto-promote neophytes anymore?  Or did my request get lost in the six-billion messages a day you have to sift through?

Diffusion of responsibilities can be a bitch. It must be really easy for such a large group of people to fail to promote newcommers if none of them are in a region with a temple whenever the request is made.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on April 19, 2013, 02:53:20 AM
Diffusion of responsibilities can be a bitch. It must be really easy for such a large group of people to fail to promote newcommers if none of them are in a region with a temple whenever the request is made.

*grumble*

The Austere and the Auspicious share some of the same responsibilities, but not exactly the same. I made it a point to bitch about this during the most recent revision of the Charter and it got nowhere. I wonder why, Vellos? ;-P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on April 19, 2013, 02:53:52 AM
none of them are in a region with a temple whenever the request is made.

There are regions without SA temples?  :o
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on April 19, 2013, 02:58:09 AM
It's not just the Elders, they have snubbed the Prophet. When the Prophet declared that Allison couldn't come back to the theocracies, FR said that didn't apply to them because they weren't a theocracy, and allowed her in. They actually decided to /vote/ on whether or not to comply with the Prophet's decree for the theocracies.

Not true no such vote ever happened. We voted on limiting Allison from senatorship.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 19, 2013, 03:12:30 AM
Not true no such vote ever happened. We voted on limiting Allison from senatorship.
You are not really helping yourself with that comment, though I suppose its better than actuallying voting on whether or not to follow his orders. Now you can just claim impulsive decision to disregard changed after thinking about it, O wait no, FR was stupid and said they did it for personal reasons, doesn't matter if it wasn't the only reason, it was a really dumb thing to say.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 19, 2013, 03:47:18 AM
Quote
Not true no such vote ever happened. We voted on limiting Allison from senatorship.
That's even worse than I thought. You deliberately thumb your nose at the Prophet's decree, when all the real theocracies comply (though at least one does not agree but complies anyway), yet claim to be a theocracy and demand theocratic privileges... FR needs to learn to accept the responsibilities if they want to claim the privileges.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 19, 2013, 04:26:08 AM
I shoulda joined Morek which was my original plan with Allison.  Woulda made things a lot more interesting for SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 19, 2013, 05:03:42 AM
Not really. Morek would have kicked you out. (And you couldn't really join Morek, because you had a ban from there.)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 19, 2013, 05:47:18 AM
I think the key word in the Prophets statement was that he counseled other realms from letting her in. He did not forbid it outside of theocracies, probably with an unsaid implication that Allison would be the realm's undoing that took her in, barring any actions by the church. At least that's what I read from it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on April 19, 2013, 05:57:09 AM
I think the key word in the Prophets statement was that he counseled other realms from letting her in. He did not forbid it outside of theocracies, probably with an unsaid implication that Allison would be the realm's undoing that took her in, barring any actions by the church. At least that's what I read from it.

So, you took her in anyway... Against the prophets word. And you agree Farronite isn't a theocracy  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on April 19, 2013, 06:19:46 AM
*grumble*

The Austere and the Auspicious share some of the same responsibilities, but not exactly the same. I made it a point to bitch about this during the most recent revision of the Charter and it got nowhere. I wonder why, Vellos? ;-P

Bro.

Erasmus la Pointe stabbed me and I've been bleeding out for four days.

Give a guy a little slack.

Also: I did notice the call for reviewing the roles of the offices. And very much ignored it. When people started calling to review offices, I stopped working on the charter and talking about it for like two weeks. By the time I brought it back up, we HAD TO RUSH SO FAST BECAUSE OF CONSUL ELECTIONS! So no time to talk about offices, golly, naw, we'll just solve all that in a good natured chat later on!

I'm just gonna say I'm really proud of the new Charter. Hireshmont managed to sneak in a lot of fun things in it that people will be realizing, I hope, for a long time to come.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on April 19, 2013, 06:41:58 AM
I'm just gonna say I'm really proud of the new Charter. Hireshmont managed to sneak in a lot of fun things in it that people will be realizing, I hope, for a long time to come.

Henhouse, meet wolf.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on April 19, 2013, 06:55:37 AM
@ all the Khari haters...

What I really think is great about this game is there is no good guys and bad guys, its all a matter of perspective. And its nice to see the veteran roleplayers who can keep IC and OOC separate as I think I can. Though I am somewhat biased to Kharis side....

Yes FR is a republic and that is not likely to change in the near future, but it still willingly follows all the points of article XI as outlined for the theocracies which I am almost certain no other non theocracy does.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on April 21, 2013, 12:41:04 AM
NO ONE IS FORCING FR TO BE A THEOCRACY.

Perhaps this is the real problem?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on April 21, 2013, 01:00:30 AM
Perhaps this is the real problem?

Morek sent an army against Asylon recently. They made it to Kid's Rock and then all their men deserted them. Golden Farrow is even further away from Morek's capital, so you must be implying that Astrum needs to do something about it. How convenient that the loudest voices for systemic oppression are also the furthest away from the political realities of the area.

That or they, y'know, live in single-region "realms" and hurl a lot of stones from their proverbial glass house while begging their targets for food.

vvv There's nothing systematic about SA's oppression, but it is systemic. *Pedantic ass.*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on April 21, 2013, 01:23:12 AM
I'm not suggesting details, just putting in the good word for systematic oppression. Because it seems like no one ever sticks up for systematic oppression anymore.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on April 21, 2013, 06:32:28 AM
I'm not suggesting details, just putting in the good word for systematic oppression. Because it seems like no one ever sticks up for systematic oppression anymore.

Right? Why does everyone always want to fight the system, anyway? SLAVERY IS FREEDOM!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on April 21, 2013, 07:42:46 AM

That or they, y'know, live in single-region "realms" and hurl a lot of stones from their proverbial glass house while begging their targets for food.

vvv There's nothing systematic about SA's oppression, but it is systemic. *Pedantic ass.*

lol.

FEED ME!

Or else the evil Farronites will annex me.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on April 21, 2013, 08:47:06 AM
Or else the evil Farronites will annex me.
I don't know about republics, but some elders in Sanguis Astroism would feel obliged to aid fledgling theocracies  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 21, 2013, 08:49:08 AM
I don't know about republics, but some elders in Sanguis Astroism would feel obliged to aid fledgling theocracies  ;D
(And its not like it would be too hard to convert Terran to a theocracy)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on April 21, 2013, 08:52:25 AM
(And its not like it would be too hard to convert Terran to a theocracy)
Choices, choices  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on April 21, 2013, 09:21:45 AM
lol.

FEED ME!

Or else the evil Farronites will annex me.

Evil...we are the good guys!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 21, 2013, 09:26:12 AM
Evil...we are the good guys!
Well its hard to convince somebody you are good if you going are going to take their lands(or stuff in general).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on April 21, 2013, 10:01:30 AM
Evil...we are the good guys!

(http://i821.photobucket.com/albums/zz133/Zafyr_photo/gifs/smiley/Rofl_3e.gif)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on April 21, 2013, 06:11:01 PM
I don't know about republics, but some elders in Sanguis Astroism would feel obliged to aid fledgling theocracies  ;D

Well now... that's actually worth considering.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on April 21, 2013, 06:58:03 PM
Don't you just hate it when you compose a message and know you can't send it because its just too damn rude and unbecoming of your characters position  :'(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 21, 2013, 07:03:36 PM
Its a position you will likely not hold much longer.  Why not be rude?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on April 21, 2013, 07:04:48 PM
Its a position you will likely not hold much longer.  Why not be rude?
It's unbecoming  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on April 22, 2013, 05:51:29 PM
Right now, in Sanguis Astroism....

Every single Consul, Light and Luminary is from a non-theocratic realm.

Terran - 1 Light
Luria Nova - 1 Light
D'Hara - 1 Light, 2 Luminaries, 1 Consul
Swordfell - 1 Consul
Farronite Republic - 1 Consul

Good thing we gave theocratic rulers votes, because otherwise Sanguis Astroism would have just completely de-theocratized the elders.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 22, 2013, 05:58:47 PM
Yippie SA hardliners are dead! Good job guys seriously! :)

Long live the new order!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 22, 2013, 06:02:09 PM
Right now, in Sanguis Astroism....

Every single Consul, Light and Luminary is from a non-theocratic realm.

Terran - 1 Light
Luria Nova - 1 Light
D'Hara - 1 Light, 2 Luminaries, 1 Consul
Swordfell - 1 Consul
Farronite Republic - 1 Consul

Good thing we gave theocratic rulers votes, because otherwise Sanguis Astroism would have just completely de-theocratized the elders.

Medugnatos is from Corsanctum. D'hara has no Light in it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 22, 2013, 06:07:59 PM
Yippie SA hardliners are dead! Good job guys seriously! :)

Long live the new order!

Actually...

I would say that the non-theocratic guys are for a large part even more hardline than the theocrats.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on April 22, 2013, 06:16:15 PM
Medugnatos is from Corsanctum. D'hara has no Light in it.

Ah, true enough. I thought he was in D'Hara: was he there at some point? Anybody know?

Actually...

I would say that the non-theocratic guys are for a large part even more hardline than the theocrats.

This is true. Hireshmont, Constantine, and Malus are probably more "conservative" than Ingi, for example. Himeko's quiet, but seems fairly conservative. Sergio is quiet as well. Leopold is new.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 22, 2013, 06:19:47 PM
Actually...

I would say that the non-theocratic guys are for a large part even more hardline than the theocrats.

Goodluck with that! ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 22, 2013, 06:20:00 PM
And there is still a new Luminary of the Maddening to be appointed. And don't forget, Medugnatos is pretty damned hard-line. Probably one of the hardest hardliners that could have been appointed. I don't think he's ever been part of D'Hara. He's been Morek/Corsanctum nearly the whole time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on April 22, 2013, 06:56:38 PM
Yippie SA hardliners are dead! Good job guys seriously! :)

And make SA like every other boring peace flower snorting religion? No way  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on April 22, 2013, 07:47:30 PM
And there is still a new Luminary of the Maddening to be appointed. And don't forget, Medugnatos is pretty damned hard-line. Probably one of the hardest hardliners that could have been appointed. I don't think he's ever been part of D'Hara. He's been Morek/Corsanctum nearly the whole time.

The issue is that we need to add a priest to the elders... and there ain't very many.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 22, 2013, 08:01:24 PM
Has Medugnatos already picked someone?

Also, this is one of the problems with adding all the rulers and Representatives to the elders. Despite having a very large number of priest/elders, we still want more non-priests as elders, too. The line has to be drawn somewhere.

Actually, the Luminary should be a priest, so promoting him to elder shouldn't be a problem.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 22, 2013, 08:05:55 PM
And make SA like every other boring peace flower snorting religion? No way  ;)

We snort our flowers as free men at least. We do not answer to a foreign religion. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 23, 2013, 12:53:43 AM
Has Medugnatos already picked someone?

Also, this is one of the problems with adding all the rulers and Representatives to the elders. Despite having a very large number of priest/elders, we still want more non-priests as elders, too. The line has to be drawn somewhere.

Actually, the Luminary should be a priest, so promoting him to elder shouldn't be a problem.
The luminary being absent is what is preventing the promotion of a consul.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 13, 2013, 06:22:05 PM
Now who was saying SA was boring? Have fun with in-fighting brought to you by Kuriga Conflicts Inc.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telamon on May 13, 2013, 08:59:00 PM
Yes! Things have gotten fairly interesting recently.
All we need now is a huge coast to coast war. =)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 14, 2013, 01:57:15 AM
Meh.

Everybody hates on Terran when we're not a theocracy.

Then we become one, and folks hate on us for having anarchy.

Blah.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 14, 2013, 02:02:28 AM
Not Terran, just what your character is doing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 14, 2013, 02:04:01 AM
Not Terran, just what your character is doing.

Terran, c'est moi.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 17, 2013, 08:09:54 PM
You all weren't seriously supposed to call a Crusade.


Seriously.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daimall on May 17, 2013, 08:41:38 PM
It not like everybody wants a Crusade within the church. There are some vocal opposition to it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 17, 2013, 08:42:49 PM
Yeah, kinda unexpected. When Hireshmont asked for it, I really didn't expect the church to go for it. The Prophet was predisposed to defend Terran, though, and Medugnatos was probably having a slow day and in need of a little bit of excitement.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 17, 2013, 08:48:59 PM
You all weren't seriously supposed to call a Crusade.


Seriously.

You can't say I didn't warn you.

Kale should probably back down now. The church isn't bluffing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 17, 2013, 08:50:05 PM
It not like everybody wants a Crusade within the church. There are some vocal opposition to it.

They can be removed or silenced.

This is a cheap crusade, too. It's not even targeted to destroy Phantaria, unless Phantaria forces the church's hand. It's just about protecting Terran. All Phantaria has to do is back off and the crusade will basically be done.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daimall on May 17, 2013, 08:52:38 PM
Church may not be bluffing, but it shall be the will and enthusiasm of the faithful Theocracies to uphold it. Who knows how long it will take for the crusaders to actually mobilize.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 17, 2013, 09:11:34 PM
Church may not be bluffing, but it shall be the will and enthusiasm of the faithful Theocracies to uphold it. Who knows how long it will take for the crusaders to actually mobilize.

lol.

You think they're just now starting to mobilize?

Basically, this crusade started when two things happened:
1. Mathurin said defending Terran would be a good cause for a theocracy
2. Phantaria declared war

It just took a little while to get the official nod. But realistically, planning and early mobilization began then.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 17, 2013, 09:30:02 PM
lol.

You think they're just now starting to mobilize?

Basically, this crusade started when two things happened:
1. Mathurin said defending Terran would be a good cause for a theocracy
2. Phantaria declared war

It just took a little while to get the official nod. But realistically, planning and early mobilization began then.

Someone's feeling high on their horse.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 17, 2013, 09:31:56 PM
Even if preparations already begun, it remains to be see what can be pulled off. I wouldn't expect very high movement rates to come in Terran's defense...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 17, 2013, 09:36:49 PM
Someone's feeling high on their horse.

No, just excited.

This is setting up to be a very fun few weeks for Dwilight.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 17, 2013, 09:42:15 PM
Even if preparations already begun, it remains to be see what can be pulled off. I wouldn't expect very high movement rates to come in Terran's defense...

Seeing as last time Gustav was commanding the most powerful unit when the Farronite Republic came down to stop Saffalore, you can guarantee that at least 1000 CS won't be coming at all...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 17, 2013, 09:42:34 PM
No, just excited.

This is setting up to be a very fun few weeks for Dwilight.

A few weeks is about all Terran can aspire to. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on May 18, 2013, 02:35:21 AM
War declarations from 5-6 realms could be enough to subdue Phantaria. Yay, war protests?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 18, 2013, 02:55:25 AM
Only to then see Terran revolt.

And a Phantaria-Saffalore-Aurvandil-Falkirk axis rise up against the church and the rest of the 'moot.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 18, 2013, 03:17:43 AM
Awesome! Let's do it!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on May 18, 2013, 03:28:58 AM
Seeing as last time Gustav was commanding the most powerful unit when the Farronite Republic came down to stop Saffalore, you can guarantee that at least 1000 CS won't be coming at all...
Yeah, the way I figure it, 80 Rinnon Riders (80/70) more than make up for it  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telamon on May 18, 2013, 03:33:57 AM
This is going to be a joke of a battle. Phantaria is going is going to be squashed. =(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on May 18, 2013, 04:38:54 AM
This is going to be a joke of a battle. Phantaria is going is going to be squashed. =(

They won't be, if they don't attack Terran.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 18, 2013, 07:15:19 AM
Only to then see Terran revolt.

And a Phantaria-Saffalore-Aurvandil-Falkirk axis rise up against the church and the rest of the 'moot.

Why would Terran revolt?

Also... Phantaria/Saffalore is no biggie.

Aurvandil-Falkirk is a bigger deal. But they would only get to SA if D'Hara let them. And if D'Hara let them, methinks that would be signalling a waaaay bigger change: i.e. D'Hara deciding that SA was a bigger threat than Aurvandil. That would be a huge 180 from previous policy. Maybe an interesting one, but a difficult one to pull off: and one that would provide a great Lurian/Fissoan cassus belli against D'Hara.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 18, 2013, 07:17:06 AM
War declarations from 5-6 realms could be enough to subdue Phantaria. Yay, war protests?

I literally just sent the message asking rulers to start making declarations. :P Admittedly, many of them will be sending troops as well.

They won't be, if they don't attack Terran.

This is very true.

Phantaria can solve this problem, and even come out with a kind of victory. Hireshmont has offered Kale a dignified way out via what I think is a fairly clever little treaty arrangement.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 18, 2013, 08:50:07 AM
I think Vellos is over-estimating just how many people support him...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on May 18, 2013, 09:24:22 AM
Guys remember its not all about Phantaria, Saffalore is in this too as was Asylon until very recently, plus Aurvandil is still in a state of declared war with Terran although there's no telling if they'll actually attack.

This whole thing reminds me a little of how World War I started.

I think Vellos is over-estimating just how many people support him...

Well whether they agree with him or not a crusade obligates people to help him. Furthermore they've already had direct military intervention by two of the largest powers in their immediate vicinity.

They can be removed or silenced.


And if there's enough of them that can create a rift in the church. Say hello to Protestant Astroism and four hundred years of bloodshed and strife.

Woo hoo! Best thing to happen in SA since the Averoth/Caerywn war.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 18, 2013, 09:48:41 AM
That help is going to be much less forthcoming given the welcome last time we came.

"Get out of my city! Who said you could show up here?"

You'd think the only reason the conflict over the "Theocracy" could even happen would get a better welcome...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on May 18, 2013, 09:56:01 AM
I think Vellos is over-estimating just how many people support him...
I think you are underestimating the power of the prophet. After that proclamation, !@#$ just got real.
That help is going to be much less forthcoming given the welcome last time we came.

"Get out of my city! Who said you could show up here?"
Try announcing your intention next time. With that trip Farronite tried to make to Balance's Retreat, you can't seriously be surprised when people suspect you when you show up at their doorstep, with a huge army.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 18, 2013, 10:05:08 AM
Try announcing your intention next time. With that trip Farronite tried to make to Balance's Retreat, you can't seriously be surprised when people suspect you when you show up at their doorstep, with a huge army.

Well, when they're your Federated allies... :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on May 18, 2013, 10:15:46 AM
Well, when they're your Federated allies... :P
Yeah, tell it to Caerwyn  :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 18, 2013, 10:31:28 AM
I think you are underestimating the power of the prophet. After that proclamation, !@#$ just got real. Try announcing your intention next time. With that trip Farronite tried to make to Balance's Retreat, you can't seriously be surprised when people suspect you when you show up at their doorstep, with a huge army.

The Prophet does make things tricky, but nothing more. I think you might be overestimating him. After all, there are many newcomers who haven't had time to be doctrinated in the "look upon the Holy Prophet in awe" aspect yet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on May 18, 2013, 11:52:47 AM
I think Vellos is over-estimating just how many people support him...

I think you're overestimating the amount of dissent. Very few of the protests actually came from people with serious power; the theocracies at least seem fully committed, and whether some minor Maroccidental lords care for the new Terran hardly matters. The only tricky one is of course the Farronite Republic with Gustav, but I suppose that depends on whether Khari really wants to give the Elders even more reasons to dismiss and criticise her.

Furthermore I think the idea that if Phantaria gets rid of Terran quickly the Church will just declare "oh well, we tried" and give up is misguided. I can certainly envision a re-conquest in such a situation.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 18, 2013, 01:32:01 PM
Why would Terran revolt?

Also... Phantaria/Saffalore is no biggie.

Aurvandil-Falkirk is a bigger deal. But they would only get to SA if D'Hara let them. And if D'Hara let them, methinks that would be signalling a waaaay bigger change: i.e. D'Hara deciding that SA was a bigger threat than Aurvandil. That would be a huge 180 from previous policy. Maybe an interesting one, but a difficult one to pull off: and one that would provide a great Lurian/Fissoan cassus belli against D'Hara.

"If D'Hara let them"

Dude, you seriously overestimate D'Hara's strength. We are stretched thin as hell right now. And you want to call our nobles to help Terran and think that if Aurvandil wanted to help Phantaria, D'Hara would have any say at all in their ability to do so?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Hroppa on May 18, 2013, 07:39:47 PM
I think you're all overestimating the underestimation involved in overestimating the Prophet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on May 18, 2013, 09:08:05 PM
I have begun referring to Vellos, outside of his presence of course, as the Beggar Priest. And it seems that the majority of the senators of the Farronites are against this crusade. We shall see how this plays out.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on May 19, 2013, 12:04:02 AM
Farronite and D'Hara are the only strong devout realms in the area and at the same time seem largely against the intervention. I'm not sure how they stand with Asylon/Aurvandil, but it's precarious for them to take the brunt of the responsibility. I assume Morek, Libero, Niselur are too far away to hold troops in Terran. Corsantcum probably can't spare nobles for a long trek, Astrum might be able.

I anticipate this to turn into a geopolitical nightmare even if the crusade works.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on May 19, 2013, 01:54:59 AM
Farronite and D'Hara are the only strong devout realms in the area and at the same time seem largely against the intervention. I'm not sure how they stand with Asylon/Aurvandil, but it's precarious for them to take the brunt of the responsibility. I assume Morek, Libero, Niselur are too far away to hold troops in Terran. Corsantcum probably can't spare nobles for a long trek, Astrum might be able.

I anticipate this to turn into a geopolitical nightmare even if the crusade works.

My thoughts exactly.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on May 19, 2013, 02:11:30 AM
Lets say Phantaria continues the fight and Astrum send in troops. Asylon would not be far behind in striking Astrum, thus pulling Astrum from the Terran field. In that scenario, and with D'Hara and Farronite, in say a less than desired level by the theocracies, this could turn into a huge melee by lots of powers.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on May 19, 2013, 02:45:48 AM
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/9d51f4d69e4a737be27ba817ed1d61ab/tumblr_mjii2tnMXF1rfd7lko1_500.gif)

#relevant
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 19, 2013, 02:56:05 AM
That should be in the official drinks section...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on May 19, 2013, 07:39:57 AM
Lets say Phantaria continues the fight and Astrum send in troops. Asylon would not be far behind in striking Astrum, thus pulling Astrum from the Terran field. In that scenario, and with D'Hara and Farronite, in say a less than desired level by the theocracies, this could turn into a huge melee by lots of powers.

If Asylon reenters Astrum lands (note: it doesn't matter who has cassus belli), the Treaty of Walefishire could be invoked and FR would send aid to Astrum (FR would have the capability, since it doesn't look like it'll be supporting the Crusade directly). If Asylon decides to divert to FR because FR sent aid to Astrum, the Treaty of Mergrathor could be invoked and Niselur would send aid to FR. If D'Hara (who also seems to be against direct intervention in the Crusade) signs the Treaty of Port Raviel, they could also send aid to FR should Asylon attack.

Hopefully the treaties hold up! :3
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 19, 2013, 07:51:58 AM
If this turns into a massive feud between tons of realms, who loses?

Not Astrum. Not Sanguis Astroism.

The losers are the people whose realms would form the battleground (even if they might technically achieve their goals): Phantaria, Terran, Saffalore, Asylon, D'Hara, and the Farronite Republic.

The only strategy available to FR and D'Hara which is rational is to get out of the way and try to minimize the level of chaos in their region: so maybe not actively support the crusade, but certainly not get in its way. D'Hara can't afford to make more enemies, and FR can't really afford to alienate the church. So they may neglect the crusade, but they can't oppose it: not without a larger level of suicidal tendencies than I normally expect from them.

Also, in other news: Hireshmont has been stabbed by an infil again. Hooray.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on May 19, 2013, 09:05:50 AM
Ooh there will be some support from FR that's for sure. To what level is to be determined.

And yeah when I read about the assassin on Vellos I just had to laugh, this might just get bigger still!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 19, 2013, 09:10:47 AM
Ooh there will be some support from FR that's for sure. To what level is to be determined.

And yeah when I read about the assassin on Vellos I just had to laugh, this might just get bigger still!

Read about it?

What position did I lose?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 19, 2013, 10:06:53 AM
If Asylon reenters Astrum lands (note: it doesn't matter who has cassus belli), the Treaty of Walefishire could be invoked and FR would send aid to Astrum (FR would have the capability, since it doesn't look like it'll be supporting the Crusade directly). If Asylon decides to divert to FR because FR sent aid to Astrum, the Treaty of Mergrathor could be invoked and Niselur would send aid to FR. If D'Hara (who also seems to be against direct intervention in the Crusade) signs the Treaty of Port Raviel, they could also send aid to FR should Asylon attack.

Hopefully the treaties hold up! :3

Yes... we'll send aid all right... *laughs evilly*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on May 19, 2013, 10:10:15 AM
None that i'm aware of, only that an assassin seriously injured you. That should give you more tinge for your anarchy, no?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arrakis on May 19, 2013, 05:19:01 PM
Interesting implications with all the politicking going around. Will the blob break?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 19, 2013, 05:29:59 PM
Who will the master politickers be, in the end?

In any case, lots of promise for new nobles in D'Hara! Plenty of wars still to be fought for quite some time, multiple colonies to set up, and lots of land to claim still.

Join for the glory of the Dragon King!  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Graeth on May 19, 2013, 06:40:31 PM
Lets say Phantaria continues the fight and Astrum send in troops. Asylon would not be far behind in striking Astrum, thus pulling Astrum from the Terran field. In that scenario, and with D'Hara and Farronite, in say a less than desired level by the theocracies, this could turn into a huge melee by lots of powers.

You think Asylon is going to go alone against a crusade?  I don't see any way in which Asylon gains from entering the conflict, at least on the side of Phantaria.  We asked them for weeks to join our realm and instead they turn around and attack Terran.  They have what is coming to them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 19, 2013, 07:07:57 PM
Don't be so sure, I've been sending out feelers and found a surprising response from a Realm Leader who is not supporting the Crusade who I thought would. Interesting times...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on May 19, 2013, 08:06:07 PM
Indeed. I have as well. Wounder if they are the same.....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on May 19, 2013, 08:59:14 PM
I think it is very cute of you to include Asylon in your countless scenarios. I thank you for the attention. =).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 20, 2013, 12:29:33 AM
What a joke.

A Crusade against a 10 Noble realm who can barely manage to muster 4,500 CS? This is worse than Atamara, ya'll.

Yeah, sorry folks, I hate to spoil the excitement but not going to be much action coming from this thing.

Lame.


EDIT: Oh, Mathruin is in Shokalom right now with Kale, maybe that will be prove fun.


Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 20, 2013, 12:34:23 AM
I know... -.-
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on May 20, 2013, 02:08:13 AM
Well...it's no better than a 10-noble realm who can muster 4,500 CS warring on a 5-noble, 1-region realm in anarchy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 20, 2013, 02:11:54 AM
Well...it's no better than a 10-noble realm who can muster 4,500 CS warring on a 5-noble, 1-region realm in anarchy.

Sure it is, that's just euthanasia.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 20, 2013, 03:31:59 AM
Well...it's no better than a 10-noble realm who can muster 4,500 CS warring on a 5-noble, 1-region realm in anarchy.

Um... I don't know if you know how math works, but that ratio is indeed A LOT different.

Besides, we weren't even sure we were going to be able to capture the Chateau Saffalore. It was a pretty evenly stacked.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 20, 2013, 04:59:57 AM
I apologize to all those who I criticized for thinking SA was ruining the continent. You were right...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on May 20, 2013, 06:42:48 AM
What a joke.

A Crusade against a 10 Noble realm who can barely manage to muster 4,500 CS? This is worse than Atamara, ya'll.

Yeah, sorry folks, I hate to spoil the excitement but not going to be much action coming from this thing.

Lame.
What happened to big brother? And bigger brother  ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on May 20, 2013, 06:53:30 AM
What a joke.

A Crusade against a 10 Noble realm who can barely manage to muster 4,500 CS? This is worse than Atamara, ya'll.

Yeah, sorry folks, I hate to spoil the excitement but not going to be much action coming from this thing.

Lame.


EDIT: Oh, Mathruin is in Shokalom right now with Kale, maybe that will be prove fun.

Assuming that this is indeed the ridiculous-sounding SA vs 4500 CS scenario described, I'd kinda have to agree. Seems to validate everything people say about SA preventing anything interesting from happening.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 20, 2013, 07:07:23 AM
What happened to big brother? And bigger brother  ::)

Not sure what you mean, honestly. We don't have those.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 20, 2013, 08:01:03 AM
SA isn't preventing interesting things from happening.

It's preventing some interesting things from happening by causing other interesting things to happen.

Besides, the politics within SA has most certainly been interesting.

Everybody should join SA, and share in the interestingness.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 20, 2013, 08:01:53 AM
Also, Hireshmont is wounded, so...

What's going on? From the forum I gather that something has happened to maybe strengthen Terran's position, but I can't see messages... anybody wanna clue me in?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on May 20, 2013, 08:10:48 AM
Alaster and a couple of other nobles joined Terran!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on May 20, 2013, 09:49:25 AM
Also, Hireshmont is wounded, so...

What's going on? From the forum I gather that something has happened to maybe strengthen Terran's position, but I can't see messages... anybody wanna clue me in?

You got elected Grand Master.

I guess its sort of like how Reagan got a major popularity boost after John Hinckley junior shot him.

How does that work out for reforming the government exactly?

What a joke.

A Crusade against a 10 Noble realm who can barely manage to muster 4,500 CS? This is worse than Atamara, ya'll.

Yeah, sorry folks, I hate to spoil the excitement but not going to be much action coming from this thing.

Lame.


EDIT: Oh, Mathruin is in Shokalom right now with Kale, maybe that will be prove fun.

Incorrect, the crusade isn't against anyone it's in defense of Terran so we'll end up fighting who ever comes for them. I've got my fingers crossed that Aurvandil will get involved.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lorgan on May 20, 2013, 10:06:17 AM
Crusades for everyone! \o/
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on May 20, 2013, 10:18:05 AM
This is the third time that the SA bloc has come to the defence of Terran, and is by far the most ridiculous. The level of response is akin to swatting a fly with a mace. If anything this demonstrates that the Church has nothing better to do, as responding with such excessive force while anything else was at hand would have been blatantly improper even to the religion's leadership. But, as there is nothing else to tax the Church's energies, it is free to divert an overwhelming amount to this trivial matter. Anything less would be pointlessly merciful.

Blame not Vellos, for he is doing what is prudent. Blame not the Church, for it is doing what is prudent as well. Blame, instead, the total lack of diversions, for diversions are the only realistic way of diverting the Church's forces away from pointless gangbang wars. Where should these diversions come from? The question is not "Where should," but rather "Where *can* they come from?" and the answer is "Nowhere, because nowhere is willing to provide a sufficient diversion." Such is life.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on May 20, 2013, 10:21:50 AM
Actually I think it's quite the opposite. There are other possible diversions the church could get involved in. The thing is this one pretty much obligates them to intervene. The charter directly calls for the church to defend its theocracies (and by extension soon to be theocracies). For once the church doesn't have a sufficient excuse to not get involved.

My hope is that this particular crusade will create a split in the church. People will reject it and get excommunicated, then together they'll form what you might call a Protestant Sanguis Astroism.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on May 20, 2013, 11:02:47 AM
Just took a look at the diplomacy page, saw that you are bluffing. No other wars in the North, while the South isn't of concern in a realpolitik sense. I realise that some Northern realms are trying to start something, but it is hasn't started yet and so isn't a certifiable diversion.

If there were anything at all of note, calling a crusade over a couple of flea-ridden realms would be a waste of effort. But, as it is, there is little demand on effort and without demand it holds little value and that of little value can be spent frivolously to anyone's content.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 20, 2013, 02:18:23 PM
Incorrect, the crusade isn't against anyone it's in defense of Terran so we'll end up fighting who ever comes for them. I've got my fingers crossed that Aurvandil will get involved.

Yea, remember when another supowerpower (Zuma) came in to stop a conflict. Hireshmont LOVED that, right? He's totally not doing the same thing he cried out against now, right?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 20, 2013, 03:33:55 PM
The level of response is akin to swatting a fly with a mace. If anything this demonstrates that the Church has nothing better to do
Believe it or not, I totally agree with you. The Crusade is ridiculous.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on May 20, 2013, 05:32:50 PM
This crusade just proves that you are either with the church or not and that SA will prevent any SA Realm from having conflict with another (as seen when FR sent troops to Swordfell).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 20, 2013, 06:16:23 PM
I totally don't get the alleged connection.

Phantaria is not SA. So how does stopping a war between Terran and Phantaria equate to preventing an SA realm from having a conflict with another SA realm?

Swordfell is not an SA realm. (And FR is not a theocracy, either.) So, again, how does stopping FR from attacking Swordfell equate to preventing an SA realm from having a conflict with another SA realm.

The matter of FR/Swordfell had absolutely nothing to with preventing a conflict between realms, as has been explained time and again, ad nauseum...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on May 20, 2013, 06:21:20 PM
If you don't want the Church interfering in your affairs, then join it and get yourself some influence. That's what Hireshmont did, and that's why all of a sudden there's a Crusade to defend Terran. It is unwise to interfere with realms that have a strong SA presence without having a countervailing presence of your own to provide you with eyes, ears and influence. It's not like it's hard to get in.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 20, 2013, 06:23:24 PM
We're so exclusive that only 1/3rd of all characters on the island have managed to get in.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on May 20, 2013, 06:27:24 PM
It is unwise to interfere with realms that have a strong SA presence

How strong could the presence be? A maximum of 5 nobles.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 20, 2013, 07:00:30 PM
I think it's loltastic that the Church feels it needs to protect a realm against another realm that has an ASTROIST as its Marshal and an ASTROIST as the Vice-Marshal as well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on May 20, 2013, 07:06:30 PM
The Crusade isn't bad because it's unfair to Phantaria (life's unfair deal with it), but because it's an all around ridiculous idea. Defending Terran could be done by sending two nobles to sit in Chateau Saffalore until judgement day. Even without interference Phantaria would have a difficult time scaling Terran's walls.

What this Crusade shows is that the people implementing it attach no value to the concept. It is not a mighty weapon to be wielded against foes of great strength (Aurvandil) or even villains of mediocre merit (Asylon), no, it is a blunt instrument to be brought down upon any weakling realm that gives a dirty look. It's laughable.

But that is not the only negative aspect of this event. Another would be that it demonstrates how futile it is for non-SA realms to interact with SA realms. If they do, they get squashed. Sounds like a good position for SA to be in from a Darwinian view, but in terms of entertainment it leaves something to be desired. It would of course be ideal for SA if they had a host of legitimate threats surrounding them to occupy their interests', as not only would it provide warfare for it's cobweb covered legions, but it would also provide added seriousness for their internal diplomacy, so that they wouldn't have to indulge themselves by declaring crusades on realms with two functional regions every so often.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 20, 2013, 07:14:15 PM
... it demonstrates how futile it is for non-SA realms to interact with SA realms.

If by "interact with" you mean "destroy". then yes, that's exactly what it demonstrates.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on May 20, 2013, 08:07:18 PM
Just took a look at the diplomacy page, saw that you are bluffing. No other wars in the North, while the South isn't of concern in a realpolitik sense. I realise that some Northern realms are trying to start something, but it is hasn't started yet and so isn't a certifiable diversion.

If there were anything at all of note, calling a crusade over a couple of flea-ridden realms would be a waste of effort. But, as it is, there is little demand on effort and without demand it holds little value and that of little value can be spent frivolously to anyone's content.

By diversion I didn't mean an active war. Why doesn't the Farronite Republic start something with Asylon? Or Morek with Libero. Hell maybe Niselur and Morek could get in a fight over the rights to keep Libero as a vassal. These are all viable options but no one wants to take the risk so they decide to play as level headed wise leaders rather then the greedy power mad megalomaniacs that really ran the medieval world.

They're not getting involved with Terran cause they're out of ideas, they're getting involved with Terran because for once they're oath bound to do so plus it's pretty safe.

By the way while Phantaria is the main realm involved is by no means the only opponent to Terran. Asylon was involved briefly and may get involved again, Saffalore actually sent troops and Aurvandil is still technically at war with Terran.

Like I said, very WWI.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 20, 2013, 08:33:59 PM
I think it's loltastic that the Church feels it needs to protect a realm against another realm that has an ASTROIST as its Marshal and an ASTROIST as the Vice-Marshal as well.

This was my frustration with it and why I think it is such a joke. It is just so blatant now that Crusades have nothing to do with the vitality of Sanguis Astroism, but rather the Elders protecting their political friends. Astroism was under absolutely no threat whatsoever. I literally cannot think of a more secular war that Phantaria could wage upon Terran, and I cannot think of a more SA friendly ruler and realm than Kale and Phantaria (well, at least before this debacle anyways).


Like I said, very WWI.

If the result of WW1 was for the conflict to fizzle out, then sure.


Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on May 20, 2013, 08:44:25 PM
This was my frustration with it and why I think it is such a joke. It is just so blatant now that Crusades have nothing to do with the vitality of Sanguis Astroism, but rather the Elders protecting their political friends. Astroism was under absolutely no threat whatsoever. I literally cannot think of a more secular war that Phantaria could wage upon Terran, and I cannot think of a more SA friendly ruler and realm than Kale and Phantaria (well, at least before this debacle anyways).

Because it's reforming to a theocracy and the charter obligates the church to defend theocracies. These kind of obligations were a big part of medieval society and they frequently came into conflict. That's what a lot of Arthurian stories are all about, the clash between different Chivalric values and oaths.

If the result of WW1 was for the conflict to fizzle out, then sure.

Have you tried getting Asylon and Aurvandil involved?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 20, 2013, 08:48:25 PM
By diversion I didn't mean an active war. Why doesn't the Farronite Republic start something with Asylon? Or Morek with Libero. Hell maybe Niselur and Morek could get in a fight over the rights to keep Libero as a vassal. These are all viable options but no one wants to take the risk so they decide to play as level headed wise leaders rather then the greedy power mad megalomaniacs that really ran the medieval world.

They're not getting involved with Terran cause they're out of ideas, they're getting involved with Terran because for once they're oath bound to do so plus it's pretty safe.

By the way while Phantaria is the main realm involved is by no means the only opponent to Terran. Asylon was involved briefly and may get involved again, Saffalore actually sent troops and Aurvandil is still technically at war with Terran.

Like I said, very WWI.

FR actually already has some !@#$ going on and this crusade is absolutely threatening to get in the way of that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on May 20, 2013, 08:53:26 PM
How so?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 20, 2013, 08:54:01 PM
Because it's reforming to a theocracy and the charter obligates the church to defend theocracies. These kind of obligations were a big part of medieval society and they frequently came into conflict. That's what a lot of Arthurian stories are all about, the clash between different Chivalric values and oaths.

But it wasn't a theocracy when we attacked it. It wasn't when the Crusade was called. It still isn't a theocracy. Maybe I should just declare Phantaria a "reforming theocracy" and say we'll be one "soon" and see if I can get a Crusade called in our name and the full armies of Astroism at my beck and call because we'll be one "any day now, guys."

But regardless, the state and health of Astroism in the area was under zero threat. You can say that all you want but bottom line this had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with Hireshmont's buddies. Which is fine that happens, but just don't be shady about it and call it what it is.


Have you tried getting Asylon and Aurvandil involved?

Oh yes, because the two best things I could do to ensure the Church doesn't ROFLSTOMP my realm would be to try to one-up them by bringing in my best buds Asylon and Aurvandil, SA's favorite realms.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on May 20, 2013, 09:15:07 PM
Oh yeah FR has had plans in motion for quite awhile and this crusade is getting in our way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on May 20, 2013, 09:22:32 PM
As the Elder council has pointed out multiple times, FR is not a theocracy, and thus need not mobilize for the crusade.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on May 20, 2013, 09:29:46 PM
Exactly.

And I have advised others of that very fact.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on May 20, 2013, 09:32:00 PM
But it wasn't a theocracy when we attacked it. It wasn't when the Crusade was called. It still isn't a theocracy. Maybe I should just declare Phantaria a "reforming theocracy" and say we'll be one "soon" and see if I can get a Crusade called in our name and the full armies of Astroism at my beck and call because we'll be one "any day now, guys."

But regardless, the state and health of Astroism in the area was under zero threat. You can say that all you want but bottom line this had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with Hireshmont's buddies. Which is fine that happens, but just don't be shady about it and call it what it is.

But see there's no debate that the realm is becoming a theocracy, and you unfortunately waited until after the announcement of these intentions to declare war. You can't ignore the timeline of events here. I have no doubt that if Terran doesn't become a theocracy the Church will step in and force it to become one.

Astroism certainly is not under threat but we would be losing an opportunity to expand into an area which has never had a theocracy before. I'm certainly not roleplaying that Turin has any special loyalty to Hireshmont. He's in it because he's a fanatic obsessed with destroying Aurvandil and a theocratic Terran could be a stepping stone to doing just that.

Oh yes, because the two best things I could do to ensure the Church doesn't ROFLSTOMP my realm would be to try to one-up them by bringing in my best buds Asylon and Aurvandil, SA's favorite realms.

Hey if you don't want to play hardball then don't complain about the conflict fizzling out. If you're not willing to risk your throne don't complain that the rulers of larger realms aren't willing to risk theirs.

Let me tell you from experience, losing a realm is fun.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on May 20, 2013, 09:33:18 PM
As the Elder council has pointed out multiple times, FR is not a theocracy, and thus need not mobilize for the crusade.

True but its individual astroists are obligated to support the crusade in whatever way they can. At the very least FR needs to remain neutral to Phantaria so willing crusaders can defend Terran.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 20, 2013, 10:00:58 PM
But see there's no debate that the realm is becoming a theocracy, and you unfortunately waited until after the announcement of these intentions to declare war. You can't ignore the timeline of events here.

I don't care if there is debate or not. We didn't declare war on a theocracy, we aren't warring a theocracy now, and a Crusade was called to defend a realm that is not a theocracy. It's just silliness to pretend you were "obligated by the charter" when you weren't.

Astroism certainly is not under threat but we would be losing an opportunity to expand into an area which has never had a theocracy before. I'm certainly not roleplaying that Turin has any special loyalty to Hireshmont. He's in it because he's a fanatic obsessed with destroying Aurvandil and a theocratic Terran could be a stepping stone to doing just that.

All it is going to do is make the region more anti-SA because is forcing itself on the region, whereas before it was already a heavily SA influenced region, but by its own volition. Honestly, it's just going to make things harder for SA because every realm in the area now is paranoid of being Crusaded on now for any war because there is clearly no secular war you can wage on a theocracy now. It's just going to polarize the whole issue.


don't complain that the rulers of larger realms aren't willing to risk theirs.

When did I do that?

Hey if you don't want to play hardball

Let me tell you from experience, losing a realm is fun.

How is that playing hardball? All that is is a sure fire way to ensure my realm dies, that isn't hardball... that's just sticking a huge "hey, come kill me, SA!" sticker on my head. Stupidity and "hardball" aren't the same thing.

And I've lost a realm before, a huge one. I have no apprehension to "losing my throne" but that doesn't mean I'm going to throw it and the realm away willy-nilly... that isn't fun for anyone.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 20, 2013, 10:02:59 PM
As the Elder council has pointed out multiple times, FR is not a theocracy, and thus need not mobilize for the crusade.
Crusades are not realm-limited. When a Crusade is called, it is incumbent on all church members to help in whatever way they can. So while FR itself is not a theocracy, individual nobles who happen to reside in FR are under obligation.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 20, 2013, 10:20:33 PM
Crusades are not realm-limited. When a Crusade is called, it is incumbent on all church members to help in whatever way they can. So while FR itself is not a theocracy, individual nobles who happen to reside in FR are under obligation.

No see it's alright, Hireshmont told us to piss off shortly before he was invaded.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on May 20, 2013, 10:38:19 PM
Crusades are not realm-limited. When a Crusade is called, it is incumbent on all church members to help in whatever way they can. So while FR itself is not a theocracy, individual nobles who happen to reside in FR are under obligation.

In whatever way they can. If the secular government doesn't see fit to mobilize because it has better things to do, oh well. Our prayers go with the Crusaders. Faith is stronger than the sword after all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daimall on May 20, 2013, 10:44:53 PM
Have you tried getting Asylon and Aurvandil involved?

That sounds like a perfect way of making the SA bloc even more united.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on May 20, 2013, 10:51:29 PM
I don't care if there is debate or not. We didn't declare war on a theocracy, we aren't warring a theocracy now, and a Crusade was called to defend a realm that is not a theocracy. It's just silliness to pretend you were "obligated by the charter" when you weren't.

The only thing stopping it from being a theocracy was the fact that the game mechanics take forever to accomplish that. Therefore several of us chose to roleplay that the realm is a theocracy and the official records only say otherwise because the clerks take forever to write it down (sort of the way realms stay on the info page for weeks even after they've been destroyed, we don't keep pretending those realms exist just because the game says otherwise).

All it is going to do is make the region more anti-SA because is forcing itself on the region, whereas before it was already a heavily SA influenced region, but by its own volition. Honestly, it's just going to make things harder for SA because every realm in the area now is paranoid of being Crusaded on now for any war because there is clearly no secular war you can wage on a theocracy now. It's just going to polarize the whole issue.

There is a secular war you can wage on a theocracy, one that doesn't involve destroying it. There have been some in the past. In some cases the realms involved will intentionally say they don't want church intervention. Before I got ousted I was hoping Asylon would poke Iashalur a little more so I could have a border war with them. I would have told the church to stay out and only asked Astrum permission to garrison Walefshire.

How is that playing hardball? All that is is a sure fire way to ensure my realm dies, that isn't hardball... that's just sticking a huge "hey, come kill me, SA!" sticker on my head. Stupidity and "hardball" aren't the same thing.

And I've lost a realm before, a huge one. I have no apprehension to "losing my throne" but that doesn't mean I'm going to throw it and the realm away willy-nilly... that isn't fun for anyone.

If you succeeded in getting them on board you would stand more then a chance of winning. Who says you need to be official allies, just talk to them under the table and convince them to smash Terran, hell then you might get SA to call a crusade you YOUR side in order to reclaim the lands from those heathens. If they wont get on board, no worries. Asylon rats you out "You believe them? They're a bunch of drug addicts!" Aurvandil rats you out "Lies they approached me out of a desire to destroy SA"

And I've lost a realm before, a huge one. I have no apprehension to "losing my throne" but that doesn't mean I'm going to throw it and the realm away willy-nilly... that isn't fun for anyone.

And it's not throwing the realm away willy-nilly, its standing up to an oppressive hegemony refusing to back down even in the face of certain destruction.

That sounds like a perfect way of making the SA bloc even more united.

It's also a good way to completely disorganize their forces. Imagine the chaos if an Asylonian army occupied Darfix while Niselur's forces were away.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 20, 2013, 11:42:53 PM
But it wasn't a theocracy when we attacked it. It wasn't when the Crusade was called. It still isn't a theocracy. Maybe I should just declare Phantaria a "reforming theocracy" and say we'll be one "soon" and see if I can get a Crusade called in our name and the full armies of Astroism at my beck and call because we'll be one "any day now, guys."

But regardless, the state and health of Astroism in the area was under zero threat. You can say that all you want but bottom line this had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with Hireshmont's buddies. Which is fine that happens, but just don't be shady about it and call it what it is.

Terran was and is a theocracy, facts be damned. Government is what you make of it. Hireshmont managed to convince people that Terran is, for all intents and purposes, a theocracy. If you can convince people the same of Phantaria, be my guest.

This war is not about Hireshmont and his buddies. Choosing to think that way will continue to leave Kale blindsided by events. Believeing that it was a secular conflict about unifying Terran left Kale vulnerable, and continuing to believe that will continue to leave Kale vulnerable. He needs to realize it is, in fact, a religious war, and needs to find a way to win the religiosity of it. I wasn't going to suggest this earlier, but here's a thought: outflank Hireshmont in the religious realm. Convert and raze the Triunist temple in Shokalom.

Astroism's elders would have to admit the goal of the crusade was essentially accomplished; the faith was defended (even expanded!), and then Kale might have more leeway in how he deals with Terran. A war between Libero and Morek does not require a crusade, for example, or even Summerdale and Morek, because nobody has any doubts that the relative position of SA is at stake. But a Triunist Republic vs. Astroist Theocracy? Yeah, the relative influence of SA is totally at stake. Advice on how to win the propaganda war: convert and then carry out radical acts to demonstrate your zeal.

In absolute terms, you're right, SA wasn't under threat. But absolute terms don't matter, RELATIVE power is what matters, and the RELATIVE balance of power WAS under threat.

Or think of it this way: in Terran's war with Kabrinskia, Hireshmont began putting out feelers about his conversion before the war began. He was in close communication with multiple elders (including Mathurin) for weeks prior to war, and continued this non-political discussion during the war. He converted during the war (or right on the cusp of it, I forget). SA could stay out because Kabrinskia was the aggressor and because the trajectory of SA power was obvious: no matter who won, SA was going to be stronger.

But the current situation is different. If Phantaria wins, SA will be weaker. An influential Elder will lose secular power and the replacement power will be demonstrably less committed to the church's priorities and interests. On the other hand, church support loses the church nothing (people who hate the church will hate it anyways), but potentially gains it a theocracy.

And for all that people claim that these kinds of things turn people off to SA, I call bologna. People don't join religions in a medieval game because they want to teach the values of moderation and tolerance. We do it because it's a path to power and an excuse for war and a chance to interact with other players. So yeah, the losers will be bitter at SA: and everybody on the sidelines will get a take-home message– "Conversion is the path to power."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 20, 2013, 11:47:04 PM
Because it's reforming to a theocracy and the charter obligates the church to defend theocracies. These kind of obligations were a big part of medieval society and they frequently came into conflict. That's what a lot of Arthurian stories are all about, the clash between different Chivalric values and oaths.

Have you tried getting Asylon and Aurvandil involved?

Except that Terran was not yet a theocracy. And as far as I know, it still isn't. The church had no obligations to it. If FR is rebuked because the game states it isn't a theocracy, than so should have Terran.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on May 21, 2013, 12:02:11 AM
You all miss the main point. Vellos had to convince only one person to call a crusade.  After that momentum kicks in. I am glad though, we haven't had many crusades. This will test the loyalty to the church for a few nobles. I hope we see some push back over the declaration.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 21, 2013, 12:05:40 AM
You all miss the main point. Vellos had to convince only one person to call a crusade.  After that momentum kicks in. I am glad though, we haven't had many crusades. This will test the loyalty to the church for a few nobles. I hope we see some push back over the declaration.

That he only had to convince one person doesn't change how ridiculous it was to declare a crusade over this.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 21, 2013, 12:08:08 AM
You all miss the main point. Vellos had to convince only one person to call a crusade.  After that momentum kicks in. I am glad though, we haven't had many crusades. This will test the loyalty to the church for a few nobles. I hope we see some push back over the declaration.

It's not going to test anything. It's going to be over before it even begins.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on May 21, 2013, 12:09:50 AM
Except that Terran was not yet a theocracy. And as far as I know, it still isn't. The church had no obligations to it. If FR is rebuked because the game states it isn't a theocracy, than so should have Terran.

The game alone doesn't state that Farronite is a theocracy, they are dedicated to remaining a republic with astroist principles. I actually argued that we should not go with the games definition of a theocracy for the charter. The game says a theocracy needs a ruler elected once, a judge appointed once and a banker and general elected at regular intervals. In debates they ended up saying this is necessary for an Astroist theocracy because people considered it more stable then a republican system or any other government system for that matter.

I'm working to amend the charter to say that there are also "theocratic realms" which are entitled to the same mutual defense.


It's not going to test anything. It's going to be over before it even begins.

With that attitude it is.

You might feel differently if you were tuned in to the SA channel. It's creating a lot of division in the church. I've got my fingers crossed for a schism.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 21, 2013, 12:13:36 AM
You might feel differently if you were tuned in to the SA channel. It's creating a lot of division in the church. I've got my fingers crossed for a schism.

I wouldn't count on it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on May 21, 2013, 12:15:11 AM
The game says a theocracy needs a ruler elected once, a judge appointed once and a banker and general elected at regular intervals.

This is simply, demonstrably, and completely untrue.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 21, 2013, 12:17:39 AM
This is simply, demonstrably, and completely untrue.

Speaking of which: I asked the church what the hell *was* a theocracy, anyways? No answer. Gotta come to the conclusion that the game's sticker on the realm page decides who is a theocracy and who is, if there's no other standards...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 21, 2013, 12:20:06 AM
With that attitude it is.

You might feel differently if you were tuned in to the SA channel. It's creating a lot of division in the church. I've got my fingers crossed for a schism.

I have plenty of contacts within the Church, both low and high in ranking. As if it hasn't been stated already, there are Astroists in Kale's military council--his Marshals--who receive all the letters to the full membership of SA.

It has nothing to do with my attitude, it's just how the game works. A Crusade was called to defend Terran, and it's going to work because it isn't a hard task to achieve. That's just the bottom line. Kale's 5,000 CS just cannot prevail against the forces of Astrum and Morek and Corsanctum and Terran. And no, Asylon and Aurvandil won't be able to change that (even if they were dumb enough to go along with that).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on May 21, 2013, 12:20:24 AM
Speaking of which: I asked the church what the hell *was* a theocracy, anyways? No answer. Gotta come to the conclusion that the game's sticker on the realm page decides who is a theocracy and who is, if there's no other standards...

If you're looking for a definition of "Theocracy," then I would say that's exactly correct.

If you want to be able to talk about something else specific to the SA charter (or other SA bylaws), I strongly suggest creating a distinct term, along the lines of "Theocratic Astroist State".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on May 21, 2013, 12:30:03 AM
This is simply, demonstrably, and completely untrue.

That's what the wiki reads.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on May 21, 2013, 12:31:09 AM
That's what the wiki reads.

As has been pretty plainly the case for years now, no government system is tied to a particular set of voting arrangements.

The Wiki is woefully out of date on a number of issues. This is just one more of them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on May 21, 2013, 12:46:27 AM
I have plenty of contacts within the Church, both low and high in ranking. As if it hasn't been stated already, there are Astroists in Kale's military council--his Marshals--who receive all the letters to the full membership of SA.

It has nothing to do with my attitude, it's just how the game works. A Crusade was called to defend Terran, and it's going to work because it isn't a hard task to achieve. That's just the bottom line. Kale's 5,000 CS just cannot prevail against the forces of Astrum and Morek and Corsanctum and Terran. And no, Asylon and Aurvandil won't be able to change that (even if they were dumb enough to go along with that).

I'm pretty sure some of them will be severely limited by the distance.

Why would it be stupid for Aurvandil to get involved? They'd be stopping the one chance the church has of getting within reach of them.

Also lets keep in mind that just because you can't destroy Terran right now doesn't mean you can't stay at war with them. The crusade is in defense of Terran, not for the destruction of Phantaria. You can continue to have hostile relations. In theory you can have border disputes and pillage them from time to time. The church almost let it slide when you were going to destroy them, they probably wont care if you just harass them.

That's actually a situation I think is all too rare in Dwilight realms building up a long term hostility without actually trying to destroy each other (which is how it usually went in medieval times). That's how you make sure there's wars and conflicts to enjoy.

I have plenty of contacts within the Church, both low and high in ranking. As if it hasn't been stated already, there are Astroists in Kale's military council--his Marshals--who receive all the letters to the full membership of SA.



Did they tell you about the letter Kas is accused of sending?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 21, 2013, 02:14:06 AM
pcw27, I honestly don't see how you can argue that this makes sense OOC. I can understand the IC reasons, there's plenty of them. But OOC, it's pretty clear that this is not really a crusade but actually just something declared so that the Church has something to do. I mean if there was no crusade declared against Aurvandil, which housed a direct competitor to Sanguis Astroism, then why should one be declared for Terran, which wasn't even a Theocracy at the time it was called. It still isn't, in fact. And as we all know, GAME MECHANICS TRUMP RP.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 21, 2013, 03:18:43 AM
Except that Terran was not yet a theocracy. And as far as I know, it still isn't. The church had no obligations to it. If FR is rebuked because the game states it isn't a theocracy, than so should have Terran.

The elders are divided on the matter.

IMHO, if FR had wanted to be recognized as a theocracy, a majority of elders probably would have allowed it to fly, provided they were willing to actually call themselves a theocracy, etc, etc.

But let's be clear: the Farronite Republic has never requested that they be recognized as a theocracy, or stated that they desire to become one. That is a VERY important point. The Farronite Republic requested an ARCHONSHIP, which is emphatically NOT the same as being recognized as a theocracy. They asked for the benefit without any of the cost.

Some elders are sticklers for the game title. But I think a majority probably aren't. They're only forcing it on Hireshmont because of the political situation regarding Terran and concerns about his personal, political ambitions: same reason the elders are forcing Hireshmont to step away from secular power in Terran on a pretty fixed timeframe.

The peculiar demands of game-mechanic government change are not an immutable rule of Sanguis Astroism's charter. According to the charter, theocracies are merely what the elders vote them to be, as they are not otherwise defined. FR has made no attempt to convince any elders they should be recognized as a theocracy: they've tried to convince the elders they should receive an Archonship, which is totally different.

Terran, however, as NOT requested an Archonship, but HAS lobbied to be recognized as a theocracy. And, surprise, we're pretty darn well recognized as a theocracy, except by some bitter loudmouths with previous histories with Hireshmont.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on May 21, 2013, 03:32:37 AM
Vellos quite twisting your words. Yes I asked for archonship for FR because we fallowed all the points of article XI as the theocracies do. Thus are a theocratic republic. You have not requested archonship for terran is BS as a theocracy automatically gets that right per the charter and open elder positions as limited by game coding.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on May 21, 2013, 03:57:50 AM
pcw27, I honestly don't see how you can argue that this makes sense OOC. I can understand the IC reasons, there's plenty of them. But OOC, it's pretty clear that this is not really a crusade but actually just something declared so that the Church has something to do. I mean if there was no crusade declared against Aurvandil, which housed a direct competitor to Sanguis Astroism, then why should one be declared for Terran, which wasn't even a Theocracy at the time it was called. It still isn't, in fact. And as we all know, GAME MECHANICS TRUMP RP.


Different Light of the Maddening in office.  Medugnatos is nothing like Rabisu.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 21, 2013, 04:06:18 AM

Different Light of the Maddening in office.  Medugnatos is nothing like Rabisu.

Indeed. Rabisu didn't want to call one when he should have, and Medugnatos did when he shouldn't have.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 21, 2013, 04:29:49 AM
Indeed. Rabisu didn't want to call one when he should have, and Medugnatos did when he shouldn't have.

I believe the one he didn't want to call a crusade on was the Farronite Republic.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 21, 2013, 04:34:38 AM
I believe the one he didn't want to call a crusade on was the Farronite Republic.

I was talking about Aurvandil...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 21, 2013, 04:35:53 AM
I was talking about Aurvandil...

Exactly my point...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 21, 2013, 04:37:56 AM
Exactly my point...

And... you lost me.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on May 21, 2013, 04:47:47 AM
Vellos quite twisting your words. Yes I asked for archonship for FR because we fallowed all the points of article XI as the theocracies do.

Sounded more like a demand to most elders. Besides, there's no such thing as a theocratic republic. And can you tell me with a straight face that the concerns of the elders were unjustified, particularly in the wake of the Farronite response to the crusade, their incursion into Swordfell, their overturning of the law to allow temples (or was it priests) into FR, the week after they agreed to it?

I can understand the IC reasons, there's plenty of them. But OOC, it's pretty clear that this is not really a crusade but actually just something declared so that the Church has something to do.

Huh?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 21, 2013, 06:38:27 AM
Quote
Hireshmont managed to convince people that Terran is, for all intents and purposes, a theocracy.
Managed to convince *some* people. There are at least as many who do not accept the claim. Luckily for Hireshmont, many of these people still believe that Terran is worth saving, even if they are not yet a theocracy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on May 21, 2013, 08:13:58 AM
Sounded more like a demand to most elders. Besides, there's no such thing as a theocratic republic. And can you tell me with a straight face that the concerns of the elders were unjustified, particularly in the wake of the Farronite response to the crusade, their incursion into Swordfell, their overturning of the law to allow temples (or was it priests) into FR, the week after they agreed to it?

Huh?

Perhaps it did sound like a demand but as Khari and some others see it our actions are directly related to how the church handles the Farronites.

As for that preaching law it did not allow temples. Only to peach if the lord allowed it which must would not. 
But whatever old news.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on May 21, 2013, 03:57:56 PM
Besides, there's no such thing as a theocratic republic.

Sure there is, or can be.

No, the game doesn't provide you a definition of one, but that means you just have to come up with a reasonable definition yourself.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 21, 2013, 05:00:45 PM
Vellos quite twisting your words. Yes I asked for archonship for FR because we fallowed all the points of article XI as the theocracies do. Thus are a theocratic republic. You have not requested archonship for terran is BS as a theocracy automatically gets that right per the charter and open elder positions as limited by game coding.

I'm not twisting my words, or anyone else's.

Sure, yeah, you're a theocratic republic. But a theocratic republic IS NOT A THEOCRACY. I'm not talking about game-mechanics here: I'm talking about FR's legal and cultural self-definition. FR has NOT chosen to define itself as a theocracy, but as a THEOCRATIC REPUBLIC. There IS a difference. Asking for an Archonship when you're not even willing to call yourself a theocracy is presumptuous.

Regarding Terran's position, no, it's not BS. Theocracies totally have the right to abdicate their archonship, and Terran has done so. That's not insignificant.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 21, 2013, 05:48:32 PM
Regarding Terran's position, no, it's not BS. Theocracies totally have the right to abdicate their archonship, and Terran has done so. That's not insignificant.
Mrh? Abdicate their Archonship? First I've heard of it. And really, I don't figure that point, if it truly was ever claimed, would have been a determining factor in any decision made by the Elders. The reasons for the crusade to defend Terran are boredom and a chance to finally get a theocracy much farther south.

Note: Saying "we don't need an archonship until we're a stable realm" does not constitute abdicating your rights to an archonship.

I do, however, agree that your statements regarding the manner in which FR attempted to claim their right to an Archon on the elder council are fairly correct.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on May 21, 2013, 07:14:44 PM
Well regardless, both terran and FR if they had archons would be empty as their leaders are already elders.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 21, 2013, 07:22:20 PM
Well regardless, both terran and FR if they had archons would be empty as their leaders are already elders.

Not really... they'd just get both votes.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 21, 2013, 07:25:04 PM
Now to wait to see how the Prophet takes being indirectly accused of making a political decision that hurt the church...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 21, 2013, 07:35:22 PM
Not really... they'd just get both votes.
That is an interesting interpretation. A possible loophole that should be addressed and closed, eventually. In the past, the possibility of casting votes obtained from holding multiple voting positions has been handled both by letting nobles cast both votes, and by not letting them do so. It has only been possible in regards to Priest class and Elder membership. With rulers now getting votes, and rulers able to hold other elder offices, this should be sorted out.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on May 21, 2013, 07:39:02 PM
That will be interesting...but not as interesting as Terran's claim on Gretchew will be. Would all of SA unite against the Zuma, or would the crusade be quickly abandoned?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 21, 2013, 07:45:51 PM
For the glory of the Stars!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 21, 2013, 07:56:31 PM
That will be interesting...but not as interesting as Terran's claim on Gretchew will be. Would all of SA unite against the Zuma, or would the crusade be quickly abandoned?

Did the Zuma take Gretchew?

Somebody keep me informed! Being wounded sucks!

I gather there are calls for Magistratums or something? Who who who?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on May 21, 2013, 08:03:04 PM
I'm not sure when/why it happened, but yeah...the Zuma control Gretchew.

As to calls for Magistratums, apparently Kas messaged Alice with dissent about how the elders were conducting the church. It wasn't overt blasphemy, but it does sound bad.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 21, 2013, 08:09:24 PM
I'm not sure when/why it happened, but yeah...the Zuma control Gretchew.

As to calls for Magistratums, apparently Kas messaged Alice with dissent about how the elders were conducting the church. It wasn't overt blasphemy, but it does sound bad.

Kas has confessed to worshipping the Zuma before, and was known to be passing on intelligence intended to strengthen OA and Aurvandil.

The reasons to boot him are many. Hireshmont just can't do it because of the obvious political baggage.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on May 21, 2013, 08:41:31 PM
I gather there are calls for Magistratums or something?

...Shouldn't that be "Magistrata"?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 21, 2013, 10:47:40 PM
...Shouldn't that be "Magistrata"?

Touché, good sir.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 22, 2013, 01:41:05 AM
Did the Zuma take Gretchew?

Somebody keep me informed! Being wounded sucks!

I gather there are calls for Magistratums or something? Who who who?

Gretchew defected from Saffalore to Zuma before you even got wounded :P You never pay attention to your border regions, which was why you had a big ol' Saffalore army right there when you were busy kicking us out of your city.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 22, 2013, 03:02:01 AM
Gretchew defected from Saffalore to Zuma before you even got wounded :P You never pay attention to your border regions, which was why you had a big ol' Saffalore army right there when you were busy kicking us out of your city.

Being a Priest does significantly hinder your tendency to pay attention to armies and such.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 22, 2013, 03:44:01 AM
Being a Priest does significantly hinder your tendency to pay attention to armies and such.

Well he was also their General in addition to Ruler, Judge and Banker, so sue me for expecting great things.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on May 22, 2013, 03:56:23 AM
Gretchew defected from Saffalore to Zuma before you even got wounded :P You never pay attention to your border regions, which was why you had a big ol' Saffalore army right there when you were busy kicking us out of your city.
Marlboro, please quit being annoying about Vellos having a hissy fit that a realm known to go to other nations cities/strongholds without warning to raze the region was asked "wtf are you doing here?".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 22, 2013, 04:00:21 AM
Being a Priest does significantly hinder your tendency to pay attention to armies and such.

Being a priest plus a realm with no rurals, so no scouts.

We're flyin' blind.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 22, 2013, 04:12:46 AM
Marlboro, please quit being annoying about Vellos having a hissy fit that a realm known to go to other nations cities/strongholds without warning to raze the region was asked "wtf are you doing here?".

Uh... no?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on May 22, 2013, 05:07:42 AM
Yes actually. See Swordfell episode.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on May 22, 2013, 05:12:15 AM
Marlboro, please quit being annoying about Vellos having a hissy fit that a realm known to go to other nations cities/strongholds without warning to raze the region was asked "wtf are you doing here?".

You mean that one time Swordfell asked them to attack Balance's retreat to oust Sevastian, and they didn't even get there before turning around. So yes, when a confederate shows up, whining isn't an approrpriate response.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 22, 2013, 05:17:20 AM
Yes actually. See Swordfell episode.

My no was more a petulant gesture of defiance than a refusal of the charges, but really you guys don't know !@#$ about !@#$ with regards to the Swordfell episode. Not gonna get into it on the forums though, if your character's genuinely interested they can pry and see where it gets them.

Vellos cried wolf because Perth told him we were coming to kick his ass. Perth told Vellos we were coming to kick his ass because I was very ambiguous with him because I didn't want him giving Saffalore a heads up. Perth later declared war on Vellos' realm and here we are. It has !@#$ all to do with Swordfell.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on May 22, 2013, 05:44:19 AM
To the eyes of everyone, FR's army went east to oust Sevastian (SA member) and help Bowie (SA enemy). The fact that the FR army refused to say its intent raised suspicion all the more. It doesn't matter that they turned around before getting there (because they got caught) -- the intent was there. It wasn't very surprising, then, that any realm with the FR army close by would be very apprehensive as to their goals -- especially when they keep quiet and refuse to say anything.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 22, 2013, 05:55:56 AM
To the eyes of everyone, FR's army went east to oust Sevastian (SA member) and help Bowie (SA enemy). The fact that the FR army refused to say its intent raised suspicion all the more. It doesn't matter that they turned around before getting there (because they got caught) -- the intent was there. It wasn't very surprising, then, that any realm with the FR army close by would be very apprehensive as to their goals -- especially when they keep quiet and refuse to say anything.

If you'd actually read my post you'd see why your perceptions are wholly irrelevant to the actual sequence of events re: Vellos. The fact that they're entirely incorrect is a matter for a different thread.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on May 22, 2013, 05:58:40 AM
To the eyes of everyone, FR's army went east to oust Sevastian (SA member) and help Bowie (SA enemy). The fact that the FR army refused to say its intent raised suspicion all the more. It doesn't matter that they turned around before getting there (because they got caught) -- the intent was there. It wasn't very surprising, then, that any realm with the FR army close by would be very apprehensive as to their goals -- especially when they keep quiet and refuse to say anything.

Wrong. The whole thing was primarily instigated by Creed and Abbigal. The Latter was a Consul of SA at the time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on May 22, 2013, 06:07:38 AM
Wrong. The whole thing was primarily instigated by Creed and Abbigal. The Latter was a Consul of SA at the time.
I am with Stabbity on this one. Also, what actually happened and your reputation need not be the same. Aka, just because we don't know what actually happened with Swordfell doesn't mean FR didn't get a reputation off of it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on May 22, 2013, 06:22:01 AM
Wrong. The whole thing was primarily instigated by Creed and Abbigal. The Latter was a Consul of SA at the time.

Half of Swordfell was for the intervention (more SA members than Sevastian's bloc), and we all felt abused by the loss of Farronite/Swordfell autonomy. The church didn't really intervene, but word came to the church and the Farronite Judge called the troops back when it did.

Enoch personally doesn't take it as a intervention by the church, but as a fear from faithful Astroists that any secular matter may be turned into a crusade against them. It certainly didn't help Swordfell embrace SA when a Consul and 4-5 SA nobles were blocked from a purely secular attempt because calls 'that no Astroist should attack another'. Which now, in hindsight, seems silly.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on May 22, 2013, 06:36:56 AM
Half of Swordfell was for the intervention (more SA members than Sevastian's bloc), and we all felt abused by the loss of Farronite/Swordfell autonomy. The church didn't really intervene, but word came to the church and the Farronite Judge called the troops back when it did.

Enoch personally doesn't take it as a intervention by the church, but as a fear from faithful Astroists that any secular matter may be turned into a crusade against them. It certainly didn't help Swordfell embrace SA when a Consul and 4-5 SA nobles were blocked from a purely secular attempt because calls 'that no Astroist should attack another'. Which now, in hindsight, seems silly.

What screwed that attempt was Creed bragging about it before the realm. If he had kept his mouth shut and distanced himself from it, FR likely wouldn't have been convinced to back down.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 22, 2013, 08:10:44 AM
If you'd actually read my post you'd see why your perceptions are wholly irrelevant to the actual sequence of events re: Vellos. The fact that they're entirely incorrect is a matter for a different thread.

You may be right and still wrong.

That is, you may be right on the facts: but from the OUTSIDE, FR earned itself a reputation for being willing to play fast and loose with the church's interests in periphery states. FR hesitance in regards to the crusade is not curing that perception.

Again, the perception may be based on a very selective perception, but that is the perception that many people have, and so it is not unreasonable to think Hireshmont might react that way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 22, 2013, 01:25:03 PM
To the eyes of everyone, FR's army went east to oust Sevastian (SA member) and help Bowie (SA enemy). The fact that the FR army refused to say its intent raised suspicion all the more. It doesn't matter that they turned around before getting there (because they got caught) -- the intent was there. It wasn't very surprising, then, that any realm with the FR army close by would be very apprehensive as to their goals -- especially when they keep quiet and refuse to say anything.

I have a hard time seeing Bowie as an SA enemy, when he got lordships and government positions in Morek, and was elected by Morekians to lead the colony to begin with... For all intents and purposes, Morek put him where he is. And so, if Bowie's an enemy, so is Morek. And just saying that sounds stupid...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on May 22, 2013, 02:10:34 PM
Wrong. The whole thing was primarily instigated by Creed and Abbigal. The Latter was a Consul of SA at the time.

incorrect.  This was instigated by Allison.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on May 22, 2013, 02:13:36 PM
Now that Niselur has quite defiantly declined to help with the crusade we should kick their butts.  Any who don't defect from the realm should be kicked out of the church.  Send in the priests and get it all taken care of in a couple weeks.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 22, 2013, 02:15:14 PM
Wrong. This whole thing was instigated by my cat when she walked across the keyboard on her way to the litterbox one day. In the process, she composed the letter that started the entire train of events. IIRC, the letter went something like this:

Fffffdfcyyyyugugjygjjllklmjnlkmjlkk

Of course you can see how that was the trigger for this whole event.

Bad kitty! Bad!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 22, 2013, 02:26:52 PM
Now that Niselur has quite defiantly declined to help with the crusade we should kick their butts.  Any who don't defect from the realm should be kicked out of the church.  Send in the priests and get it all taken care of in a couple weeks.

Shouldn't have allowed a rebellion against the rightful theocratic ruler, Turin!  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 22, 2013, 04:51:31 PM
Let's finish up with Terran/Phantaria, then have an INTERNAL crusade!

Like the Cathar Wars!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telamon on May 23, 2013, 03:32:43 AM
This'll be so fun!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on May 23, 2013, 04:17:15 AM
Hot damn, I had hoped the church would facilitate conflicts rather than shut them down. Appease Maddening!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 23, 2013, 05:39:39 AM
Hot damn, I had hoped the church would facilitate conflicts rather than shut them down. Appease Maddening!

Just lets keep it to one at a time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 23, 2013, 12:45:20 PM
Just lets keep it to one at a time.

Actually, I was told that there'd be nothing wrong with simultaneous crusades. XD
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 23, 2013, 05:52:56 PM
Actually, I was told that there'd be nothing wrong with simultaneous crusades. XD

There's nothing wrong with it fundamentally, it's just a whole lot of work.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 24, 2013, 03:13:29 AM
And Kale responds reasonably well to the first round of peace offers... except makes a blatant attempt to encircle Terran for future annexation.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sypher on May 24, 2013, 03:58:22 AM
Can Niselur, Libero and Morek even reach Terran before their troop morale plummets too low? I would imagine even Astrum & Corsanctum would have issues with the distance to Terran.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on May 24, 2013, 04:43:14 AM
Astrum is very close to Terran, they shouldn't have a problem. It's just like SA vs Thulsoma.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daimall on May 24, 2013, 04:54:29 AM
I think the bigger thing for Niselur at the moment is that will they even go to Terran in the first place? Not likely it seems.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on May 24, 2013, 05:44:39 AM
Shouldn't have allowed a rebellion against the rightful theocratic ruler, Turin!  ;)
Iashulur was not a theocracy. Niselur on the other hand is. When the rebellion happened Leopold changed the government to theocracy, likely to appease the church so he could keep his new position as Turin was fighting it actually. That, and he most certainly could not have gotten his position back if he wanted despite him stating so. Turin was a bore as the king of Iashulur while Leopold has made Niselur quite a bit better from what I hear.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 24, 2013, 07:09:02 AM
And Kale responds reasonably well to the first round of peace offers... except makes a blatant attempt to encircle Terran for future annexation.

Gretchew would hardly make the difference if we were ever in a position to be able to annex Terran. That's not the motivation. Terran will always have the obligatory defense of the Astrocracies anyways, right? Charter and all that? Phantaria will never be in a position to war Terran ever again.

Besides, a theocratic city-state would be awesome.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on May 24, 2013, 07:09:38 AM
Iashulur was not a theocracy. Niselur on the other hand is. When the rebellion happened Leopold changed the government to theocracy, likely to appease the church so he could keep his new position as Turin was fighting it actually. That, and he most certainly could not have gotten his position back if he wanted despite him stating so. Turin was a bore as the king of Iashulur while Leopold has made Niselur quite a bit better from what I hear.

Iashular was a theocracy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 24, 2013, 07:13:08 AM
Can Niselur, Libero and Morek even reach Terran before their troop morale plummets too low? I would imagine even Astrum & Corsanctum would have issues with the distance to Terran.

They all made it to Terran pretty easily during the Aurvandil wars. Kale knows this first had as he was head of the Allied coordination between 'Moot and Astrocracies, which the primary reason he knew there wasn't much chance of fighting it out: he has literally helped coordinate the arrival of Astrocratic armies into Terran before.

The line seems to be somewhere around Paisly, really.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daimall on May 24, 2013, 07:42:46 AM
Iashulur was not a theocracy. Niselur on the other hand is. When the rebellion happened Leopold changed the government to theocracy, likely to appease the church so he could keep his new position as Turin was fighting it actually. That, and he most certainly could not have gotten his position back if he wanted despite him stating so. Turin was a bore as the king of Iashulur while Leopold has made Niselur quite a bit better from what I hear.

Iashular was a theocracy already. But yes, I don't remember Turin being that inspiring to the common lords of the realm.. As I recall the rebellion seem to had had completely blindsided Turin, either that or he didn't take it seriously if anybody actually tipped him off. Niselur seems alot more interesting now with a higher level of activity within the realm. Well at the very least a shakeup in who is in power was there. Although Qadan is still the Treasurer as always and a Duke (of a different duchy.)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on May 24, 2013, 07:53:37 AM
They all made it to Terran pretty easily during the Aurvandil wars. Kale knows this first had as he was head of the Allied coordination between 'Moot and Astrocracies, which the primary reason he knew there wasn't much chance of fighting it out: he has literally helped coordinate the arrival of Astrocratic armies into Terran before.

The line seems to be somewhere around Paisly, really.

I believe we call that the Paisly Triangle.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 24, 2013, 12:49:06 PM
Gretchew would hardly make the difference if we were ever in a position to be able to annex Terran. That's not the motivation. Terran will always have the obligatory defense of the Astrocracies anyways, right? Charter and all that? Phantaria will never be in a position to war Terran ever again.

Besides, a theocratic city-state would be awesome.

Who said either of you get Gretchew?  >:(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 24, 2013, 05:53:45 PM
Who said either of you get Gretchew?  >:(

lol.

Yeah, Hireshmont thinks Kale is being rather naive about D'Haran ambitions.

Gretchew would hardly make the difference if we were ever in a position to be able to annex Terran. That's not the motivation. Terran will always have the obligatory defense of the Astrocracies anyways, right? Charter and all that? Phantaria will never be in a position to war Terran ever again.

Besides, a theocratic city-state would be awesome.

Yes, a city state is what I want. A city state that includes Gretchew and, if Hireshmont can find a way to swing it, Vashgew too.

Hireshmont is not about to trust a piece of paper. He trusted the Treaty of the Maroccidens as well and then, when Terran had secessions, D'hara and Barca abandoned Terran. Yeah, Hireshmont is not going to just hand over the food security of Chateau Saffalore to Phantaria, a realm that literally just tried to destroy Terran.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 24, 2013, 06:40:27 PM
Well, it's that or trust it to Saffalore, D'Hara, Asylon, or the Farronite Republic, none of whom are exactly "friendly" towards Terran anymore...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 24, 2013, 06:57:29 PM
Well, it's that or trust it to Saffalore, D'Hara, Asylon, or the Farronite Republic, none of whom are exactly "friendly" towards Terran anymore...

Um, no?

Gretchew and Saffalore and full production can feed the Chateau, or close to it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on May 24, 2013, 07:14:57 PM
What Gustav said...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 24, 2013, 07:45:27 PM
lol.

Yeah, Hireshmont thinks Kale is being rather naive about D'Haran ambitions.

Hireshmont seems to think that a lot about Kale...


Who said either of you get Gretchew?  >:(

Go away, D'Hara. Chesney isn't a coastal city it'll confuse you!

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 24, 2013, 07:51:15 PM
Hireshmont seems to think that a lot about Kale...


Go away, D'Hara. Chesney isn't a coastal city it'll confuse you!

All lands south of Terran are ours! OURS! MY PRECIOUS RURALS!

Terran can have Vagshew for all I care, though.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on May 25, 2013, 04:52:55 AM
Go away, D'Hara. Chesney isn't a coastal city it'll confuse you!

D'Haran manifest destiny all up in this Maroccidental bitch!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on May 25, 2013, 05:08:20 PM
I think the bigger thing for Niselur at the moment is that will they even go to Terran in the first place? Not likely it seems.
They'll be there at sunset. I will, anyway  ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 25, 2013, 05:13:06 PM
So alone... all alone...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 25, 2013, 08:00:25 PM
They'll be there at sunset. I will, anyway  ::)

We really need to be moving it of the Chateau... Food supplies are kinda sorta limited...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 26, 2013, 12:55:54 AM
We really need to be moving it of the Chateau... Food supplies are kinda sorta limited...

They will be the exact same drain on food in Saffalore-town that they are in Chateau. Unless you're just buying food for the city and letting the townsland starve, which is a hell of a way to run a realm.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 26, 2013, 01:21:45 AM
They will be the exact same drain on food in Saffalore-town that they are in Chateau. Unless you're just buying food for the city and letting the townsland starve, which is a hell of a way to run a realm.

... Did we conquer Saffalore already? I thought it was rogue... It'll starve one way or anther, may as well conquer it and make it ours and try to rebuild it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on May 26, 2013, 08:06:57 PM
Well the Elder's Council has just about descended into absolute chaos...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 26, 2013, 09:49:34 PM
Well that was racist...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on May 26, 2013, 11:02:58 PM
Quote
Report from Kas Mayhem   (1 hour, 20 minutes ago)
Letter from Kas Mayhem   (just sent)
Message sent to all full members of "Sanguis Astroism" (87 recipients)
Brother Kihalin,

I must apologize, was a lack of discipline from my courtier to not teach my new scriba my previous adresses properly, somehow I found him to be lazy, very short with slanted eyes and a yellowish skin, every time I passed by him I thought he was asleep because I could not see his eyes opened, but since I found this discrepancy better to change.

Yours,
Kas Mayhem
Ambassador of Niselur
Count of Ninith
Knight Penitent of Sanguis Astroism
Kas Mayhem
Ambassador of Niselur
Count of Ninith
Knight Penitent of Sanguis Astroism

Well now I know why Kas is a knight Penitent...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on May 26, 2013, 11:07:59 PM
Well that was racist...

What was?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 26, 2013, 11:57:04 PM
What was?

See above post.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 27, 2013, 04:15:07 AM
Shut up Turin, stop saying we don't want land. I wantz it allz!  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 27, 2013, 06:16:16 AM
Wow... that's... not really okay.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 27, 2013, 01:31:38 PM
Wow... that's... not really okay.

In case you didn't know, that was a reference to Kas from Niselur saying all of Terran should be given to D'Hara, and then Turin saying D'Hara doesn't need nor want more land.

But I do! I want more land! Give me all of your lands, and I'll grant you a niece fief to build a vassal state onto!  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on May 27, 2013, 03:11:04 PM
Mathurin joined Terran. That changes everything.  Phantaria, we'll be seeing you soon!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 27, 2013, 08:51:32 PM
Mathurin joined Terran. That changes everything.  Phantaria, we'll be seeing you soon!

Not really.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 27, 2013, 09:37:19 PM
Mathurin joined Terran. That changes everything.  Phantaria, we'll be seeing you soon!

Oh, fun.

It's like Atamara 2.0 but worse.


You might as well go ahead and do it honestly. Would be doing be a favor since Phantaria is doomed to be boring now so being conquered would be a good out so I can move on to something else.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 27, 2013, 09:50:55 PM
Oh, fun.

It's like Atamara 2.0 but worse.


You might as well go ahead and do it honestly. Would be doing be a favor since Phantaria is doomed to be boring now so being conquered would be a good out so I can move on to something else.

Quit whining, I know for a fact you have more options than just getting rolled over by Terran.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 27, 2013, 10:05:18 PM
Quit whining, I know for a fact you have more options than just getting rolled over by Terran.

For expansion? No. Not really.


For being conquered by someone else, yeah there are few. But that was kind of my point.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 27, 2013, 10:27:01 PM
For expansion? No.
There's always Asylon. Or the Farronites.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 27, 2013, 10:41:36 PM
For expansion? No. Not really.

Believe me, I sympathize.

There's always Asylon. Or the Farronites.

Or Terran. Still.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 27, 2013, 10:57:48 PM
There's always Asylon. Or the Farronites.

Asylon and the Farronite Republic will defend each other if attacked.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 27, 2013, 11:02:08 PM
So... attack them both! That way, they can't defend each other. :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on May 27, 2013, 11:21:36 PM
Phantaria should make peace with Terran and unite with them against Asylon. They can use Vashgew as an incentive. With Terran involved Farronites will probably stay out of it if not join Phantaria and Terran's side. I've never understood why they don't want Itau.

Shut up Turin, stop saying we don't want land. I wantz it allz!  ;D

I said you didn't want Terran's land, Saffalore's on the other hand you're all over. Go for Aurvandil's next Terran will probably assist.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on May 28, 2013, 12:44:02 AM
I love when Non-Asylonians use Asylon in their possible plots and schemes.

But Gustav is right, Asylon will defend the Farronites, Grimrog(my character) has given his word and there is only one realm he wont fight, and I doubt it would attack the Farronites...

Quote
I've never understood why they don't want Itau.

Because they know that fabricating or supporting such a claim would ruin the good relations they have with the Heathens of Asylon. I am sure they WANT that Duchy, but I am also sure that the current situation is far more beneficial to them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on May 28, 2013, 12:45:26 AM
I've never understood why they don't want Itau.

Lack of nobles/food makes it a hassle with little reward.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 28, 2013, 12:48:50 AM
I love when Non-Asylonians use Asylon in their possible plots and schemes.

But Gustav is right, Asylon will defend the Farronites, Grimrog(my character) has given his word and there is only one realm he wont fight, and I doubt it would attack the Farronites...

Because they know that fabricating or supporting such a claim would ruin the good relations they have with the Heathens of Asylon. I am sure they WANT that Duchy, but I am also sure that the current situation is far more beneficial to them.

Besides, any realm that replaced us would probably be far less amicable with Asylon and more of a church puppet. Also, you are correct that we most definitely desire that duchy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 28, 2013, 01:01:27 AM
And none have ever gotten it...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 28, 2013, 01:13:27 AM
Or Terran. Still.

Believe me, if I was bigger I would. We don't even outnumber them in Nobles anymore, though. It would be fruitless.


Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on May 28, 2013, 04:53:02 AM
"Crap, our enemies out-maneuvered us. They are clearly detrimental to the game."

?

Regardless of whether or not the move to make Terran a Theocracy was fueled by greed and need (and let's face it, it probably was), it was a good move by Terran. It certainly breathed life into SA again. Just because the Crusade was negative for Phantaria and Co. does not make it detrimental to the whole welfare of Dwilight. The recent flurry of activity in SA is a testament to that fact.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 28, 2013, 05:28:33 AM
Believe me, if I was bigger I would. We don't even outnumber them in Nobles anymore, though. It would be fruitless.

Oh don't be such a downer.

You're being far too uncreative.

There are multiple possible ways I can think of to make sure Asylon and FR don't support each other.

Besides, even if you did conquer the Chateau, what then? You'd have less CS than if you have a strong theocratic ally in the Chateau. With a reliable ally you'll have a stronger Greater Terranese military. Build allies instead of empires, then use them to build collective empires.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 28, 2013, 06:22:18 AM
It wouldnt take Asylon more than a moment to ride down to Terran crush it like a bug and back in Asylon to fight off the entire theocracies like we always do and be done with you Vellos once and for all. So tempting just to make a point...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 28, 2013, 10:25:02 AM
"Crap, our enemies out-maneuvered us. They are clearly detrimental to the game."

?

Regardless of whether or not the move to make Terran a Theocracy was fueled by greed and need (and let's face it, it probably was), it was a good move by Terran. It certainly breathed life into SA again. Just because the Crusade was negative for Phantaria and Co. does not make it detrimental to the whole welfare of Dwilight. The recent flurry of activity in SA is a testament to that fact.

Never said any of that.

Oh don't be such a downer.

You're being far too uncreative.

There are multiple possible ways I can think of to make sure Asylon and FR don't support each other.

No desire to attack Asylon or FR. They've both been friends to Phantaria in different ways. Would be a bad move to turn on our closest friends.

Besides, even if you did conquer the Chateau, what then?

The plan was to reunite Terran.


Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 28, 2013, 12:36:00 PM
Phantaria should make peace with Terran and unite with them against Asylon. They can use Vashgew as an incentive. With Terran involved Farronites will probably stay out of it if not join Phantaria and Terran's side. I've never understood why they don't want Itau.

I said you didn't want Terran's land, Saffalore's on the other hand you're all over. Go for Aurvandil's next Terran will probably assist.

Who said I don't want Terran lands?  :o

Just because he's not stupid enough to ask for them, doesn't mean Machiavel wouldn't like to add them to his fief.  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 28, 2013, 03:36:35 PM
... be done with you Vellos once and for all.
Better hurry. Vellos won't be in Terran for long. I hear he's headed to the Farronites. :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 28, 2013, 06:10:09 PM
Better hurry. Vellos won't be in Terran for long. I hear he's headed to the Farronites. :D

Barca is my bet. It's the last hold out against SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on May 28, 2013, 06:57:07 PM
Barca is my bet. It's the last hold out against SA.

Maybe he's going to try and convert Falkirk into a theocracy too.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 28, 2013, 07:01:40 PM
Barca is my bet. It's the last hold out against SA.
Second-to-last, really.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on May 28, 2013, 07:11:29 PM
If Vellos comes to the Farronites, that's new to me...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 28, 2013, 07:19:31 PM
Well of course it will be new, he's never been there before. It will be new to all of us. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on May 28, 2013, 08:18:32 PM
Second-to-last, really.

That makes a cool title for them.

"Barca the Penultimate"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 28, 2013, 08:24:04 PM
Well of course it will be new, he's never been there before. It will be new to all of us. ;)

If that happens, prepare to see the most passive aggressive discrimination against him you've ever seen...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 29, 2013, 01:11:43 AM
Har har and hear I thought I had burned my bridges... As long as the hatred for me is just below Vellos I am doing ok! :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on May 29, 2013, 03:11:12 AM
Har har and hear I thought I had burned my bridges... As long as the hatred for me is just below Vellos I am doing ok! :D

This gives me an idea for a new thread...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on May 29, 2013, 05:50:58 AM
Regardless of whether or not the move to make Terran a Theocracy was fueled by greed and need (and let's face it, it probably was), it was a good move by Terran. It certainly breathed life into SA again. Just because the Crusade was negative for Phantaria and Co. does not make it detrimental to the whole welfare of Dwilight. The recent flurry of activity in SA is a testament to that fact.

Actually, I think that King Leopold's decision to not participate in the "holy" crusade breathed life into the north.  Even my character who is not a part of SA and wants nothing to do with politics, but is fiercely loyal to the king has been drawn into the conflict.

In other news, I do admire Mordant Lefanis's skill at debating, even though my character has disagreed "slightly" with his views, even if the debate was probably sparked by my not realizing that Mordant was the regent of SA and saying some things best left unsaid if the regent of SA is present.

I did think I was going to lose the debate, until that crazy stunt in Phantaria was pulled.

I do curse those who named the religion Sanguis Astroism, as I have to look it up and copy+paste every time I use that word, which is coming up more often than I like.  I especially curse the name Sanguis Astroism when I use my mobile phone, and may wait until I come home until I use that word.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on May 29, 2013, 06:38:39 AM
Stuff

ROFL. Yeah. It is hard to tell outside of the Church.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on May 29, 2013, 08:06:34 AM
Actually the comment that made me laugh was:
Quote
Not to crash into this party you guys are having but.... you do know that we have the Regent of Sanguis Astroism as Margrave of Darfix correct?

My first thought was "Oh !@#$! What have I done".
My second was "I guess the cat's out of the bag,  I'll just have to roll with it"
My third was "It is in-character as my character just arrived and is not a member of SA, and is loyal to the King and finds the attitude of the regent disrespectful, and normally wouldn't be involved in politics but WILL defend the king, so let's debate it out."

Thus began the great debate between the two characters, which somehow let to a "lone wolf" attack on Phantaria, and a trial for the regent, and probably some eternal dislike between the two characters if not hatred.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on May 29, 2013, 08:34:09 AM
Mordant randomly popping up in Mistight and attacking our units was really weird. Worse part was he refused to even say anything to us about it when we asked.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on May 29, 2013, 09:13:33 AM
My character thinks that it is a crazy plot to frame Niselur by having the punishment of the regent(you killed/punished the regent-revenge!!! kinda thing)used as cause for war in addition to King Leopold's defiance, but maybe she's just a little paranoid as she's not part of SA, but follows the bloodstars on a more person path, so she's outta the loop per say(which the regent just called me on)

Not being part of SA, but following the Bloodstars allows my character to defy the church, without being punished or silenced as a few quite inquiries by my character have gleaned, as long as King Leopold continues his stance.

That being said personally I am worried whether my character may push things too far, as defiance of SA must be done carefully or I may lose my character's head.  If King Leopold isn't doing what I think he's doing then it could be bad.... very bad. 

I didn't plan on RPing politics-I just wanted to bash a few monster heads, get a lordship, maybe have a guild, but somehow my character got drawn into this political situation

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 29, 2013, 11:06:20 PM
Meh, I'm debating between Barca and the Farronites.

Barca would be a neat chance to expand into new and uncharted lands, and rebuild Hireshmont's standing within the Moot a bit.

But FR would just be such a hilariously feisty place to be. It'd be like when Allison went to Terran. :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on May 29, 2013, 11:45:35 PM
Yeah going to FR would be interesting. You might find some support but many have bought into my representation of Vellos.

Personally I think its about time for a SA vs SA conflict.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on May 30, 2013, 12:09:11 AM
I want to see Morek+Niselur vs Astrum+Libero. The entire north would have a good ol' time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 30, 2013, 02:32:03 AM
That ... doesn't even sound even remotely possible.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 30, 2013, 02:35:19 AM
I want to see Morek+Niselur vs Astrum+Libero. The entire north would have a good ol' time.

Libero became a vassal of Niselur, so...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 30, 2013, 02:37:53 AM
That ... doesn't even sound even remotely possible.

Has about the same likelihood as Bowie being declared a saint...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on May 30, 2013, 04:24:49 AM
Libero became a vassal of Niselur, so...

So Astrum gives Libero a better deal, offers to help retake some of their lost territories. Morek retaliates and seduces Niselar to join them. Then you have a fairly even war that encompasses the entire north.

Then again, as I'm sure it's apparent, I haven't been paying attention to the political climate of the north. I assumed it iced over while staring directly into the sky.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on May 30, 2013, 09:05:13 AM
It would probably be Libero, Niselur, Asylon vs SA.  Probably Asylon because that darned SA-alliance keeps getting in the way, and this would be the only chance to break it. Maybe other realms will join in if some sort of weakness is perceived.

Morek wouldn't be possible-the Libero vassalage agreement probably irritated Morek and I think I read somewhere that Astrum and Morek are very close friends.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on June 15, 2013, 08:11:04 PM
Alright, that's it. So many heads gonna roll. And while the archons are busy creating a (much needed) world war, the clerics are going to rip any remaining control of the Faith from the seculars. Too unstable, that lot.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 15, 2013, 08:11:59 PM
Farronite Republic will probably also be on the side of Niselur.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 15, 2013, 11:13:38 PM
Farronite Republic will probably also be on the side of Niselur.

Maybe.

Alright, that's it. So many heads gonna roll. And while the archons are busy creating a (much needed) world war, the clerics are going to rip any remaining control of the Faith from the seculars. Too unstable, that lot.

Finally. Malus' silence has been quietly infuriating Hireshmont.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on June 15, 2013, 11:46:51 PM
World War you say hmmm?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 16, 2013, 12:05:17 AM
Is Barca game?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 16, 2013, 12:15:04 AM
Barca? Are they still alive?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 16, 2013, 12:17:32 AM
Barca? Are they still alive?

Apparently very much so; had their first foreign deployment in years to Chesney.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 16, 2013, 12:53:54 AM
Barca? Are they still alive?
I assume that we will find out.  Maybe Barca will be the butterfly of doom.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on June 16, 2013, 01:00:09 AM
We discovered the wheel a week ago guys, give us a break  :-* 

The only thing we have in common with butterflies is our harmlessness  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 16, 2013, 01:03:27 AM
We discovered the wheel a week ago guys, give us a break  :-* 

The only thing we have in common with butterflies is our harmlessness  ;D
Oh no, the next discovery after the wheel is sliced bread, and sliced bread leads to a sword, which leads to death.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on June 16, 2013, 03:36:54 AM
Well its moving forward. Khari just told the elders FR will support Niselur.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 16, 2013, 04:33:27 AM
Any of them who have been paying attention will already have known that, weeks ago.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 16, 2013, 04:40:01 AM
Any of them who have been paying attention will already have known that, weeks ago.

So what you mean is they just figured it out now?  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 16, 2013, 04:43:16 AM
For some, that is sadly true.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on June 16, 2013, 07:41:59 AM
This is the perfect time for an Astroist Heresy religion to pop up in Niselur.

Think Catharism, Bogomilism, or Waldensians.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arrakis on June 16, 2013, 12:38:59 PM
Well its moving forward. Khari just told the elders FR will support Niselur.

As a player, I do hope that the Church doesn't chicken out now after the massive story build-up.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on June 16, 2013, 01:04:07 PM
Bawww will the world war not happen then

*puts popcorn down again*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 16, 2013, 02:06:08 PM
As a player, I do hope that the Church doesn't chicken out now after the massive story build-up.

My money is on them chickening out.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on June 16, 2013, 08:25:23 PM
Maybe.

Finally. Malus' silence has been quietly infuriating Hireshmont.

The best lesson I've learned from the player of Mathurin is to know when to remain silent. ;-)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on June 16, 2013, 08:47:15 PM
The best lesson I've learned from the player of Mathurin is to know when to remain silent. ;-)

On the other hand, silence has a disarming effect, and I think what SA really needs now is some cathartic northern war.

This is the perfect time for an Astroist Heresy religion to pop up in Niselur.

Think Catharism, Bogomilism, or Waldensians.

And also this.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 16, 2013, 08:58:00 PM
Apasurainism would be a good religion for Niselur.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on June 16, 2013, 09:31:52 PM
On the other hand, silence has a disarming effect, and I think what SA really needs now is some cathartic northern war.

Oh, for sure. I have to be sure that the implicit bargain between secular and religious elements of SA is understood, though. War for everybody, but leave the assets of the Faith alone. Everybody gets what everybody wants. Rooting for heresy is misguided, if understandable, IMHO. People want conflict. Conflict only arises in the absence of some stabilizing force. A monolithic faith that withdraws from secular affairs like wars creates that vacuum. Give your enemy its own faith, and you create another stabilizing institution parallel to yours. One with its own assets to protect and interests to advance. You increase the division between two sides, sure, but you also entrench powerful interests. All heresy, all the time is the easy, destructive, lazy way. I have infinitely more respect for the player who can both create/preserve while creating chaos.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 16, 2013, 11:02:59 PM
As a player, I do hope that the Church doesn't chicken out now after the massive story build-up.

Oh, Hireshmont fully intends to chicken out and to encourage the cowardice of others.

Too much to lose. You've built too big an alliance network; it's not a winning fight.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 16, 2013, 11:03:38 PM
Oh, Hireshmont fully intends to chicken out and to encourage the cowardice of others.

Too much to lose. You've built too big an alliance network; it's not a winning fight.

Hireshmont does not like to lose.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arrakis on June 16, 2013, 11:27:32 PM
Yeah, we noticed that with tumbling of Terran. Too bad he never gets to admit it when confronted with it IC. Maybe he will, eventually. When he loses. :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 17, 2013, 12:49:19 AM
Barca? Are they still alive?

D'Hara likes to protect their little Barcan brothers from the mischievous eyes of the uncivilized foreigners.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 17, 2013, 01:00:04 AM
Oh, Hireshmont fully intends to chicken out and to encourage the cowardice of others.

Too much to lose. You've built too big an alliance network; it's not a winning fight.
Heh, I didn't think that Luria Nova would side with us, even though(from her bio), the Queen seems very secular, a lot of the SA nobles seem pretty hardcore.  Maybe the massive infiltrator waves sent by Vellos and Karbanski sent to kill nobles and adventures turned some of the hardcore SA people away, and the rest probably just want to beat on D'Hara.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 17, 2013, 01:02:52 AM
Heh, I didn't think that Luria Nova would side with us, even though(from her bio), the Queen seems very secular, a lot of the SA nobles seem pretty hardcore.  Maybe the massive infiltrator waves sent by Vellos and Karbanski sent to kill nobles and adventures turned some of the hardcore SA people away, and the rest probably just want to beat on D'Hara.

If there's one certainty in Dwi politics, it's that you can always find at least one Lurian scheming to see D'Hara destroyed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 17, 2013, 01:16:30 AM
If there's one certainty in Dwi politics, it's that you can always find at least one Asylonian scheming to see D'Hara destroyed.

Fixed!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on June 17, 2013, 01:26:38 AM
Heh, I didn't think that Luria Nova would side with us, even though(from her bio), the Queen seems very secular, a lot of the SA nobles seem pretty hardcore.  Maybe the massive infiltrator waves sent by Vellos and Karbanski sent to kill nobles and adventures turned some of the hardcore SA people away, and the rest probably just want to beat on D'Hara.


Ummmm what ate you talking about?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 17, 2013, 01:36:47 AM

Ummmm what ate you talking about?
Oh you know the infiltrators you and Vellos sent to kill certain people that some nobles in Luria Nova issuing declarations that those kind of attacks will not be tolerated, and to be on the lookout for suspicious behaviour from new adventures etc etc.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on June 17, 2013, 01:40:46 AM
Oh, Hireshmont fully intends to chicken out and to encourage the cowardice of others.

Too much to lose. You've built too big an alliance network; it's not a winning fight.

The way I see it the Elders Council loses either way. If the Elders do chicken out (and that's very much over Constantine's dead body) then the Farronite-Niselur bloc will realise how strong their hand is and effectively veto any major Church decision that doesn't go their way. The Elders Council will lose much of its power and I doubt we will see any crusades in the near future. If the situation persists we may see the end of SA as a large powerblock.

SA only works if enough nobles are willing to voluntarily give their loyalty to the religion that the rest of the membership are too afraid of the religion to break free. The current conflict is the tipping point- if SA cannot subdue Niselur and co. (either through war or by convincing Niselur to remain a theocracy by other means) then it does not have the power to enforce loyalty outside of the small number of characters who are willing to obey the Elders for purely rp reasons. If the balance does not tip back, SA could potentially become just like most other BM religions; a nice rp-point and forum for discussion, but not an organisation that can wield effective political power.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 17, 2013, 01:54:31 AM
The way I see it the Elders Council loses either way. If the Elders do chicken out (and that's very much over Constantine's dead body) then the Farronite-Niselur bloc will realise how strong their hand is and effectively veto any major Church decision that doesn't go their way. The Elders Council will lose much of its power and I doubt we will see any crusades in the near future. If the situation persists we may see the end of SA as a large powerblock.

SA only works if enough nobles are willing to voluntarily give their loyalty to the religion that the rest of the membership are too afraid of the religion to break free. The current conflict is the tipping point- if SA cannot subdue Niselur and co. then it does not have the power to enforce loyalty outside of the small number of characters who are willing to obey the Elders for purely rp reasons. If the balance does not tip back, SA could potentially become just like most other BM religions; a nice rp-point and forum for discussion, but not an organisation that can wield effective political power.
It will also make the accusations that SA will only pick on easy opponents like the 4vs1 on Aylson, or the pileup on Phantaria, seem true.  I think Vellos's interpretation angle(and I may be wrong), might provide a graceful way out.  I think I know where Vellos is going on this, but he is a very surprising man, and hard to read.
Oh and you are Consantine, your character seems pretty hardcore.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 17, 2013, 02:03:32 AM
I find it amusing how Hireshmont is on a spree of destroying the things he tries to protect.

I doubt the Church would be so fragile before this crisis if it weren't for the huge crack the crusade for Terran created.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on June 17, 2013, 02:20:12 AM
Oh, Hireshmont fully intends to chicken out and to encourage the cowardice of others.

Too much to lose. You've built too big an alliance network; it's not a winning fight.
Mordaunt doesn't see it that way. In fact, a little plan hatches even now.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 17, 2013, 02:28:41 AM
Mordaunt doesn't see it that way. In fact, a little plan hatches even now.
You mean like a rebellion against the Farronite Republic?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on June 17, 2013, 02:34:37 AM
You mean like a rebellion against the Farronite Republic?

Lol no.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 17, 2013, 02:40:05 AM
The road to hell (and utter implosion) is paved with good intentions.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 17, 2013, 02:56:56 AM
Maybe the massive infiltrator waves sent by Vellos and Karbanski sent to kill nobles and adventures turned some of the hardcore SA people away, and the rest probably just want to beat on D'Hara.

Um, wut?

I literally have no idea what you're talking about. I don't lie OOC, and I can pretty darn well guarantee you this is false. And I'm really interested to hear more because that's odd. I'd love it if somebody could contact Hireshmont about this IC.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 17, 2013, 03:02:19 AM
Oh you know the infiltrators you and Vellos sent to kill certain people that some nobles in Luria Nova issuing declarations that those kind of attacks will not be tolerated, and to be on the lookout for suspicious behaviour from new adventures etc etc.

Okay, yeah, contact me IC or something. That's hilariously false.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 17, 2013, 03:05:03 AM
I think I know where Vellos is going on this, but he is a very surprising man, and hard to read.

Hireshmont is going in a very simple direction, and it's always the same one: exactly the direction he tells you he's going. He's been very clear that he wants a peaceful resolution, Niselur back in the church, and no war. He'll do what he needs to to accomplish those goals.

The reason Hireshmont is hard to read for you is because you're reading way to much into him.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 17, 2013, 03:16:02 AM
Maybe the massive infiltrator waves...

I don't think there are enough active infils on Dwilight to make what could be called a light ripple, let alone a massive wave...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on June 17, 2013, 03:38:16 AM
Why would I waste political capital on infill attacks in Luria?  There ate better targets in thenorth.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on June 17, 2013, 03:57:17 AM
Why would I waste political capital on infill attacks in Luria?  There ate better targets in thenorth.

Why would you waste political capital trying to wiggle out of the peace treaty with Phantaria that ended a war that already a huge point of conflict/contention within your Church? When the treaty was agreed to, in public, not even two weeks prior to your objections over it?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 17, 2013, 04:41:52 AM
Why would you waste political capital trying to wiggle out of the peace treaty with Phantaria that ended a war that already a huge point of conflict/contention within your Church? When the treaty was agreed to, in public, not even two weeks prior to your objections over it?

That's not a waste: that's a use! ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on June 17, 2013, 02:25:28 PM
There are two (well, probably like ten) games being played right now in SA. Those in the secular gallery trying to wield the levers of power to gain an upper hand, and those in the spiritual gallery sawing off the levers forever. A lot of people like SA as a purely religious force. They joined because religion in BM can offer something apart from the usual political chicanery. It can help one really develop a character. I'm willing to bet, given the stagnation caused by the secular gallery's regular (ab)use of the levers, that those same people will hand the "victory" to the spiritual gallery.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on June 17, 2013, 06:38:18 PM
;DI know;D
Believe me, there are perfectly believable reasons, and your two posts to SA just increased the believability :)

What posts? You realize Vellos and I play different characters and that they don't like each other?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 18, 2013, 12:41:20 AM
What posts? You realize Vellos and I play different characters and that they don't like each other?

i.e. may actively be involved in chicaneries to undermine one another....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 18, 2013, 12:42:54 AM
What posts? You realize Vellos and I play different characters and that they don't like each other?

I have no idea how anyone could conclude that Jonsu and Hireshmont II have any affinity for each other...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 18, 2013, 12:45:46 AM
There are two (well, probably like ten) games being played right now in SA. Those in the secular gallery trying to wield the levers of power to gain an upper hand, and those in the spiritual gallery sawing off the levers forever. A lot of people like SA as a purely religious force. They joined because religion in BM can offer something apart from the usual political chicanery. It can help one really develop a character. I'm willing to bet, given the stagnation caused by the secular gallery's regular (ab)use of the levers, that those same people will hand the "victory" to the spiritual gallery.

This is true-ish.

But I think you underestimate the spiritual revisionism of many of the less conservative elements.

And, IMHO, SA is only really able to have spiritual flavor and vibrancy because of its temporal power. Hard to enforce orthodoxy without swords.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on June 18, 2013, 01:53:25 AM
There are two (well, probably like ten) games being played right now in SA. Those in the secular gallery trying to wield the levers of power to gain an upper hand, and those in the spiritual gallery sawing off the levers forever. A lot of people like SA as a purely religious force. They joined because religion in BM can offer something apart from the usual political chicanery. It can help one really develop a character. I'm willing to bet, given the stagnation caused by the secular gallery's regular (ab)use of the levers, that those same people will hand the "victory" to the spiritual gallery.

The fact that SA has political power is in my opinion one of the things that make it different from other standard BM religions. Very, very few players are willing to sit through and write scores of theological disputes if there is no way for either party to "win" by enforcing itself upon the other; this is why most BM religions are dead boring and become little more than background flavor in a secular world. And yes non-political religions can of course make for good character development, but these characters will then typically act out most of their story within their realm (because there are only many long rp letters one can post before one needs to actually do something significant) leaving the religion a silent shell.

Also I'm not sure I agree with your characterisation of "spiritual" and "secularist" factions in SA. While I agree that  many secularists on both sides of the recent conflicts are trying to pull the levers of SA to gain political power, I don't think any of those arguing that the Church should have no political power are anything more than secularists themselves- they don't want a more "spiritual" SA, they want one that keeps quiet and damned well out of their business. Most of the characters that have actually contributed to the "spiritual" side of SA in the past seem more in support of a political Church than against it, likely as Vellos said so that they can actually enforce orthodoxy rather than their see their various beliefs become essentially meaningless.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 18, 2013, 06:19:18 AM
I have no idea how anyone could conclude that Jonsu and Hireshmont II have any affinity for each other...
*Coughs* Wrong player. dustole is Kabrinski, while Stabbity is Himoura. Both families with very notable players (dustole likely has the more powerful single character while Stabbity is the more influential family between the two).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 18, 2013, 12:43:47 PM
*Coughs* Wrong player. dustole is Kabrinski, while Stabbity is Himoura. Both players with very notable players (dustole likely has the more powerful single character while Stabbity is the more influential family between the two).

Oh right.

Jonsu and Alaster are just opposing faces of the same coin, though. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on June 19, 2013, 09:13:57 PM
War,

To be, or not to be?

I'm getting the feeling that the Farronites are like that scene in Reign of Fire when the Americans show up at the castle door with tanks and what's his name says to Christian Bale "we can do this easy, or real easy".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 20, 2013, 05:16:25 AM
War,

To be, or not to be?

I'm getting the feeling that the Farronites are like that scene in Reign of Fire when the Americans show up at the castle door with tanks and what's his name says to Christian Bale "we can do this easy, or real easy".

lol, yeah, no war. Not gonna happen.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 20, 2013, 05:23:46 AM
No war! No war! :(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 20, 2013, 05:32:08 AM
No war! No war! :(

Nope.

You really think Astrum is going to tangle with Niselur, Asylon, FR, possibly Libero, all at once?

Niselur has done a good job of ensuring peace. The alliance with Luria Nova was a nice touch too.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 20, 2013, 06:56:02 AM
Nope.

You really think Astrum is going to tangle with Niselur, Asylon, FR, possibly Libero, all at once?

Niselur has done a good job of ensuring peace. The alliance with Luria Nova was a nice touch too.
So umm why not? They haven't done much in quite awhile. Sure some of the higher ups have had fun with politics but the leaders seem to not want their realms to have fun. I don't care what they do but for quite awhile all its been is threaten people and now that a chance for conflict arrives they chicken out. Btw, Astrum would of course have Morek and Corsanctum's help. If Libero tried any thing it would be took out rather quickly IMO. It would actually be a really good war, especially since it would cause another conflict to arise. The continent would be in war and it wouldn't be a gangbang, it would be more or less even so I really don't see how the war would be bad.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 20, 2013, 10:08:27 AM
Unfortunately, this proves King Leopold's point-that the elders of SA will only fight if there is overwhelming advantage, such as 4vs1 against Asylon, and the might of SA against Phantaria.

Vellos does know how to chicken out in style...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arrakis on June 20, 2013, 11:15:41 AM
Not all Elders are like that, but the vast majority is. To understand the logic of those Elders we first need to realize their nature; they're mostly priests and politicians that don't benefit from intra-SA fighting, cause this diminishes their power and authority. Primarily authority. But on the other hand, they're eager to declare a crusade in those areas where SA's influence can spread and they're doing it to gain authority over larger mass of followers. For successful crusade means more people to do their bidding. It is a gutless politic of convenience that has no similarities with anything that can be considered spiritual. I find it highly amusing that this method backfired and that crusade in Terran has done more damage that what is worth.

From Leopold's perspective, the fact that the Elders are twitching and turning to appease him to rejoin the theocratic family makes him chuckle a bit. The Elders are on their knees and the fact that they bended so easily is another testament to Leopold of their spineless politicking. In the old days, to do what Leopold has done and get away with it would be impossible for the Church has been much more stricter then, but also more righteous than it is now. Now, the Elders seems to be run by characters who endlessly scheme to have their way ( I think some have labeled them as southern republicans ). I think there are a few of such characters, but I am primarily thinking of Hireshmont here for his trick with Terran is what alienated the relations. The fact that other Elders allowed Hireshmont to get away with it, and that he became the loudest voice that represents the Church is where the Elders have probably made a mistake.

From the perspective of a player, the fact that Elders are chickening out is quite a disappointment. To not keep in mind the pros this war would bring to Dwilight and Battlemaster as a whole is an oversight. Its like no one notices that theocracies are graveyards that boast the least number of characters on Dwilight and that are the most empty and void realms to play in. The goal of any player that has an important position in any realm and continent is to ensure that it is fun for others, too. I will draw a parallel with CE here, and say that Dwilight Northern federative block that is without a doubt intertwined and ruled by SA leadership is quite similar to CE. To bitch about a power block on one continent but do a similar thing on the other is quite a misguided understanding of player responsibility, and is usually done by same people.

In any case, I think that the odds for such a war are nowhere as one sided as the Elders think. The power of the theocracies are great even though they are a bit dormant. In fact, Leopold is making a huge risk for Niselur can easily be destroyed in the process. But I, as a player, am ready to take that risk regardless of the consequences and am driving Leopold according to that. I really don't want to have a King in the a** of the world that will never amount to anything or matter to anyone. I've built a massive IC story to further these goals the best I could, and the fact that the Elders are going great lengths to remain in the status quo is making it more difficult. But luckily for the players of Dwilight, the decision no longer rests in the hands of the Elders.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on June 20, 2013, 11:21:14 AM
Stuff

Good. I hope SA gets pushed back to Morek and remain there. It is time for the era of Theocracies to come to an end. They literally killed the entire north with their stupid military alliance :p
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on June 20, 2013, 11:29:44 AM
Counter-crusade Crusade! Purge the SA of these foul scheming elders who have corrupted the true faith!! TO WARRR BLAAAARGHHHH

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Jaden on June 20, 2013, 11:42:02 AM
cant you guys just let us have fun  :'(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 20, 2013, 12:29:50 PM
Nope.

You really think Astrum is going to tangle with Niselur, Asylon, FR, possibly Libero, all at once?

Niselur has done a good job of ensuring peace. The alliance with Luria Nova was a nice touch too.

I hadn't looked at it this way.

Nice. Morek remains available to defend the peace treaty, hurray! :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 20, 2013, 02:11:31 PM
Chatmaster...or gankmaster
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on June 20, 2013, 02:19:43 PM
Not all Elders are like that, but the vast majority is. To understand the logic of those Elders we first need to realize their nature; they're mostly priests and politicians that don't benefit from intra-SA fighting, cause this diminishes their power and authority. Primarily authority. But on the other hand, they're eager to declare a crusade in those areas where SA's influence can spread and they're doing it to gain authority over larger mass of followers. For successful crusade means more people to do their bidding. It is a gutless politic of convenience that has no similarities with anything that can be considered spiritual. I find it highly amusing that this method backfired and that crusade in Terran has done more damage that what is worth.

From Leopold's perspective, the fact that the Elders are twitching and turning to appease him to rejoin the theocratic family makes him chuckle a bit. The Elders are on their knees and the fact that they bended so easily is another testament to Leopold of their spineless politicking. In the old days, to do what Leopold has done and get away with it would be impossible for the Church has been much more stricter then, but also more righteous than it is now. Now, the Elders seems to be run by characters who endlessly scheme to have their way ( I think some have labeled them as southern republicans ). I think there are a few of such characters, but I am primarily thinking of Hireshmont here for his trick with Terran is what alienated the relations. The fact that other Elders allowed Hireshmont to get away with it, and that he became the loudest voice that represents the Church is where the Elders have probably made a mistake.

From the perspective of a player, the fact that Elders are chickening out is quite a disappointment. To not keep in mind the pros this war would bring to Dwilight and Battlemaster as a whole is an oversight. Its like no one notices that theocracies are graveyards that boast the least number of characters on Dwilight and that are the most empty and void realms to play in. The goal of any player that has an important position in any realm and continent is to ensure that it is fun for others, too. I will draw a parallel with CE here, and say that Dwilight Northern federative block that is without a doubt intertwined and ruled by SA leadership is quite similar to CE. To bitch about a power block on one continent but do a similar thing on the other is quite a misguided understanding of player responsibility, and is usually done by same people.

In any case, I think that the odds for such a war are nowhere as one sided as the Elders think. The power of the theocracies are great even though they are a bit dormant. In fact, Leopold is making a huge risk for Niselur can easily be destroyed in the process. But I, as a player, am ready to take that risk regardless of the consequences and am driving Leopold according to that. I really don't want to have a King in the a** of the world that will never amount to anything or matter to anyone. I've built a massive IC story to further these goals the best I could, and the fact that the Elders are going great lengths to remain in the status quo is making it more difficult. But luckily for the players of Dwilight, the decision no longer rests in the hands of the Elders.

I'm not sure I understand your first point; how is using crusades to expand the religion a "gutless politics"? Sure from a modern day perspective we don't like it, but from a medieval mindset it makes perfect sense; while they seem to us a horrific abuse of religion the medieval crusades were seen at the time as a supremely spiritual venture (at least by a significant proportion of the Catholic Church).

As for war; for a short amount of time there was some serious tension in the Council between Hireshmont and Pierre and fanatics like Constantine and Turin over whether a crusade should be declared. However then Brance and Sergio basically said that in the case of a war against Nislur's alliance Astrum would be guaranteed to fall within a very short period of time even with Morek and Corsanctum's help. Regardless of the real odds you (or more accuratly the Farronites) have managed to convince Astrum  that they stand no chance, and when the soldiers who would be fighting the war claim they will lose within weeks it's really quite impossible for the Elders to seriously contemplate going ahead anyway.

I agree with some of the rest of what you have said; the blatant appeasement that Hireshmont is embarking on makes the Elders weakness painfully obvious and such a dramatic u-turn only makes us look worse not better. This is also a subject of significant debate in the Elders Council, but Hireshomnt is the only really active light and the one responsible for Church negotiations- short of removing him from power altogether there is little the other Elders can do but continue to voice their objections and prevent thesigning of any humiliating treaties.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on June 20, 2013, 03:11:48 PM
To understand the logic of those Elders we first need to realize their nature; they're mostly priests and politicians that don't benefit from intra-SA fighting, cause this diminishes their power and authority. Primarily authority. But on the other hand, they're eager to declare a crusade in those areas where SA's influence can spread and they're doing it to gain authority over larger mass of followers. For successful crusade means more people to do their bidding.

That part you get right.

Quote
It is a gutless politic of convenience that has no similarities with anything that can be considered spiritual.

That, however is not true. First if all, it is certainly not gutless. It was not easy to achieve, and it is hard to hold onto. It is deliberate chauvinistic expansion. Secondly, to claim it's not spiritual is to misunderstand what SA stands for. SA does not prescribe a set of morals to follow. SA says that you will lead a successful life if you can recognize the will of the Stars and act upon it at the right time. To act to further the goals of the Stars, you must have power at your disposal. SA is not a religion favorable to the separation of church and state.

Quote
From the perspective of a player, the fact that Elders are chickening out is quite a disappointment. To not keep in mind the pros this war would bring to Dwilight and Battlemaster as a whole is an oversight. Its like no one notices that theocracies are graveyards that boast the least number of characters on Dwilight and that are the most empty and void realms to play in. The goal of any player that has an important position in any realm and continent is to ensure that it is fun for others, too. I will draw a parallel with CE here, and say that Dwilight Northern federative block that is without a doubt intertwined and ruled by SA leadership is quite similar to CE. To bitch about a power block on one continent but do a similar thing on the other is quite a misguided understanding of player responsibility, and is usually done by same people.

It takes two to waltz. Go ahead and declare the war if the other side is too slow for you! I agree with you that it would be good for Dwilight.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on June 20, 2013, 07:24:50 PM
Counter-crusade Crusade! Purge the SA of these foul scheming elders who have corrupted the true faith!! TO WARRR BLAAAARGHHHH

Yes!

Niselur and the Farronites need to find an Anti-Pope(Prophet) to champion! That would be great.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on June 20, 2013, 07:33:13 PM
Anyone ever read the Safehold series by David Weber?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 20, 2013, 07:53:24 PM
I have. Are you about to draw parallels between SA and the Church of God Awaiting?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on June 20, 2013, 08:03:10 PM
I have. Are you about to draw parallels between SA and the Church of God Awaiting?

I am. Not the tyranny part or the bloodthirsty belligerence, but the dominance of the northern realms by an ingrained religious authority is too much for me to ignore.

That, and I'm still waiting on the next book and am using this opportunity to vent  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on June 20, 2013, 08:21:39 PM
Well its starting to seem that Khari and the Farronites could gain much by staying neutral....

Only time will tell what we decide!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 20, 2013, 08:53:47 PM
Yes!

Niselur and the Farronites need to find an Anti-Pope(Prophet) to champion! That would be great.
I'd prefer not to bring out the anti-pope unless really necessary.  It would irritate the person in question.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 20, 2013, 09:01:39 PM
All these arguments in favour of preserving Astroism in its current form never take into account what would rise in its vacuum. After all great empires die the void is filled with war and dark ages vying kingdoms and chaos. And then once that has settled another faith or empire or group will perculate to the top, grow complacent, fat and lazy and then be torn apart. The inevitable decline of the alliances will either come with war drums or fade away with silly panflutes and bells, the thing to realize is when and how you die and whether it was kicking with a swird in hand covered in blood on a battlefield or in your bed as a weak old man.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on June 20, 2013, 10:27:37 PM
Come on you silly northerners, your swords have remained in their sheathes for so long it seems you have forgotten how to put them to use, it's time you used less words and more actions. This is a unique opportunity to make a great change no matter the outcome, quibling and sending long letters back and forth is something which seems to have bored most of the northern nobility to death already.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Fleugs on June 20, 2013, 10:34:22 PM
All these arguments in favour of preserving Astroism in its current form never take into account what would rise in its vacuum. After all great empires die the void is filled with war and dark ages vying kingdoms and chaos. And then once that has settled another faith or empire or group will perculate to the top, grow complacent, fat and lazy and then be torn apart. The inevitable decline of the alliances will either come with war drums or fade away with silly panflutes and bells, the thing to realize is when and how you die and whether it was kicking with a swird in hand covered in blood on a battlefield or in your bed as a weak old man.

Yes, and that is brilliant. Everybody likes the war and dark ages part.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 21, 2013, 12:21:05 AM
Not all Elders are like that, but the vast majority is. To understand the logic of those Elders we first need to realize their nature; they're mostly priests and politicians that don't benefit from intra-SA fighting, cause this diminishes their power and authority. Primarily authority. But on the other hand, they're eager to declare a crusade in those areas where SA's influence can spread and they're doing it to gain authority over larger mass of followers. For successful crusade means more people to do their bidding. It is a gutless politic of convenience that has no similarities with anything that can be considered spiritual. I find it highly amusing that this method backfired and that crusade in Terran has done more damage that what is worth.

It's not yet clear the crusade cost more than it was worth. Short-run, sure. The long run hasn't come yet.

But let's be clear: what you call "gutless" is simply pragmatism. We expect to lose a war: why would we start one?

Nobody except Asylon starts wars with a negative expected value. Plus Hireshmont has lost a major war before and didn't like how it felt. He's not willing to watch the same fate befall SA that happened to the Moot.

Niselur can attack if they want. But I don't know what Leopold expected. He's dancing with Hireshmont mostly, an incurable alliance-builder. When Leopold managed to out-ally Hireshmont, the jig was up for war, unless it's a war of raw Niselurian aggression and expansion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 21, 2013, 12:23:35 AM
Oh also:

The "war hawks" are mostly the ecclesiastical authorities in SA. Most of the peaceniks in this case are more associated with non-ecclesiastical authority: Khari, Brance, Sergio-ish, Pierre-ish. Hireshmont is really the only "dove" who's purely ecclesiastical right now.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Fleugs on June 21, 2013, 12:27:14 AM
Can anyone summarize a few holy places of SA? Like the first temple, most important temple now, most important city, .... Just out of curiosity.  ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 21, 2013, 12:45:57 AM
Can anyone summarize a few holy places of SA? Like the first temple, most important temple now, most important city, .... Just out of curiosity.  ::)

Darfix = closest to the stars
Caiyun = I believe this was where it started
Corsanctum = Holy Realm
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Fleugs on June 21, 2013, 12:51:53 AM
Darfix = closest to the stars
Caiyun = I believe this was where it started
Corsanctum = Holy Realm

I presume you mean Caylin, in Morek, then?

Anyway, thanks. Now I can aim.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ironsides on June 21, 2013, 12:59:36 AM

Don't forget Unterstrom (where Cryfdwr is buried) and Nifel (where he died).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 21, 2013, 01:09:18 AM
I presume you mean Caylin, in Morek, then?

Anyway, thanks. Now I can aim.

Nope, I meant what I said, it's in Caiyun, just to the right of Cailyn.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 21, 2013, 01:13:40 AM
Negative accepted value? The value is war that is the value, to fight to die to cut with sword, only you feathery outlanders need value , assurance and soft words to make war, for an Asylonian the greatest value in life is war! Whether we fight alone against everyone, or lose our entire lands these things meaning nothing to us. The only thing that means anything to Asylonian is pure war. You plan and talk and scheme just to hear the bellows of your own voice, Asylon uses the bellows to forge swords, to prepare to fight against the entire world! This is what is good and honourable and befitting of a noble. For an Asylonian to grow old is the saddest thing, better to die in battle.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Fleugs on June 21, 2013, 01:21:59 AM
Corsanctum looks easy enough to overrun.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on June 21, 2013, 01:27:29 AM
For an Asylonian to grow old is the saddest thing, better to die in battle.

Says the 64-year old ruler of Asylon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telamon on June 21, 2013, 01:32:00 AM
Play nice, everyone...

Also – an exciting, large scale, war is what Dwilight really needs.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 21, 2013, 01:58:12 AM
Corsanctum looks easy enough to overrun.

Not really, if you consider diplomacy. Those able to wouldn't do so themselves, and wouldn't let others do it either.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 21, 2013, 02:27:06 AM
Says the 64-year old ruler of Asylon.

Im not the ruler of Asylon :( and my character is a hero been since I started. Its not like I am avoiding death or battle, its just that none of you have been good enough to take down this prize.  :'(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 21, 2013, 05:39:24 AM
Also – an exciting, large scale, war is what Dwilight really needs.

Not all wars are created equal.

I'm game for a continent-consuming conflagration.

But only after we reach 100% conversion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on June 21, 2013, 05:44:24 AM
Which will never happen because your method of converting people loses you players (through boredom) faster than they can be converted (which is at a glacial pace).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on June 21, 2013, 08:46:49 AM
SA is only boring if you do not get involved. I originally did it way back when cus all the cools people did while I was in Xinhai. Now its funner than ever for me. So much going on!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on June 21, 2013, 12:02:17 PM
Says the 64-year old ruler of Asylon.

He is NOT the ruler of Asylon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 21, 2013, 02:05:29 PM
Thats two times in one day... One of the nobles of Asylin replied ' yes my king'  8)

Hey Grimrog, share the throne dude! 8)

Actually, Grimrog and I think very alike. Except Grimrog isnt as flamboyant with his rhetoric. I enjoy working with him. I enjoy every noble in Asylon who is active, opinionated and likes to have fun or chaos. We are all in Asylon to have fun, that means loose goals with short term planning. I dont think any of us are in it for the power or control we just enjoy coming up with some random idea and seeing where it goes. I think the other realms are far more analytical and looking at far too long term goals, in Asylon we live right now, there is no long term strategy, constantly come up with ways to cause trouble, find new ways to do things, do things differently than our neighbors just because we can and because its more fun to do things off the top of our heads than striving to maintain the realm or philosophy for years and years. We might be in Dwilight a long time, we might be gone tommorow, who cares as long as it was fun. And if it means we have to be the evil enemy of Dwilight, so be it... Because being bad is good fun.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telamon on June 21, 2013, 07:25:11 PM
Not all wars are created equal.

I'm game for a continent-consuming conflagration.

But only after we reach 100% conversion.

I think, for the sake of the game and player interest, that the priority here should be keeping things exciting for as many people as possible. Ultimately, a SA worldwide conversion just isn't going to happen, and if it does, it would only be interesting for those higher up members of SA like yourself.

This war, which could potentially be the most even fight against SA in recent memory, would definitely put some life into the game for everyone involved.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telamon on June 21, 2013, 07:32:26 PM
SA is only boring if you do not get involved. I originally did it way back when cus all the cools people did while I was in Xinhai. Now its funner than ever for me. So much going on!

So the implication is that unless you're an active member of SA, and you contribute, and you're a member of any of the theocratic realms, their vassals, neighbors, or any realm politically intimidated by SA, you're just out of luck?

That is just a game killing attitude. This war will exist because many players are sick of the SA coalition, and true to the Battle Master spirit, want to overturn it and make something different. We should encourage a split!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 21, 2013, 08:29:11 PM
The thing I see is 'entitlement' . Not one realm or RP or religion is entitled to anything in BM the only ones who mean anything are the nobles and their willingness to take what is theirs. SA cannot survive without its alliances, the harder they squeeze the more realms will slip through their fingers...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on June 21, 2013, 09:48:22 PM
The thing I see is 'entitlement' . Not one realm or RP or religion is entitled to anything in BM the only ones who mean anything are the nobles and their willingness to take what is theirs. SA cannot survive without its alliances, the harder they squeeze the more realms will slip through their fingers...

Defiant, to the last...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 21, 2013, 09:56:09 PM
Defiant, to the last...

The thing I see is 'entitlement' . Not one realm or RP or religion is entitled to anything in BM the only ones who mean anything are the nobles and their willingness to take what is theirs. SA cannot survive without its alliances, the harder they squeeze the more realms will slip through their fingers...

All realms will fall in line when we show them the power of the Bloodstars(Deathstar).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 21, 2013, 10:02:56 PM
...the harder they squeeze the more realms will slip through their fingers...

Did you paraphrase Princess Leia on purpose, or incidentally? I think incidentally since it's not worded quite the same, but still, it was the first thing I thought of... *cough*Iamanerd*cough*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 21, 2013, 10:08:25 PM
So the implication is that unless you're an active member of SA, and you contribute, and you're a member of any of the theocratic realms, their vassals, neighbors, or any realm politically intimidated by SA, you're just out of luck?

That is just a game killing attitude. This war will exist because many players are sick of the SA coalition, and true to the Battle Master spirit, want to overturn it and make something different. We should encourage a split!

No, that's not the implication. The implication is that SA is fun in its own right, not necessarily the banal, fun-killing organization that you and others are intent on making it out to be.

If you don't like SA, do something to change it, either from the outside or the inside. There's nothing wrong with trying to get a war going. However, please appreciate the fact that there are many people who actually like SA and enjoy what it brings to the game who are not particularly interested in blowing up the organization just for your entertainment.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on June 21, 2013, 10:12:49 PM
The fact remains, the SA realms are emptying out. That's probably a good indicator of fun, and SA is failing at it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on June 21, 2013, 10:14:56 PM
Well SA itself is not boring. Just theocracies are. You can always expect to have many players in good realms :) Boring ones just lose nobles one by one. By wiping one or two theocracies, everyone can benefit :) More room to breathe and more nobles for everyone \o/
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 21, 2013, 10:26:12 PM
The original intention of the theocracies was that they would at times war eachother, absorb, break apart and repeat. What instead has happened is stagnation and locked alliances that are killing what you love so much. Just because the theocracies fight doesnt mean SA dies. At the rate you are goong with noble attrition both your realms and religion will kill themselves off without any of us having to do a thing.  ;D


Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 21, 2013, 10:32:17 PM
Well SA itself is not boring. Just theocracies are. You can always expect to have many players in good realms :) Boring ones just lose nobles one by one. By wiping one or two theocracies, everyone can benefit :) More room to breathe and more nobles for everyone \o/

Yes and no.

If it were merely a question of killing a theocracy, that's one thing.

But the groups wanting to kill the theocracy in question are also those who want to see weak elders replaced by national delegations, with no authority over secular politics.

So it's a question of a war for those who favor an interesting, developed, involved game religion vs. those who favor a disengaged, local-flavor, powerless religion. Which is a classic medieval struggle, and fine, except that most players naturally drift into the anti-religious camp simply because we're moderns and that's how we think.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on June 21, 2013, 10:43:10 PM
An SA that saw SA realms fighting each other a la Medieval Catholic realms fought each other would be great and I don't think anyone would object to that.

The problem comes truly from the nature of BM wars which is that BM wars have a high frequency of being wars whose only result can be the death of either realm involved. Thus SA realms don't war each other because to do so would actually mean the faith losing strength as most wars involve the total collapse of the enemy realm.

If wars in BM were more about limited goals then I think we would see much more intra-SA fighting. Alas, BM just doesn't work that way most of the time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on June 21, 2013, 10:59:40 PM
There's been plenty of intra-SA fighting, including wholesale destruction of SA realms by other SA realms.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on June 21, 2013, 11:41:40 PM
There's been plenty of intra-SA fighting, including wholesale destruction of SA realms by other SA realms.

And well over a RL year of realm killing stagnation. Barring the Kabrinskia implosion, the face of the theocracies changed zero. When the seat of Sanguis Astroism finds itself with more regions than nobles there is something wrong.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on June 21, 2013, 11:49:27 PM
So everybody wants a big war involving SA, but nobody wants to be the first to make a move, and then it's SA's fault things stagnate because they keep 'dominating' the island... Holy crap it's Atamara all over again. Sanguis Cagilism?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 22, 2013, 12:05:54 AM
So everybody wants a big war involving SA, but nobody wants to be the first to make a move, and then it's SA's fault things stagnate because they keep 'dominating' the island... Holy crap it's Atamara all over again. Sanguis Cagilism?
Hence King Leopold making the first move, and all the simmering discontent is coming to life.  They just needed a SA ruler as the lightning rod.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on June 22, 2013, 12:31:49 AM
So everybody wants a big war involving SA, but nobody wants to be the first to make a move, and then it's SA's fault things stagnate because they keep 'dominating' the island... Holy crap it's Atamara all over again. Sanguis Cagilism?

Exactly! Sick of a domineering Church, power-hungry Elders and lovey-dubby theocracies? Go to war and try to crush the Church, replace the Eldes and destroy the theocracies! That's what Leopold is doing and the North looks like its finally going to get interesting again.

Sitting on the forums and typing: "boring fun-killing evil SA, why don't you just destroy yourselves randomly for little rp reason so we can have OOC "fun"" is not the way to go. A conflict is made interesting because there are opposing sides, and both sides do everything in their power to win. A manufactured implosion for OOC reasons is over quickly and results in even more boredom.

I do think it will be a shame if SA is reduced to just another powerless flavor religion, but then again I've had more fun in SA than most so I'm rather biased. And even SA gets boring without a good crusade once in a while.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telamon on June 22, 2013, 12:41:59 AM
Exactly! Sick of a domineering Church, power-hungry Elders and lovey-dubby theocracies? Go to war and try to crush the Church, replace the Eldes and destroy the theocracies! That's what Leopold is doing and the North looks like its finally going to get interesting again.

Sitting on the forums and typing: "boring fun-killing evil SA, why don't you just destroy yourselves randomly for little rp reason so we can have OOC "fun"" is not the way to go. A conflict is made interesting because there are opposing sides, and both sides do everything in their power to win. A manufactured implosion for OOC reasons is over quickly and results in even more boredom.

I agree with this. We're going to have our war and it'll be dang interesting!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on June 22, 2013, 12:51:09 AM
So everybody wants a big war involving SA, but nobody wants to be the first to make a move, and then it's SA's fault things stagnate because they keep 'dominating' the island... Holy crap it's Atamara all over again. Sanguis Cagilism?

The first move is coming.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 22, 2013, 01:01:00 AM
The first move is coming.
Shhh....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on June 22, 2013, 01:32:16 AM
Exactly! Sick of a domineering Church, power-hungry Elders and lovey-dubby theocracies? Go to war and try to crush the Church, replace the Eldes and destroy the theocracies! That's what Leopold is doing and the North looks like its finally going to get interesting again.

Sitting on the forums and typing: "boring fun-killing evil SA, why don't you just destroy yourselves randomly for little rp reason so we can have OOC "fun"" is not the way to go. A conflict is made interesting because there are opposing sides, and both sides do everything in their power to win. A manufactured implosion for OOC reasons is over quickly and results in even more boredom.

I do think it will be a shame if SA is reduced to just another powerless flavor religion, but then again I've had more fun in SA than most so I'm rather biased. And even SA gets boring without a good crusade once in a while.
Well, most of the southern realms are already (always) at war, and tensions remin high between those that are not.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 22, 2013, 01:33:47 AM
Meh. We'll see. I maintain that Dwilight will be much blander once SA is reduced to a weak background flavor. Religion is pretty lame in most of BM; Dwilight is practically the only place it matters on a regular basis.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on June 22, 2013, 01:37:23 AM
Well then fight for your religion you little ninny  :-* :-* :-* :-*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telamon on June 22, 2013, 01:44:16 AM
Meh. We'll see. I maintain that Dwilight will be much blander once SA is reduced to a weak background flavor. Religion is pretty lame in most of BM; Dwilight is practically the only place it matters on a regular basis.

Who's to say SA will become weak background flavor? Even assuming that you lose the war, the worst that would happen would be SA being reduced in size. The Theocracies of Morek, Astrum, and Corsantum would probably still exist and have strong feelings/opinons. When you're pushed into a corner, sometimes things get more exciting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on June 22, 2013, 01:47:06 AM
Meh. We'll see. I maintain that Dwilight will be much blander once SA is reduced to a weak background flavor. Religion is pretty lame in most of BM; Dwilight is practically the only place it matters on a regular basis.

I very much agree that should SA be reduced to a flavor religion in the coming war, Dwilight will be much more boring and BM will have lost one of its only religions that actually did anything. However at the same time characters interacting with SA by wanting to destroy it are not necessarily a bad thing either from an OOC perspective.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 22, 2013, 01:52:17 AM
Meh. We'll see. I maintain that Dwilight will be much blander once SA is reduced to a weak background flavor. Religion is pretty lame in most of BM; Dwilight is practically the only place it matters on a regular basis.
I argue that you are already there, by backing off.  What happened to the church of old....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on June 22, 2013, 02:09:18 AM
I argue that you are already there, by backing off.  What happened to the church of old....

He is a southern republican! Burn him! He isn't a northerner!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 22, 2013, 02:24:24 AM
He is a southern republican! Burn him! He isn't a northerner!
?
I hoped for a vigerous debate, but the church just backed off.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 22, 2013, 02:36:13 AM
?
I hoped for a vigerous debate, but the church just backed off.
Because Vellos sees cowardice as a good idea even though he just made SA basically a powerless religion. This war is needed otherwise SA is just a powerless religion because if they back off from this, then SA can't ever control anything any more if they won't go to war over it and the block against them isn't going to get smaller.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 22, 2013, 02:37:46 AM
The original intention of the theocracies was that they would at times war eachother, absorb, break apart and repeat. What instead has happened is stagnation and locked alliances that are killing what you love so much. Just because the theocracies fight doesnt mean SA dies. At the rate you are goong with noble attrition both your realms and religion will kill themselves off without any of us having to do a thing.  ;D
Thats the dumbest thing I have heard in awhile. The theocracies are weakening but they are far from falling apart due to loss of nobles and SA as a religion has more nobles than ever afaik.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on June 22, 2013, 02:39:18 AM
SA becoming powerless might not be a bad thing actually. It opens up more room for other religions. SA was probably the most unique religion ever created in BM but that doesn't mean there aren't anything going to be like that in the future.

I think SA played its role and did well. Time for it to fade away and something else to revitalize Dwilight.  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 22, 2013, 02:42:13 AM
I argue that you are already there, by backing off.  What happened to the church of old....

What happened to the church of old is that lots of players on Dwilight decided it was more fun to tear things down than build them up.

SA became powerful because lots of players decided to play characters who were devoted to the church or at least cared about it and respected its spiritual authority; i.e. somewhat more typically medieval-ish characters. SA is weaker now because more players are choosing to behave like a less common kind of medieval noble (not non-existent, mind you: just less typical).

The Catholic Church didn't become strong by picking losing battles, and neither will SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 22, 2013, 02:45:04 AM
SA becoming powerless might not be a bad thing actually. It opens up more room for other religions. SA was probably the most unique religion ever created in BM but that doesn't mean there aren't anything going to be like that in the future.

I think SA played its role and did well. Time for it to fade away and something else to revitalize Dwilight.  ;)
There are five other continents with room for a religion like SA yet I don't see anything close to SA. And by like SA, I mean a religion that actually matters. In Dwilight SA is something I hear mentioned during decision making frequently, because it matters. No where else does religion really matter like it does in Dwilight and SA dying off isn't going to make it happen for another religion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on June 22, 2013, 02:45:50 AM
NOBODY EXPECTS THE SANGUIST INQUISITION!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 22, 2013, 02:48:36 AM
What happened to the church of old is that lots of players on Dwilight decided it was more fun to tear things down than build them up.

SA became powerful because lots of players decided to play characters who were devoted to the church or at least cared about it and respected its spiritual authority; i.e. somewhat more typically medieval-ish characters. SA is weaker now because more players are choosing to behave like a less common kind of medieval noble (not non-existent, mind you: just less typical).

The Catholic Church didn't become strong by picking losing battles, and neither will SA.
Tell me once where the catholic church was seriously offended by another nation and just backed off. If you stop enforcing things even if there is a bit of a struggle, then there is no longer power held by SA, especially when that block will sit there against you ready to act when ever you displease them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on June 22, 2013, 02:50:52 AM
There are five other continents with room for a religion like SA yet I don't see anything close to SA. And by like SA, I mean a religion that actually matters. In Dwilight SA is something I hear mentioned during decision making frequently, because it matters. No where else does religion really matter like it does in Dwilight and SA dying off isn't going to make it happen for another religion.

That's not, IMO, because of anything inherent to SA. That's because it was able to develop a significant powerbase without competition due to its status as the religion of the only Dwilight starting realm to be able to spawn multiple colonies in close enough proximity to become a bloc.

Though it's also partly because many of its early members really did care about it as a religion, and not simply as another form of power—in other words, because they were interested in the RP of it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 22, 2013, 02:53:29 AM
Tell me once where the catholic church was seriously offended by another nation and just backed off. If you stop enforcing things even if there is a bit of a struggle, then there is no longer power held by SA, especially when that block will sit there against you ready to act when ever you displease them.

*ahem* The Holy Roman Empire.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lorgan on June 22, 2013, 02:55:38 AM
What happened to the church of old is that lots of players on Dwilight decided it was more fun to tear things down than build them up.

SA became powerful because lots of players decided to play characters who were devoted to the church or at least cared about it and respected its spiritual authority; i.e. somewhat more typically medieval-ish characters. SA is weaker now because more players are choosing to behave like a less common kind of medieval noble (not non-existent, mind you: just less typical).

The Catholic Church didn't become strong by picking losing battles, and neither will SA.

Geez.

SA doesn't have to die nor lose it's authority. In fact I could think of a few ways for you guys to increase your authority in a more divided North. SA is not just theocracies and crusades, heck how much /real/ power did the theocracies of catholicism wield? Yeah, not that much.
SA will still have a monopoly in the North and dominate everywhere else. Just coz you won't have your big boys Morek and Astrum to pummel all opposition into the ground anymore doesn't mean that the fun is over. It'll just be a different game.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 22, 2013, 02:56:53 AM
Thats two times in one day... One of the nobles of Asylin replied ' yes my king'  8)

Hey Grimrog, share the throne dude! 8)

Actually, Grimrog and I think very alike. Except Grimrog isnt as flamboyant with his rhetoric. I enjoy working with him. I enjoy every noble in Asylon who is active, opinionated and likes to have fun or chaos. We are all in Asylon to have fun, that means loose goals with short term planning. I dont think any of us are in it for the power or control we just enjoy coming up with some random idea and seeing where it goes. I think the other realms are far more analytical and looking at far too long term goals, in Asylon we live right now, there is no long term strategy, constantly come up with ways to cause trouble, find new ways to do things, do things differently than our neighbors just because we can and because its more fun to do things off the top of our heads than striving to maintain the realm or philosophy for years and years. We might be in Dwilight a long time, we might be gone tommorow, who cares as long as it was fun. And if it means we have to be the evil enemy of Dwilight, so be it... Because being bad is good fun.
Where do you get this from? "no long term strategy" and striving for fun instead of maintaining the realm? You haven't done anything offensively since Terran's war that was a serious war. You took a cheap shot at Terran because you still had a grudge with the realm and then whined to stop the war as soon as your realm actually became threatened. You couldn't even be man enough to honest in your war against Terran for your casus beli and instead just hid behind "matter of honor".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on June 22, 2013, 03:25:49 AM
Tell me once where the catholic church was seriously offended by another nation and just backed off.

When Henry VIII withdrew all of England from the Catholic Church and founded his own?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on June 22, 2013, 03:27:26 AM
Also... we're getting a little bit ahead of ourselves... SA is far far far from dead.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 22, 2013, 03:42:39 AM
Also... we're getting a little bit ahead of ourselves... SA is far far far from dead.

It doesn't need to die to become worthless
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on June 22, 2013, 03:48:15 AM
It doesn't need to die to become worthless

It's also pretty far from that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 22, 2013, 04:00:32 AM
You would be surprised.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 22, 2013, 04:02:32 AM
What happened to the church of old....
You've been playing this game for two months. Where do get crap like this from?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 22, 2013, 04:10:55 AM
What happened to the church of old is that lots of players on Dwilight decided it was more fun to tear things down than build them up.

SA became powerful because lots of players decided to play characters who were devoted to the church or at least cared about it and respected its spiritual authority; i.e. somewhat more typically medieval-ish characters. SA is weaker now because more players are choosing to behave like a less common kind of medieval noble (not non-existent, mind you: just less typical).
This, in spades.

SA was always strong because the players that were part of it wanted it to be strong. They were willing to play nobles dedicated to their church, and willing to do their duties to the church. This is the key to a successful organization in Battlemaster, whether that organization is a religion, a guild, a secret society, or an entire realm. No organization can run without a group of people willing to make it work.

A growing number of nobles, and especially some of the more vocal ones, have decided that they do not want their characters to participate in the church, and would rather see it destroyed. Some of them because the church will not give them the power and leadership they seek, and some of them because the church will not follow their agenda.

Many (most?) people not in the church, and even quite a few in the church, simply don't understand how SA works, and what made it such a successful and influential institution. It's a bit sad. But it was a hell of a lot of fun building it into the biggest and best religion that Battlemaster has ever seen. I am quite confident that it's like will never be seen again.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on June 22, 2013, 04:29:08 AM
A growing number of nobles, and especially some of the more vocal ones, have decided that they do not want their characters to participate in the church, and would rather see it destroyed. Some of them because the church will not give them the power and leadership they seek, and some of them because the church will not follow their agenda.

Maybe the Church should've done a better job at not pissing people off. People only want to destroy it because it went around throwing its weight everywhere and acting like it was invincible.

You all sound like you're mad because the Church made enemies... when you were specifically doing things to make enemies.



Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on June 22, 2013, 04:33:27 AM
Well everyone who enjoyed playing around with legos know that tearing something down is just as fun as building something up although it takes a lot less ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 22, 2013, 04:39:59 AM
Maybe the Church should've done a better job at not pissing people off. People only want to destroy it because it went around throwing its weight everywhere and acting like it was invincible.

You all sound like you're mad because the Church made enemies... when you were specifically doing things to make enemies.

One damn crusade in one pisspot little backwater civil war.

The church has literally not done squat besides that in the years Hireshmont has been part of it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on June 22, 2013, 04:50:24 AM
I think SA was awesome until we smashed Caerwyn. Ever since Caerwyn died, things began to slow down and now this...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 22, 2013, 05:17:24 AM
One damn crusade in one pisspot little backwater civil war.

The church has literally not done squat besides that in the years Hireshmont has been part of it.

That it's a pisspot little backwater civil war is probably precisely why it was so bad. Everything was wrong about that crusade. The "enemy" had astroists, no astroists were being persecuted, the territories weren't worth anything to the church, the realm defended wasn't viable on its own, it was ingerence from northern realms in maroccidental affairs, it was slapping a foreign type of governance into republican territories, it was forcing a whole bunch of people to do stuff they didn't want to do when they had a ton of more important things to do, etc...

If the war had at least been meaningful, then people would have been ready to make concessions. But it wasn't. Whether it was the case or not, it had all the appearances of being the direct result of a corrupt eldership abusing of their authority to declare crusades out of spite from certain individuals not fostering the interests of the Church in mind.

There wasn't really any way to oppose the previous crusades, for the targets were always going out of their way to assure their own destruction. But Phantaria did not. And between them, came Rabisu's firm refusal to call for a crusade against Aurvandil, despite all of the astroist realms pretty much lining up against them. You really could not follow the refusal of a crusade against a state that totally deserves it with the imposition of a crusade against a state that clearly doesn't.

Basically, Vellos assured SA the same fate as Terran. Rotating between soft and hard and soft and hard will just break the church. It needs consistency to keep everyone on the same page.

Because of your last crusade, you next one is likely to result in your humiliation. Niselur, Farronite Republic, Asylon, and Phantaria surround Astrum. Libero Empire and Luria Nova flank Morek.

The days of the theocracies are over. SA will have to learn to live through the republics and monarchies of the land. And indeed, it's likely going to lose a lot of the power that made it unique. But what can be done, you've already destroyed the authority that granted them this power.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on June 22, 2013, 05:46:05 AM
That it's a pisspot little backwater civil war is probably precisely why it was so bad. Everything was wrong about that crusade. The "enemy" had astroists, no astroists were being persecuted, the territories weren't worth anything to the church, the realm defended wasn't viable on its own, it was ingerence from northern realms in maroccidental affairs, it was slapping a foreign type of governance into republican territories, it was forcing a whole bunch of people to do stuff they didn't want to do when they had a ton of more important things to do, etc...

This.

The Crusade wasn't insignificant; it was a major watershed moment in the attitude and willingness of the Church to do things it hasn't ever done before. A Crusade against fellow Astroists, a Crusade into the Maroccidens, a Crusade into historically 'Moot territory, the purposeful helping of the overthrow of a Republican government to establish a Theocracy, a Crusade that didn't defend the faith, but instead used the faith as a sword for what looked like political ends. It was huge! Not to mention the Elders went through with this despite knowing their was huge opposition to it not only outside the Church, but among their own faithful and their own theocracies.


Like I've said before: I'm not anti-SA and I never really have been--not OOC, anyways. I love SA for what it is, which is an amazing religion for BM and for the SMA continent that has never been seen before in this game. However, SA decided to directly do something to bully my character, and thus he no longer has the more apathetic view of SA that he once had.



Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 22, 2013, 05:55:33 AM

Because of your last crusade, you next one is likely to result in your humiliation. Niselur, Farronite Republic, Asylon, and Phantaria surround Astrum. Libero Empire and Luria Nova flank Morek.


Which is why we won't likely be calling a crusade.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 22, 2013, 06:11:41 AM
Which is why we won't likely be calling a crusade.

Doesn't matter, you still lost. Either Niselur plays along and satisfies itself with knowing it is invincible, or they push their luck and mount a coalition against Astrum anyways just for the sake of it. Being the agressor decreases the odds of gaining enough internal and foreign support drastically, but they may very well be able to get away with even that anyways.

That is kinda the thing with the realms on these corners of the map... Aurvandil didn't need any friends, due to the weakness of their neighors and their cheating advantages. Niselur's got all the defensive perks of a corner, plus mountains to further isolate, AND a bunch of allies to act as buffers on all fronts.

Truth is, Niselur holds all of the cards, now. Whatever happens next is up to them. The Church overextended itself, and has lost this conflict before it even began.

I honestly don't understand how anyone could have seen that last crusade as being a good idea... Machiavel told Vellos, he told Mathurin... don't do this. It's a terrible idea. And the parts that I predicted paled in comparison to what actually came to be and what I did not yet know at the time.

'cause heck, if Niselur decides it doesn't want Terran to exist anymore... it won't. And the crusade will have had zero positive impacts for the church, and just a bunch of negative ones.

Niselur's king is one powerful dude right now. A pity he has to side with Luria Nova. :(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on June 22, 2013, 06:30:08 AM
This, in spades.

SA was always strong because the players that were part of it wanted it to be strong. They were willing to play nobles dedicated to their church, and willing to do their duties to the church. This is the key to a successful organization in Battlemaster, whether that organization is a religion, a guild, a secret society, or an entire realm. No organization can run without a group of people willing to make it work.

A growing number of nobles, and especially some of the more vocal ones, have decided that they do not want their characters to participate in the church, and would rather see it destroyed. Some of them because the church will not give them the power and leadership they seek, and some of them because the church will not follow their agenda.

Many (most?) people not in the church, and even quite a few in the church, simply don't understand how SA works, and what made it such a successful and influential institution. It's a bit sad. But it was a hell of a lot of fun building it into the biggest and best religion that Battlemaster has ever seen. I am quite confident that it's like will never be seen again.

I keep seeing the phrase "too many people don't understand how SA works". SA has not found itself able to evolve with the times, and has been relying purely on its history of success to see it through its recent actions. Ignoring the vocal majority of the full members is a huge mistake that has cost the Church a great deal. The politics of the elders have continued to alienate more and more individuals who wield considerable amounts of secular power. The Last Crusade is proof that the elders are out of touch with the secular powers. You claim that nobles not bending over themselves to please the church isn't typical medieval, but that simply isn't true. The HRE is a huge indicator of this. The Sunni/Shia schism is a great example as well. The Catholic Church was largely successful through the middle ages because it was able to keep the vast majority of the secular powers appeased, and served functional uses to the secular rulers. Spain for example, fighting the moors, benefited greatly from the Church.

The best parallel I can find for this lies with Crusader Kings II. Holy wars are fought, and various actions can cause a church to lose or gain moral authority. This last Crusade destroyed the church's moral authority in the eyes of a great deal of its followers. If Sanguis Astroism wants to regain its moral authority, it needs to not appear to be playing to the whims of a singular elder over a large, vocal, portion of the faith. Whatever the reality of the situation, that is how it was perceived, and perception is reality.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 22, 2013, 06:33:40 AM
snip
Hence the greater disparity over current events.  Niselur has done more to warrant a crusade, or at least a smack on the wrist, but not only is Niselur not getting punished, but is being allowed back in with greater voice than it did before.

As I said IC, if we stood alone or were as small as Phantaria, I have no doubt that SA would try to curb-stomp us.

While the church was looking elsewhere, King Leopold was quietly building allies.  King Leopold has been planning this move for months, and it was hinted at on the Dwarf Fortress forums, when it was mentioned we were in the middle of SA(a.k.a boring land I believe was hinted at).  Thus people from there joined in waiting for King Leopold to deliver, and so far he has not disappointed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 22, 2013, 07:41:47 AM
I keep seeing the phrase "too many people don't understand how SA works". SA has not found itself able to evolve with the times, and has been relying purely on its history of success to see it through its recent actions. Ignoring the vocal majority of the full members is a huge mistake that has cost the Church a great deal. The politics of the elders have continued to alienate more and more individuals who wield considerable amounts of secular power. The Last Crusade is proof that the elders are out of touch with the secular powers. You claim that nobles not bending over themselves to please the church isn't typical medieval, but that simply isn't true. The HRE is a huge indicator of this. The Sunni/Shia schism is a great example as well. The Catholic Church was largely successful through the middle ages because it was able to keep the vast majority of the secular powers appeased, and served functional uses to the secular rulers. Spain for example, fighting the moors, benefited greatly from the Church.

The best parallel I can find for this lies with Crusader Kings II. Holy wars are fought, and various actions can cause a church to lose or gain moral authority. This last Crusade destroyed the church's moral authority in the eyes of a great deal of its followers. If Sanguis Astroism wants to regain its moral authority, it needs to not appear to be playing to the whims of a singular elder over a large, vocal, portion of the faith. Whatever the reality of the situation, that is how it was perceived, and perception is reality.

What happened, to be honest, is that the players/characters who built SA left. Not all of them, but most of them. There was a time when it would have been inconceivable for Niselur to defy the Church this way, or for Astrum to find itself in this position of weakness. It wasn't all that long ago that both Kabrinskia (as it was then) and Niselur were client states of Astrum. It is sheer passivity that has allowed the present state of affairs to come to pass. Leopold's rebellion should have been crushed without mercy, and FR should have been brought into line more carefully. Unfortunately, the personal relationships that once bound SA together (for example the Brance-Rowan-Bustoarsenzio relationship) have ceased to exist, and without them the fabric that bound the Church together is slowly eroding.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 22, 2013, 08:24:43 AM
The combined Astroist alliances inability to smash Asylon not once but twice was the beginning of the end.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arrakis on June 22, 2013, 12:41:34 PM
'cause heck, if Niselur decides it doesn't want Terran to exist anymore... it won't.

Alaster and Turin are doing this on their own very well. Both of them have sent letters to literally all nobles of Niselur in attempt to destabilize and overthrow Leopold. This is a standard Dustole move of sending out feelers like he used to do with Allison. However, Alaster is no Allison from her best days, and such a tactic doesn't pass with fresh and unproven characters like Alaster is. When Alaster realized that his political move won't gain him back-up from the Church like he expected, he threw a hissy fit at Leopold and meekly offered a duel to death. Normally, much more than fate of Terran is at stake for Leopold to accept it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arrakis on June 22, 2013, 01:09:23 PM
What happened, to be honest, is that the players/characters who built SA left. Not all of them, but most of them. There was a time when it would have been inconceivable for Niselur to defy the Church this way, or for Astrum to find itself in this position of weakness. It wasn't all that long ago that both Kabrinskia (as it was then) and Niselur were client states of Astrum. It is sheer passivity that has allowed the present state of affairs to come to pass. Leopold's rebellion should have been crushed without mercy, and FR should have been brought into line more carefully. Unfortunately, the personal relationships that once bound SA together (for example the Brance-Rowan-Bustoarsenzio relationship) have ceased to exist, and without them the fabric that bound the Church together is slowly eroding.

I agree with this observation. When the pillars that built SA departed the foundation of characters on which SA was built was gone, and some new people, perhaps unproven in the eyes of the Church, have taken the leadership. But it is worthy to note that these characters have left for a reason. SA has reached its height and there was nothing left to do. Dwilight was conquered and trying to control such a massive core of nobles that SA became was exhausting and unrewarding task. The blob was just getting bigger and bigger and regular players simply don't have enough time to devote to control this mass of commotion and regular unrest on daily basis. If they tried, they burned out, which is what I believe happened to Brance when he was the Regent. If Brance couldn't do it, who is probably the most respected individual in the history of SA, I don't think anyone ever will. Without firm leadership that everyone looks up to this mass of nobles become dissatisfied when they're ordered around. It is simply how nature of players and characters works. Mordaunt failed to provide this leadership to the Church and other candidates for the Regent were even worse. Now, when someone like Hireshmont - whose reputation is stained and dubious - becomes the most vocal proponent of the Church, which makes him de facto a leader-in-command, it is only natural that the foundations of the Church start falling apart. Every Empire reaches its zenith and so does SA. But after you surpass that point, there is only a long way down to go. I don't think SA will die out, that would be a great shame. But I think things will change if this war makes the effect I am hoping it will. For better or for worse, it is hard to say. I don't think anyone knows for sure what will be the result in the end. But I believe that as long as we're having fun traveling - the destination is less important.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on June 22, 2013, 03:23:19 PM
Doesn't matter, you still lost. Either Niselur plays along and satisfies itself with knowing it is invincible, or they push their luck and mount a coalition against Astrum anyways just for the sake of it. Being the agressor decreases the odds of gaining enough internal and foreign support drastically, but they may very well be able to get away with even that anyways.

Gotta say, this is what it looks like to me, too.

And you know that when I agree with Chénier on anything, you're doomed. ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 22, 2013, 03:43:28 PM
Niselur and the Farronites will attack as soon as the tournament is over. The war has been a foregone conclusion for quite some time. It will happen. Niselur has built a strong coalition of allies, and can't back down. Doing so takes them right back into being the boring, no-action realm out in the ass-end of nowhere that they don't want to be. That would be the end of Leopold's reign, as he built his following on promises fo being important and relevant.

He can really only go after FR, Asylon, and Astrum. And he's allied to two of those...

What will be interesting is what Libero will do. LE and Niselur are tied together. Will Libero try to aide Niselur? Will Morek attack them because of their status as vassals of Niselur, taking advantage of Niselur's dissolving of the alliance chain that protected LE? If so, how will Niselur defend LE while simultaneously fighting against Astrum?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on June 22, 2013, 03:48:57 PM
First World War of Dwilight Inc.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 22, 2013, 04:33:09 PM
Morek and Libero will have big decisions on their hands. Libero's a vassal of Niselur, and it'd make little sense for them to pay thousands of gold to be a vassal and not obey. However, the context is maybe different than they first thought... I have no idea what went on in their minds, but if they were giving gold to Niselur simply to fend off a perceived impending Morekian invasion, this is quite something else. Niselur would never be able to do anything to protect Libero if it's fighting Astrum, leaving Morek to beat the hell out of Libero. However, if Morek engages Libero, then they cease to become available to enforce the D'Hara-Luria Nova peace treaty they've promised to militarily back up, opening the door for a new Lurian invasion. At least for a little while. Would Luria Nova be ready to jump on this opportunity to attack D'Hara, though, with the knowledge that Libero might not last long and that Morek could soon come back to punish their betrayal?

Indeed, it's a world war brewing like Dwilight has never seen. It remains to be seen to what level it will pan off. Some nations have all interests to try to prevent it at all costs, like Astrum and D'Hara, while others have much to lose by it not happening, like Niselur.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 22, 2013, 05:07:51 PM
Morek and Libero will have big decisions on their hands. Libero's a vassal of Niselur, and it'd make little sense for them to pay thousands of gold to be a vassal and not obey. However, the context is maybe different than they first thought... I have no idea what went on in their minds, but if they were giving gold to Niselur simply to fend off a perceived impending Morekian invasion, this is quite something else. Niselur would never be able to do anything to protect Libero if it's fighting Astrum, leaving Morek to beat the hell out of Libero. However, if Morek engages Libero, then they cease to become available to enforce the D'Hara-Luria Nova peace treaty they've promised to militarily back up, opening the door for a new Lurian invasion. At least for a little while. Would Luria Nova be ready to jump on this opportunity to attack D'Hara, though, with the knowledge that Libero might not last long and that Morek could soon come back to punish their betrayal?

Indeed, it's a world war brewing like Dwilight has never seen. It remains to be seen to what level it will pan off. Some nations have all interests to try to prevent it at all costs, like Astrum and D'Hara, while others have much to lose by it not happening, like Niselur.

LE paid Niselur to protect them from Morek: I'm not sure what LE will do when Niselur provokes Morek into attacking them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 22, 2013, 05:23:04 PM
LE paid Niselur to protect them from Morek: I'm not sure what LE will do when Niselur provokes Morek into attacking them.

Indeed. I don't know LE enough to say more on this. LE is a big looser in this conflict, though, should war come to be. Not sure how they'll love Niselur putting them in this tough spot, either.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on June 22, 2013, 05:30:20 PM
LE paid Niselur to protect them from Morek: I'm not sure what LE will do when Niselur provokes Morek into attacking them.

What Luria Nova attacks Morek to take pressure off Libero?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 22, 2013, 05:41:13 PM
Well, one could always make the case that Libero is merely trying to get themselves into something exciting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on June 22, 2013, 06:00:59 PM
So how is this going to go down,

Niselur vs Astrum

Asylon and FR help against Astrum, possibly pulling Phantaria in as well.
This means Libero will possibly help Niselur, but Morek will attack Libero.
Corsanctum obviously joins Astrum & Morek. Swordfell aids Morek & D'hara.
Which means LN will attack D'Hara, pulling in Barca as well.
Saffalore will !@#$ itself in happyness (if they live that long) and aid LN.
Terran will be a hardline-SA realm attacking Phantaria and FR from behind.
Meanwhile cheating Aurvandil does massive landgrabs.


Sounds like a tale worth telling. Idk if this is entirely correct though and I bet a couple of realms will surprise us yet.


I think, if this happens, Dwilight will not be the same.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 22, 2013, 06:17:47 PM
Saffalore will not live that long. And whatever Terran does, if this war breaks out, they'll be at their neighbors' mercy, because no one's gonna lift a finger for them while many would be overeager to destroy them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: sharkattack on June 22, 2013, 06:39:37 PM
If all this happens as you wrote  Wolfang D'hara would not exist anymore as LN and Aurvandil would wipe em off continent.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 22, 2013, 06:52:51 PM
If all this happens as you wrote  Wolfang D'hara would not exist anymore as LN and Aurvandil would wipe em off continent.

The cheater realm isn't as strong as it used to be. D'Hara's got Barca on their west flank, and Swordfell on their east flank. Fissoa likely will remain on Aurvandil's ass as well. So while D'Hara would not be in a good position should Luria Nova attack it, it will be far from lost in advance. D'Hara has many allies and friends, all around it. And Luria Nova proved incapable of beating D'Hara when we were down to a few starving regions, why would they do any better now that we have recovered all of our regions and most of them are productive once more? We've got a better income, more infrastructure, and a lot more nobles than last time we fought. And there's also Swordfell+Morek to consider, which wasn't part of the game last time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daimall on June 22, 2013, 08:24:59 PM
LE paid Niselur to protect them from Morek: I'm not sure what LE will do when Niselur provokes Morek into attacking them.

As far as I remember, I don't think LE has paid us the gold yet. Because their King was suppose to visit us with gold to deposit into our bank, but that never materialized because of all the recent unrest.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 22, 2013, 09:34:33 PM
I keep seeing the phrase "too many people don't understand how SA works".
That's because it's true. They don't. You don't. You never did figure out how it worked. You know how to tear it down, and you're very good at causing trouble. But you never knew how it worked, or could make it work.

Quote
SA has not found itself able to evolve with the times, and has been relying purely on its history of success to see it through its recent actions. Ignoring the vocal majority of the full members is a huge mistake that has cost the Church a great deal. The politics of the elders have continued to alienate more and more individuals who wield considerable amounts of secular power. The Last Crusade is proof that the elders are out of touch with the secular powers.
In a way, this is true. SA has not evolved. But the evolution many people seem to want is to evolve into some powerless, toothless mass. If that's the kind of evolution you want, then too bad. It's better for the church to die than become the plain vanilla crap that every other religion in BattleMaster has become.

This latest crusade did not cause the problem. It simply revealed the problem that has been there for a long time, and growing. The expansion of SA into the south was the success that started the downhill slide. Too much success brought too many political conversions, and power seekers. It's been building for a couple years. The reason a lot of people didn't see it before was that the church wasn't making any demands of its members. As soon as it did, the veneer cracked, and all the internal flaws popped out into the open.

It was inevitable, really. Too many conflicting personalities. If enough people join it, you will eventually gain enough members from incompatible families. Imagine trying to have a single realm with all of these same people in it... It would fracture into pieces inside of a week. Plus you then add in all the people only interested in tearing others down, or destroying SA just to be able to say they were the one that did it. But too bad for them, because when the game is over, the post-game analysis will give Leopold the credit.

Quote
You claim that nobles not bending over themselves to please the church isn't typical medieval, but that simply isn't true.
I never made that claim. What I said is that in order for any organization in BattleMaster to succeed, there needs to be a critical mass of players willing to make their character subservient to that organization. This does not mean that they have to play toady, or slave, or mindless minion. But they have to recognize the church's authority, and be willing to play along with the church, even if there is no direct punishment mechanism to enforce it, like bans and fines. Imagine how long a realm would last if the ruler declared a war, and 60% of the nobles in the realm called him a fool and refused to fight.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 22, 2013, 10:29:22 PM
That's because it's true. They don't. You don't. You never did figure out how it worked. You know how to tear it down, and you're very good at causing trouble. But you never knew how it worked, or could make it work.
In a way, this is true. SA has not evolved. But the evolution many people seem to want is to evolve into some powerless, toothless mass. If that's the kind of evolution you want, then too bad. It's better for the church to die than become the plain vanilla crap that every other religion in BattleMaster has become.

This latest crusade did not cause the problem. It simply revealed the problem that has been there for a long time, and growing. The expansion of SA into the south was the success that started the downhill slide. Too much success brought too many political conversions, and power seekers. It's been building for a couple years. The reason a lot of people didn't see it before was that the church wasn't making any demands of its members. As soon as it did, the veneer cracked, and all the internal flaws popped out into the open.

It was inevitable, really. Too many conflicting personalities. If enough people join it, you will eventually gain enough members from incompatible families. Imagine trying to have a single realm with all of these same people in it... It would fracture into pieces inside of a week. Plus you then add in all the people only interested in tearing others down, or destroying SA just to be able to say they were the one that did it. But too bad for them, because when the game is over, the post-game analysis will give Leopold the credit.
I never made that claim. What I said is that in order for any organization in BattleMaster to succeed, there needs to be a critical mass of players willing to make their character subservient to that organization. This does not mean that they have to play toady, or slave, or mindless minion. But they have to recognize the church's authority, and be willing to play along with the church, even if there is no direct punishment mechanism to enforce it, like bans and fines. Imagine how long a realm would last if the ruler declared a war, and 60% of the nobles in the realm called him a fool and refused to fight.

This is a very heavy handed, arrogant view of what's happening.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 22, 2013, 11:04:41 PM
...because it doesn't agree with the way you see it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 22, 2013, 11:15:57 PM
...because it doesn't agree with the way you see it.

Or the way I see it either...  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 22, 2013, 11:22:59 PM
Well, yeah, but you're crazy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on June 22, 2013, 11:36:58 PM
The reason a lot of people didn't see it before was that the church wasn't making any demands of its members. As soon as it did, the veneer cracked, and all the internal flaws popped out into the open.

Which is hilarious, because nothing was really needed from it's members. The safeguarding of Terran seemed like a good example of what SA is more capable of, a good bluff. At most, all people had to do was give some food, a few claims of "yeah, we'll help if you need", and sending a token force to visit Terran.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 23, 2013, 03:52:35 AM
Which is hilarious, because nothing was really needed from it's members. The safeguarding of Terran seemed like a good example of what SA is more capable of, a good bluff. At most, all people had to do was give some food, a few claims of "yeah, we'll help if you need", and sending a token force to visit Terran.

Yeah, that was the funny thing to me: everybody freaked out when all they had to do was send a letter to Kale being like, "Yo. Cut it out."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 23, 2013, 04:29:05 AM
Well, yeah, but you're crazy.

 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 23, 2013, 04:39:32 AM
Yeah, that was the funny thing to me: everybody freaked out when all they had to do was send a letter to Kale being like, "Yo. Cut it out."

Thing is, we didn't see why the Church felt like it was worth a crusade in the first place. Terran had no history as a Theocratic realm, and Hireshmont's continual saying that it was before it had even been considered such by the game did not help matters.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 23, 2013, 04:46:59 AM
Thing is, we didn't see why the Church felt like it was worth a crusade in the first place. Terran had no history as a Theocratic realm, and Hireshmont's continual saying that it was before it had even been considered such by the game did not help matters.

It was also, at least in appearance, in total conflict with the church's position on Farronite Republic's ascension to theocracy-worthiness and Aurvandil's level of crusade-worthiness.

A viable realm full of astroists wanted to be recognized as a theocracy, and was told to piss off. Meanwhile, a hostile realm, that housed a splinter faith considered evil, led by a heretic, and against whom nearly all astroists were at war, was not considered worthy of a crusade by Rabisu (and thus the Church). Then, a tiny republic with nearly no nobles, no region, and no food gets to be considered a theocracy and gets to enjoy a crusade to save its ass...

Metal may be both strong and malleable, but if you bend it both ways, it'll break. And that's what happened.

And really, as Gustav said, calling it a theocracy when it wasn't didn't pass well with a number of people. People used that against Farronite Republic: "You aren't a theocracy, you are a republic, the game says so!" And then you came saying "Terran isn't a republic, it's a theocracy, regardless of what the game says!". And so did, I believe, a number of elders who had the opposite stance when it came to FR. Or at least, so it seemed by their lack of noticeable objection in this instance compared to FR's case.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on June 23, 2013, 07:42:03 AM
But no action was taken by the church until it did become a theocracy
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on June 23, 2013, 07:48:02 AM
That may be true, but the mere fact that a lot of the high-ups in SA were already flaunting the Crusade threat even before Terran officially became a Theocracy could be considered an action in itself. It's the same as what happened in FR -- the Elders just sent subtle threats of a Crusade, and FR changed a lot of its laws to mirror everything in a Theocracy (in all but name, actually).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 23, 2013, 10:21:32 AM
Yeah, that was the funny thing to me: everybody freaked out when all they had to do was send a letter to Kale being like, "Yo. Cut it out."
In Niselur, it was actually regent Mordaunt's actions that did the most damage.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on June 23, 2013, 03:02:11 PM
It was also, at least in appearance, in total conflict with the church's position on Farronite Republic's ascension to theocracy-worthiness and Aurvandil's level of crusade-worthiness.

A viable realm full of astroists wanted to be recognized as a theocracy, and was told to piss off. Meanwhile, a hostile realm, that housed a splinter faith considered evil, led by a heretic, and against whom nearly all astroists were at war, was not considered worthy of a crusade by Rabisu (and thus the Church). Then, a tiny republic with nearly no nobles, no region, and no food gets to be considered a theocracy and gets to enjoy a crusade to save its ass...

Metal may be both strong and malleable, but if you bend it both ways, it'll break. And that's what happened.

And really, as Gustav said, calling it a theocracy when it wasn't didn't pass well with a number of people. People used that against Farronite Republic: "You aren't a theocracy, you are a republic, the game says so!" And then you came saying "Terran isn't a republic, it's a theocracy, regardless of what the game says!". And so did, I believe, a number of elders who had the opposite stance when it came to FR. Or at least, so it seemed by their lack of noticeable objection in this instance compared to FR's case.

This dosn't really make sense. The Farronite Republic never wanted to become theocracy, they wanted to be recognized as the equivalent of a theocracy while remaining a republic. This is somthing Khari was very very clear about- there was never going to be any government change in the Farronite Republic, and most of her arguments were based on the idea that the Church needed to move beyond the conventional defntion of a theocracy and allow non-theocratic governments be recognized as such. If the Farronites did desire to become a theocracy (and not just a republic with Elder voting rights) then they would have been welcomed with open arms, but that's not what they wanted.

Terran on the other hand was preparing to become a theocracy at the time of the Phantaran attack, and the Elders were not about to allow their new theocracy to be destroyed before it was even created just because Kale managed to act before the anarchy process could be completed. Yes, technically it wasn't yet a theocracy (and if you had looked closely you would note that many Elders noted the distinction) but it would be in a matter of weeks, the Farronite Republic on the other hand never intended on becoming a theocracy ever, so how that makes them more "theocracy-worthy" I don't know. Believe it or not Hirehsmont did try the whole "we are practically a theocracy in all but name" argument but the Elders were very adamant that they would need a solid plan and guarantee that it would go through the required anarchy and actually become a real theocracy before they even contemplated any aid.

I agree with the stuff about Aurvandil though, but that's Rabisu's fault. Most of the Elders currently in power had lobbied for a crusade against Aurvandil as well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 23, 2013, 03:07:57 PM
Some of us realized that a crusade against Aurvandil was useless. Why declare a crusade you can't fight? And we already knew that we couldn't fight it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 23, 2013, 04:00:46 PM
Some of us realized that a crusade against Aurvandil was useless. Why declare a crusade you can't fight? And we already knew that we couldn't fight it.

To set a precedent. And because there was !@#$ you could do: fund the crusaders. It's what D'Hara did when it didn't want to fight itself, to back up its allies, on two occasions I believe. Also, it would have made stuff like Luria Nova backstabbing D'Hara instead of helping out extremely unlikely. Same with Asylon's backstab of Terran. 'cause, if a crusade had been called against Aurvandil, then the northern states wouldn't have been allowed to tolerate anything that reduced the southern states' ability to crush the enemy. So even if Morek and Astrum can't really send troops to Aurvandil, your wealth and diplomatic weight might have been enough to compensate for Aurvandil's cheating.

I agree with the stuff about Aurvandil though, but that's Rabisu's fault. Most of the Elders currently in power had lobbied for a crusade against Aurvandil as well.

Most of the elders might have supported a crusade, but the Church did not.

As another said, the cracks were forming for quite a while. It wasn't just this crusade that formed them all. It's cracks after cracks after cracks, with then a great blow from a sledgehammer.

There are just too many diverging opinions and agendas in the church. Not calling a crusade against Aurvandil, for example, was probably perceived as being northern-centric by a lot of southern faithful. "Oh, these guys totally deserve a crusade, even more than some of the previous ones who were declared a crusade against, but it doesn't suit Astrum and Morek's agendas so we are left alone to be persecuted by those heathens!" Picking your fights is one thing, but when you start sacrificing a portion of your membership, because the conflict wouldn't be fun enough for another portion of your membership, then you aren't doing what's in the best interests of the whole, you are just considering the interests of the portion of membership that's closer to home.

Plus, as SA grew in power, you got more and more people who just wanted the perks but didn't care for any of the obligations. "Hey, I just need to sign up and never actually do anything, sure, I'll join if it makes me eligible for top titles!" And the ones in other realms "Hey, if a few of us join, then they can't say we are closed to SA, and we get to follow their communications and steer things our way! Sure, we'll join!" or the like. If you don't actually ask anything of anyone for a while, sure, you can pat yourself on the back for the large number of followers your religion has grown to. But how many of them can you rely on to make sacrifices for your causes? To actually obey your commands? I think the eldership assumed too much. Authority is like a muscle: If you use it too hard, it'll tear, but if you never use it, it'll grow weak.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 24, 2013, 05:51:26 AM
One damn crusade in one pisspot little backwater civil war.

The church has literally not done squat besides that in the years Hireshmont has been part of it.
Have you been blind for quite awhile? Huge issues with FR. Morek caused problems with Libero (the theocracies are united so if you don't like one you don't like any and if you don't like the theocracies you don't like the church). Asylon likes to say Astrum was mean and then dislikes SA.  SA would not have this problem if as Chenier said, they used their muscle the right amount. FR was about the worse amount ever, no crusade so they didn't get their theocracy but enough pressure that they pissed off FR(which the church was being very dumb about since it would have been a month(s) until FR had a chance at switching to theocracy considering they had roughly 20k CS militia). Swordfell had the right amount because it didn't have the FR issue . Swordfell wasn't pressured so they remained very friendly as FR would have been.

Btw, I don't feel like making one huge post so I am going on a posting spree.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 24, 2013, 05:58:54 AM
This.

The Crusade wasn't insignificant; it was a major watershed moment in the attitude and willingness of the Church to do things it hasn't ever done before. A Crusade against fellow Astroists, a Crusade into the Maroccidens, a Crusade into historically 'Moot territory, the purposeful helping of the overthrow of a Republican government to establish a Theocracy, a Crusade that didn't defend the faith, but instead used the faith as a sword for what looked like political ends. It was huge! Not to mention the Elders went through with this despite knowing their was huge opposition to it not only outside the Church, but among their own faithful and their own theocracies.


Like I've said before: I'm not anti-SA and I never really have been--not OOC, anyways. I love SA for what it is, which is an amazing religion for BM and for the SMA continent that has never been seen before in this game. However, SA decided to directly do something to bully my character, and thus he no longer has the more apathetic view of SA that he once had.
The theocracies thing was bs. Its something I have heard several elders say they didn't particularly care considering they had all these discussions on whether or not to do the crusade and Leopold was silent, then it gets declared and Leopold freaks out about it. Niselur was where most the disagreement came from which I would say is somewhat due to Niselur being revived through Arrakis OOC recruiting which is perfectly fine but most of his nobles didn't have an opinion on much on Dwilight so when the King who was there when you joined (powerful attachment when they are actually active) tells you his opinion, you have his opinion.

Also I disagree that this crusade was significant. It certainly got more people disagreeing with SA but I wouldn't call it significant really. I see it more as poking something that is barely held together, when you do there is a good chance things will start to fall apart.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 24, 2013, 06:06:46 AM
Doesn't matter, you still lost. Either Niselur plays along and satisfies itself with knowing it is invincible, or they push their luck and mount a coalition against Astrum anyways just for the sake of it. Being the agressor decreases the odds of gaining enough internal and foreign support drastically, but they may very well be able to get away with even that anyways.

That is kinda the thing with the realms on these corners of the map... Aurvandil didn't need any friends, due to the weakness of their neighors and their cheating advantages. Niselur's got all the defensive perks of a corner, plus mountains to further isolate, AND a bunch of allies to act as buffers on all fronts.

Truth is, Niselur holds all of the cards, now. Whatever happens next is up to them. The Church overextended itself, and has lost this conflict before it even began.

I honestly don't understand how anyone could have seen that last crusade as being a good idea... Machiavel told Vellos, he told Mathurin... don't do this. It's a terrible idea. And the parts that I predicted paled in comparison to what actually came to be and what I did not yet know at the time.

'cause heck, if Niselur decides it doesn't want Terran to exist anymore... it won't. And the crusade will have had zero positive impacts for the church, and just a bunch of negative ones.

Niselur's king is one powerful dude right now. A pity he has to side with Luria Nova. :(
Two things:

One, please shut up on the multiing. It happened, now move on. Your continuous slander of Aurvandil isn't going to change anything, and its getting to the point where I am starting to think a magistrates case may be necessary because its getting to the point it could be said you are harassing the players of Aurvandil who were honest.

Second while I agree with you on just about everything in that post, I don't about your Terran comment. Sure if Leopold started a war against SA, Terran wouldn't be that hard to destroy if it was a priority, but I wouldn't say its quite as trivial as you make it sound, especially if Astrum made it a priority to defend.

P.S. I wouldn't say its such a bad thing that Niselur allied with LN for D'hara though I won't state why.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 24, 2013, 06:11:05 AM
The combined Astroist alliances inability to smash Asylon not once but twice was the beginning of the end.
I only recall once, which ended because of the Long Winter where everybody was starving so they agreed to peace, but that was a white peace. Two if you count when you were cowards and waited till Terran was going to be smashed to bits before finally attacking which ended because you whined a lot about how the casius beli was no longer valid and how they were so mean even though you guys claim to love war.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 24, 2013, 06:20:00 AM
So how is this going to go down,

Niselur vs Astrum

Asylon and FR help against Astrum, possibly pulling Phantaria in as well.
This means Libero will possibly help Niselur, but Morek will attack Libero.
Corsanctum obviously joins Astrum & Morek. Swordfell aids Morek & D'hara.
Which means LN will attack D'Hara, pulling in Barca as well.
Saffalore will !@#$ itself in happyness (if they live that long) and aid LN.
Terran will be a hardline-SA realm attacking Phantaria and FR from behind.
Meanwhile cheating Aurvandil does massive landgrabs.


Sounds like a tale worth telling. Idk if this is entirely correct though and I bet a couple of realms will surprise us yet.


I think, if this happens, Dwilight will not be the same.
I mostly agree with you, but as I said to Chenier, don't call Aurvandil cheating anymore, especially now as you are talking present tense you are making a cheating accusation. It happened and the cheater has been punished, there is nothing else that will happen from complaining about them and either way, slandering them is not needed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 24, 2013, 07:47:52 AM
I only recall once, which ended because of the Long Winter where everybody was starving so they agreed to peace, but that was a white peace. Two if you count when you were cowards and waited till Terran was going to be smashed to bits before finally attacking which ended because you whined a lot about how the casius beli was no longer valid and how they were so mean even though you guys claim to love war.


Love of war does not mean we blindly fall into it like the warm embrace of a black widow... Love pf war is the delicate dance and then the blade on our terms... Not yours.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 24, 2013, 07:54:18 AM

Love of war does not mean we blindly fall into it like the warm embrace of a black widow... Love pf war is the delicate dance and then the blade on our terms... Not yours.
So first you say love war and would rather die fighting than being cowards and that you don't use long term strategy like other realms but then defend your cowardice with saying you don't want to have your realm die by not being the one to carefully plan it all out and have it fit to your plans?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on June 24, 2013, 08:19:55 AM
So first you say love war and would rather die fighting than being cowards and that you don't use long term strategy like other realms but then defend your cowardice with saying you don't want to have your realm die by not being the one to carefully plan it all out and have it fit to your plans?

There is a difference between not planning things well in advance and being willing to go down fighting and picking suicidal fights. Asylon's view is, if a chance comes to pick a fight and win, sure. If a fight comes along, whatever, they'll fight it, even if they die. But that doesn't meant they're going to go out of their way to get destroyed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kwanstein on June 24, 2013, 11:56:42 AM
Basically other realms sit around twiddling their thumbs, waiting for wars to come to them, while Asylon takes a proactive stance. Also, unbeknownst to most, it seems, Asylon looted some Astrum city to the ground in their last scuffle. So, it wasn't really a tie; Asylon won.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 24, 2013, 03:37:44 PM
Two things:

One, please shut up on the multiing. It happened, now move on. Your continuous slander of Aurvandil isn't going to change anything, and its getting to the point where I am starting to think a magistrates case may be necessary because its getting to the point it could be said you are harassing the players of Aurvandil who were honest.

Second while I agree with you on just about everything in that post, I don't about your Terran comment. Sure if Leopold started a war against SA, Terran wouldn't be that hard to destroy if it was a priority, but I wouldn't say its quite as trivial as you make it sound, especially if Astrum made it a priority to defend.

P.S. I wouldn't say its such a bad thing that Niselur allied with LN for D'hara though I won't state why.

If Astrum's fighting a huge coalition in the North, I doubt it'd be able to do much for Terran.

And no, I won't shut up about Aurvandil. They cheated. And they gained a !@#$load because of it. I'm not gonna act as if it never happened, as if all of their achievements were legit. Because they achieved squat since. And I still suspect them of cheating. Because, even right after the accounts were locked, Dustole stated that there were new accounts showing similar traits as the old ones. Their gains aren't legit, so I won't pretend they are.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 24, 2013, 03:39:54 PM
Thank you Kwanstein and Stabbity, youexplained it very well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Fleugs on June 24, 2013, 03:54:50 PM
And no, I won't shut up about Aurvandil. They cheated. And they gained a !@#$load because of it. I'm not gonna act as if it never happened, as if all of their achievements were legit. Because they achieved squat since. And I still suspect them of cheating. Because, even right after the accounts were locked, Dustole stated that there were new accounts showing similar traits as the old ones. Their gains aren't legit, so I won't pretend they are.

Aye! But it seems nobody but Fissoa is willing to go teach them a lesson.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on June 24, 2013, 04:37:35 PM
So one thing I learned while the crusade for Terran was going on, its virtually impossible to drive a region into revolt as a priest/diplomat. Now of course Im not sure who was doing what but while I was in Chatuea Saffalore for well over a week and spending  nearly 24 hours a day badmouthing Terran I never once got the region to drop below worshopful. Had some success outside the capital but very little.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on June 24, 2013, 04:50:30 PM
Aye! But it seems nobody but Fissoa is willing to go teach them a lesson.
I think everyone is willing to teach them a lesson, but ironically Aurvandil is safe because D'Hara and LN are not willing to work together, and their political isolation is keeping them out of the upcoming war, something which I'm sure they'll use to their advantage.

I also agree with Chénier when he says it's hard to look past Aurvandil having cheated. If they wanted other realms to look kindly upon them IG AND OOG, they could at least have returned the spoils they had gotten when they were cheating, for example, the regions they took from Barca. And where are all the Aurv & Falkirk players on this forum? They account for a little less than 15% of the active Dwilight population..
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sypher on June 24, 2013, 05:23:20 PM
I think everyone is willing to teach them a lesson, but ironically Aurvandil is safe because D'Hara and LN are not willing to work together, and their political isolation is keeping them out of the upcoming war, something which I'm sure they'll use to their advantage.
...
I don't think Aurvandil is safe. They tried to act threatening and tough against Fissoa after Allomere became ruler but didn't stop Fissoa & friends from destroying Falkirk. A combined Fissoa & Barca would crush the Aurvandil that exists now. Fissoa by itself could still win or at least push them out of Fatmilak isle.

Realistically, Luria Nova can't do much against Aurvandil directly. The morale penalties start hurting us on Madina Isle.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 24, 2013, 06:42:24 PM
Also, unbeknownst to most, it seems, Asylon looted some Astrum city to the ground in their last scuffle. So, it wasn't really a tie; Asylon won.
Apparently it's unbeknownst to Astrum, too. Especially since that never happened.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 24, 2013, 06:46:46 PM
The combined Astroist alliances inability to smash Asylon not once but twice was the beginning of the end.
This never happened. Astrum and some allies went to war with Asylon twice, but there was never any concerted attempt to "smash" or destroy Asylon. We engaged in a limited war with clear goals. When those goals were achieved, or the reason for the war disappeared, we stopped fighting. But there was never any attempt to destroy Asylon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 24, 2013, 06:49:32 PM
So one thing I learned while the crusade for Terran was going on, its virtually impossible to drive a region into revolt as a priest/diplomat. Now of course Im not sure who was doing what but while I was in Chatuea Saffalore for well over a week and spending  nearly 24 hours a day badmouthing Terran I never once got the region to drop below worshopful. Had some success outside the capital but very little.
Trying to influence the population either for or against a third party is less effective. Also, your oratory skill is very important

Also, there really needs to be some chance that someone using diplomacy skills in a region is detected by the other people in the region. Diplomats being 100% undetectable is not a desirable situation.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on June 24, 2013, 07:06:49 PM
Trying to influence the population either for or against a third party is less effective. Also, your oratory skill is very important

Also, there really needs to be some chance that someone using diplomacy skills in a region is detected by the other people in the region. Diplomats being 100% undetectableis not a desirable situation.

Ooh I agree...lots of bribes and never detected. And my oratory fame is 99. Even with a second diplomat we could not effect the chateau. Had some better success at a rural but started running out of gold.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 24, 2013, 07:52:24 PM
I don't think Aurvandil is safe. They tried to act threatening and tough against Fissoa after Allomere became ruler but didn't stop Fissoa & friends from destroying Falkirk. A combined Fissoa & Barca would crush the Aurvandil that exists now. Fissoa by itself could still win or at least push them out of Fatmilak isle.

Realistically, Luria Nova can't do much against Aurvandil directly. The morale penalties start hurting us on Madina Isle.

But Luria Nova continuously threatening to invade D'Hara keeps D'Hara from comitting itself against Aurvandil...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 24, 2013, 07:53:34 PM
Trying to influence the population either for or against a third party is less effective. Also, your oratory skill is very important

Also, there really needs to be some chance that someone using diplomacy skills in a region is detected by the other people in the region. Diplomats being 100% undetectable is not a desirable situation.

There were other ambassadors and diplomats in the region as well. I know I lauded Terran a few times, just to be able to say that I did. I'm sure that Terran had courtiers and/or diplomats working every turn as well on region stats.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 24, 2013, 08:38:33 PM
Apparently it's unbeknownst to Astrum, too. Especially since that never happened.

We only looted Walefishire and dunnbrook good. It wasnt a city , just some town. Anyways 4 or 5 kingdoms versus 1 was pretty clear to Asylon you wanted to destroy us whether that is true or not. Policy in Asylon is to North Korea propaganda every situation within the kingdom. We make our own truth.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on June 24, 2013, 08:41:30 PM
But Luria Nova continuously threatening to invade D'Hara keeps D'Hara from comitting itself against Aurvandil...

And yet D'hara continuously refuses Luria Nova's demands for compensation in exchange for peace.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on June 24, 2013, 08:47:59 PM
And yet D'hara continuously refuses Luria Nova's demands for compensation in exchange for peace.

Not only that, but has thus far refused to even admit there is anything they might have done that would warrant an apology, let alone serious compensation...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 24, 2013, 08:49:57 PM
And yet D'hara continuously refuses Luria Nova's demands for compensation in exchange for peace.

Obviously. Should D'Hara demand compensation for backstabbing us during the Long Winter too? I'd love to calculate how much that cost us, and send you the bill. We could deduct your "claim" if you want, and we'll just take the rest you owe us. I'm sure everyone will be happy that way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on June 24, 2013, 09:28:24 PM
Vellos has been arrested for conspiring against the Farronite Republic....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on June 24, 2013, 10:07:44 PM
Vellos has been arrested for conspiring against the Farronite Republic....
You do realize the high rate of false positives from secret police, right?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on June 24, 2013, 10:08:24 PM
Alright, let's move on to another subject.

Any developments in the north with the whole possible SA-war in the future :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on June 24, 2013, 10:13:30 PM
We'll see after the tournament is over... Whatever happens, I hope we see some action at long last.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on June 24, 2013, 10:14:03 PM
You do realize the high rate of false positives from secret police, right?

Maybe the individuals in question don't care?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 24, 2013, 10:23:05 PM
Maybe the individuals in question don't care?

That seems likely.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on June 24, 2013, 10:24:54 PM
It was a rhetorical question.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 24, 2013, 10:30:31 PM
That seems likely.

Indeed. It wouldn't surprise me that he was conspiring against FR in some way, but doubtful that he was doing so in a way the game could detect (underground member).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on June 25, 2013, 12:02:59 AM
Maybe the individuals in question don't care?

I'm sure the character doesn't, I'm just informing the player.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 25, 2013, 12:25:30 AM
Indeed. It wouldn't surprise me that he was conspiring against FR in some way, but doubtful that he was doing so in a way the game could detect (underground member).

Actually no, not conspiring at all. Quite surprised by the arrest. I'd heard some rumblings earlier but didn't think anything of them. Was rather surprised, also quite pleasantly surprised by my prompt release.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on June 25, 2013, 02:14:20 AM
Innocent until proven guilty, and all that.

It also helps that the current Chief Magistrate is also pro-SA ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 25, 2013, 02:46:53 AM
Yeah, I kind of did a real *facepalm* at that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on June 25, 2013, 03:14:40 AM
Send him to Phantaria!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 25, 2013, 03:23:26 AM
Bloody well send him to Asylon!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on June 25, 2013, 03:35:05 AM
Actually no, not conspiring at all. Quite surprised by the arrest. I'd heard some rumblings earlier but didn't think anything of them. Was rather surprised, also quite pleasantly surprised by my prompt release.

That's a matter of perspective, probably.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 25, 2013, 05:06:43 AM
Moderator note: I have removed the OT discussion about multis. The Social Contract applies here on the forums, as well as in-game. If you have proof, or strong suspicions, of rule-breaking, report it to the Magistrates or Titans.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 25, 2013, 04:36:35 PM
Defense submitted.

I even included a bit about how, like OJ, "If I had done it.... here's how I would."

Should be fun.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 25, 2013, 06:15:21 PM
"If the plot fits, you must acquit!"

Maybe you should have opted for the Chewbacca defense.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on June 25, 2013, 07:19:50 PM
"If the plot fits, you must acquit!"

Maybe you should have opted for the Chewbacca defense.

That would have worked good. I had suspected traitors within my council. Now I know for certain!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 26, 2013, 05:58:44 AM
That would have worked good. I had suspected traitors within my council. Now I know for certain!

Khari is awfully paranoid if she regards it as treason to inform an illegally accused noble of a criminal plot against him.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on June 26, 2013, 05:48:20 PM
So was Niselur leaving the federation all part of the plan?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 26, 2013, 06:31:30 PM
Yes. Leopold told... Corsanctum's ruler(?)... that he would move as soon as the tournament was over. In order to line up for war, he has to leave the federation, resulting in automatic war declarations with all former federation members.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on June 26, 2013, 06:33:10 PM
Yes, Niselurian troops have entered Astrum, and if the alliance coordination is good other members should be entering their respective territories.

D'Hara was already scouted by adv's a week ago for defence weaknesses, Luria Nova could strike Morek rather than D'Hara, but it seems likely Lurian armies will arrive on D'Hara shores with a turn or two.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on June 26, 2013, 06:36:51 PM
Holy cow I'm so exited as to how this pans out.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_gst-Ryh3g
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on June 26, 2013, 06:37:01 PM
Lurian armies will arrive on D'Hara shores with a turn or two.

Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on June 26, 2013, 07:29:11 PM
Holy cow I'm so exited as to how this pans out.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_gst-Ryh3g

"No... now it ends."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on June 26, 2013, 10:02:30 PM
Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?Orly?

The current positioning of D'haran troops is rather favorable too.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on June 26, 2013, 10:17:25 PM
The current positioning of D'haran troops is rather favorable too.

Everytime we fight a Western war...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on June 26, 2013, 11:14:26 PM
Everytime we fight a Western war...

Funny how referring to your bigger badder neighbor as a child and a bitch backfires on you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on June 26, 2013, 11:45:42 PM
Funny how referring to your bigger badder neighbor as a child and a bitch backfires on you.

What are you talking about?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on June 27, 2013, 12:12:20 AM
Rynn's constant badmouthing of Alice. I have ears everywhere you know.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on June 27, 2013, 02:09:56 AM
Rynn's constant badmouthing of Alice. I have ears everywhere you know.

Rynn doesn't badmouth Alice, he simply adds exclamation points to everything she does. And he certainly never publicly called her a bitch although he fervently believes it. Of course, it's also not difficult to portray her as childlike in regards to foreign affairs. 5yo rulers of Dwilight sums that up pretty succinctly.

 :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on June 27, 2013, 05:14:21 AM
I may be paraphrasing but Rynn's references to her have been less than flattering. Its also extremely easy to laint Rynn as a 5yo. Generally speaking, antagonzing your bigger neighbor is a ticket to getting a solid whooping.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on June 27, 2013, 05:23:16 AM
Rynn doesn't badmouth Alice, he simply adds exclamation points to everything she does. And he certainly never publicly called her a bitch although he fervently believes it. Of course, it's also not difficult to portray her as childlike in regards to foreign affairs. 5yo rulers of Dwilight sums that up pretty succinctly.

 :P

Erm... Rynn did threaten to rape her in front of all the rulers of Dwilight.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on June 27, 2013, 05:38:12 AM
I may be paraphrasing but Rynn's references to her have been less than flattering. Its also extremely easy to laint Rynn as a 5yo. Generally speaking, antagonzing your bigger neighbor is a ticket to getting a solid whooping.

Can't deny it. Now imagine the two of them locked in a room!

quote author=Vellos link=topic=1421.msg111188#msg111188 date=1372303396]
Erm... Rynn did threaten to rape her in front of all the rulers of Dwilight.
[/quote]

Did not! He simply swore her to bear a child of his if she did not follow through on some promise she made. Which, of course, was well after she promised to murder him. That horse is immortal, so I can beat it to my heart's content.  ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on June 27, 2013, 08:42:08 AM
Rynn is terrible at being a diplomat with enemies. I think you would agree with that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on June 29, 2013, 12:37:53 AM
I'm hoping all this faithful on faithful violence about to ensue turns more people into mad zealots. That seems to be what was missing from SA...the desire to snuff any voice who disagrees with your interpretation of doctrine.

People demanding trials for excommunications and demotions, incessant whining about wanting transparency from the elders, and the allowances made for vitriol and insults to the church....SA is a church trying to be run like a liberal democracy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on June 29, 2013, 01:38:20 AM
I'm hoping all this faithful on faithful violence about to ensue turns more people into mad zealots. That seems to be what was missing from SA...the desire to snuff any voice who disagrees with your interpretation of doctrine.

People demanding trials for excommunications and demotions, incessant whining about wanting transparency from the elders, and the allowances made for vitriol and insults to the church....SA is a church trying to be run like a liberal democracy.

There used to be plenty of zealots.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on June 29, 2013, 01:41:00 AM
There used to be plenty of zealots.

Yep. But those people are no longer with us.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on June 29, 2013, 01:44:21 AM
Yep. But those people are no longer with us.

I wonder where they went  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on June 29, 2013, 01:57:16 AM
I wonder where they went  8)

If you stop fighting, people tend to leave.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on June 29, 2013, 05:24:50 AM
There are still plenty of zealots and others who are close, in the church. The recent conflicts have pushed a few a bit further down that path.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on June 30, 2013, 04:14:37 AM
Oh so the Crusade is bigger now.

Cool. Well, Rabisu's on board.
That will change everything!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on June 30, 2013, 04:33:55 AM
We need more dormant characters to wake up! :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Solari on July 01, 2013, 02:59:10 PM
Yes... YEEEESSS... The Austere is eclipsed by the Auspicious and the Maddening, and all heaven and earth are out of harmony. The only thing that can restore balance is blood. Rivers of blood.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on July 01, 2013, 10:34:25 PM
Yes... YEEEESSS... The Austere is eclipsed by the Auspicious and the Maddening, and all heaven and earth are out of harmony. The only thing that can restore balance is blood. Rivers of blood.

And mountains of corpses!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on July 01, 2013, 11:13:02 PM
And mountains of corpses!

And...something else (http://roll1d12.blogspot.com/2013/02/missing-ingredient-for-emergency.html)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 05, 2013, 12:20:28 AM
Rabisu's recent rant, in summary:

If you're not on board with the Crusade, you're trying to destroy the Church (and should be destroyed).

Also, people in SA don't even know there's a Crusade on? OMG people, it's called propaganda. Try it, use it, love it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 05, 2013, 01:41:30 AM
Rabisu's recent rant, in summary:

If you're not on board with the Crusade, you're trying to destroy the Church (and should be destroyed).

Also, people in SA don't even know there's a Crusade on? OMG people, it's called propaganda. Try it, use it, love it.

Rabisu's rant: "How dare you guys not be at war with the realm I refused to declare a crusade against!"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 05, 2013, 02:05:04 AM
One of the reasons he was hesitant to call a Crusade was because once called it can't exactly be un-called (at least not without shame or difficulty). That once called, its a sacred duty for the faithful to follow, regardless of their opinions.

Which is also why he's so fervently in favor of it now.

It's not like he's only going to support a crusade if he's the one to call it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 05, 2013, 03:18:16 AM
One of the reasons he was hesitant to call a Crusade was because once called it can't exactly be un-called (at least not without shame or difficulty). That once called, its a sacred duty for the faithful to follow, regardless of their opinions.

Which is also why he's so fervently in favor of it now.

It's not like he's only going to support a crusade if he's the one to call it.

Of course, but the refusal to call a crusade that so many people wanted, followed by a crusade called by his successor that nobody wanted, helped broaden the rift that now tears in SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 05, 2013, 03:23:09 AM
Of course, but the refusal to call a crusade that so many people wanted, followed by a crusade called by his successor that nobody wanted, helped broaden the rift that now tears in SA.

Less Rabisu's fault, more Medugnatos. They should have just followed tradition and gone with Rabisu's luminary. None of this would have ever happened.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 05, 2013, 03:27:54 AM
Less Rabisu's fault, more Medugnatos. They should have just followed tradition and gone with Rabisu's luminary. None of this would have ever happened.

I'd be inclined to agree. Refusing that crusade made more sense than declaring the Terran one. Now it's just a crusade on a crusade, against crusaders, and that really doesn't seem to have any sort of pull on anyone who wouldn't have responded for secular reasons (like being attacked themselves).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 05, 2013, 03:29:31 AM
I'd be inclined to agree. Refusing that crusade made more sense than declaring the Terran one. Now it's just a crusade on a crusade, against crusaders, and that really doesn't seem to have any sort of pull on anyone who wouldn't have responded for secular reasons (like being attacked themselves).

And now Alaster wants to throw it all away...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 05, 2013, 03:34:02 AM
And now Alaster wants to throw it all away...

Goes to show, doesn't it?

Creating a theocracy in Terran was the first mistake. Putting a Kabrinski in power was the fatal mistake.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on July 05, 2013, 05:28:50 AM
Less Rabisu's fault, more Medugnatos. They should have just followed tradition and gone with Rabisu's luminary. None of this would have ever happened.

If it weren't for the priest protection, Jonsu wouldn't even be in SA: let alone a Luminary. She has too many enemies and too few allies, and is a liability to everyone around her.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on July 05, 2013, 07:26:12 AM
If it weren't for the priest protection, Jonsu wouldn't even be in SA: let alone a Luminary. She has too many enemies and too few allies, and is a liability to everyone around her.

She's pretty useful here in Luria.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on July 05, 2013, 07:29:49 AM
Goes to show, doesn't it?

Creating a theocracy in Terran was the first mistake. Putting a Kabrinski in power was the fatal mistake.

When they put the son of the last woman who tried to conquer Phantaria in power Kale just knew there was no sincere intent on a lasting peace.

Lo and behold like 5 days after he was elected the Kabrinski boy tried to wiggle his way out of the peace treaty and declared that he would not recognize it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 05, 2013, 09:16:37 AM
If it weren't for the priest protection, Jonsu wouldn't even be in SA: let alone a Luminary. She has too many enemies and too few allies, and is a liability to everyone around her.

Amongst your circle perhaps. It was Jonsu who brokered the LN-Niselur alliance you know.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on July 05, 2013, 10:30:01 PM
Amongst your circle perhaps. It was Jonsu who brokered the LN-Niselur alliance you know.

Hah. Hahahaha.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 06, 2013, 12:56:37 AM
When they put the son of the last woman who tried to conquer Phantaria in power Kale just knew there was no sincere intent on a lasting peace.

Lo and behold like 5 days after he was elected the Kabrinski boy tried to wiggle his way out of the peace treaty and declared that he would not recognize it.

Putting a Kabrinski in power was a nice big "FU 'moot! Not only we put a theocracy in republican lands, but we also put the guy who kept trying to destroy you in power! Have fun!" Phantaria was hardly the only one aggravated.

On the other hand, it's almost as if the church wanted to give us a legitimate excuse to pummel down Terran and put that whole drama behind us all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on July 06, 2013, 01:03:01 AM
Putting a Kabrinski in power was a nice big "FU 'moot! Not only we put a theocracy in republican lands, but we also put the guy who kept trying to destroy you in power! Have fun!" Phantaria was hardly the only one aggravated.

It was kind of an accident.

Turin was plan A for ruler, but that kinda fell through.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 06, 2013, 01:04:35 AM
It was kind of an accident.

Turin was plan A for ruler, but that kinda fell through.

"Accident"? Letting such a thing happen is no accident. The elders should have been doing everything in their power to make sure this could never happen. If you didn't plan for this to happen, you still didn't make sure to prevent it...

I'm happier this way, though. :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on July 06, 2013, 01:06:41 AM
"Accident"? Letting such a thing happen is no accident. The elders should have been doing everything in their power to make sure this could never happen. If you didn't plan for this to happen, you still didn't make sure to prevent it...

Why?

Terran isn't dying because of Alaster. It's dying because geopolitics elsewhere made it indefensible. It wouldn't have mattered who ruled it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 06, 2013, 01:07:58 AM
Why?

Terran isn't dying because of Alaster. It's dying because geopolitics elsewhere made it indefensible. It wouldn't have mattered who ruled it.

Certain regional powers might have been more inclined to defend it had it a friendlier face in power. Now, instead, everyone's just eager to see it destroyed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on July 06, 2013, 01:11:16 AM
Certain regional powers might have been more inclined to defend it had it a friendlier face in power. Now, instead, everyone's just eager to see it destroyed.

I doubt that. There wasn't anybody who could have saved Terran from the alliance now assembled.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 06, 2013, 01:12:32 AM
I doubt that. There wasn't anybody who could have saved Terran from the alliance now assembled.

Attacking garrisoned walls is costly. Allies behind the walls could have dissuaded a siege and prompted the alliance to strike softer Astrum lands instead.

Maybe.

Might not have happened, though, but Alaster made sure it never could.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on July 06, 2013, 01:48:15 AM
Terran isn't dying because of Alaster.

You are really underestimating just how much Paul loathes Alaster. I think we would've gone north to party in Eidulb if you'd left literally anyone else in power.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 06, 2013, 02:47:01 AM
Of course, but the refusal to call a crusade that so many people wanted, followed by a crusade called by his successor that nobody wanted, helped broaden the rift that now tears in SA.

That something like this would happen if Rabisu stepped down was one reason he stayed on as long as he did. Everyone wanted a Crusade. Not just one Crusade either. Pretty much any political conflict involving members of the Church had a vocal faction lobbying for Crusade. It's not surprising that one of them succeeded, especially since Jonsu was elbowed out of being the next Light.

How'd that happen anyway? Rabisu groomed her for the position. It would have been like an angrier, female Rabisu.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on July 06, 2013, 02:53:56 AM
You are really underestimating just how much Paul loathes Alaster. I think we would've gone north to party in Eidulb if you'd left literally anyone else in power.
Alaster was the inital reason given for withdrawing from the Theocracies.  We used his appointment to help pitch the idea of becoming a monarchy.

There were other reasons of course, but making Alaster ruler of Terran was the straw that broke the camel's back.  Then there was his indivual threats against Niselurain nobles from Alaster.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vita` on July 06, 2013, 03:02:47 AM
Rabisu not stepping down soon enough denied Jonsu as Light. Rabisu stepped down very soon after the Charter was enacted, which changed Light selection to be done by the fellow Lights, rather than automatically being the Luminary. My character interpreted that as rather intentional on Rabisu's part.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 06, 2013, 03:45:25 AM
Rabisu not stepping down soon enough denied Jonsu as Light. Rabisu stepped down very soon after the Charter was enacted, which changed Light selection to be done by the fellow Lights, rather than automatically being the Luminary. My character interpreted that as rather intentional on Rabisu's part.

Unintentional and coincidental, as it turns out. Rabisu was really out of the loop at the time because he was wandering the desert... which is also to say that I was out of the loop of reading much in BM because I had spotty internet access by then. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on July 06, 2013, 03:54:25 AM
How'd that happen anyway? Rabisu groomed her for the position. It would have been like an angrier, female Rabisu.

If Jonsu had had become a Light, Hireshmont would have schismed right then and there.

Literally, if Jonsu had been Light, there would have already been another Crusade: a Crusade to force the church to kick her out of leadership.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 06, 2013, 04:07:22 AM
Well, Hireshmont may have schismed, but I'm not sure there'd be a crusade.  I mean hardly anyone protested when she was made Luminary, which at the time was essentially the Vice-Light. And judging by past history, when someone wants an Elder out of a position, they make a big fuss about it and try to get a Magistratum, or to get either the Regent or the Prophet involved to fix it. I mean no one launched crusades to get Allison out of power, and she was hated much more.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on July 06, 2013, 04:12:45 AM
Well, Hireshmont may have schismed, but I'm not sure there'd be a crusade.  I mean hardly anyone protested when she was made Luminary, which at the time was essentially the Vice-Light. And judging by past history, when someone wants an Elder out of a position, they make a big fuss about it and try to get a Magistratum, or to get either the Regent or the Prophet involved to fix it. I mean no one launched crusades to get Allison out of power, and she was hated much more.

It was very different when she was chosen as Luminary.

A Magistratum might not have worked; but obviously that would have been step one.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on July 06, 2013, 04:32:24 AM
That something like this would happen if Rabisu stepped down was one reason he stayed on as long as he did. Everyone wanted a Crusade. Not just one Crusade either. Pretty much any political conflict involving members of the Church had a vocal faction lobbying for Crusade. It's not surprising that one of them succeeded, especially since Jonsu was elbowed out of being the next Light.

How'd that happen anyway? Rabisu groomed her for the position. It would have been like an angrier, female Rabisu.

You seem to have seriously underestimated the amount of hostility against Jonsu in the Elders Council; nearly everyone was united in getting her out as soon as possible, and thanks to her tantrum when she wasn't declared Light she provided the perfect opportunity for us.

The only Elder I had expected would speak up for her was Malus, but it appears he didn't feel that strongly about it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 06, 2013, 04:44:24 AM
Literally *no one* wanted to risk Jonsu getting into power. Especially not the Light of the Maddening. Her possible ascension was one of the driving factors of the charter revision.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 06, 2013, 04:49:48 AM
Well, so it's a good thing the Elders got what they wanted. Otherwise who knows what kind of pointless, destructive quagmire might have ensued?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on July 06, 2013, 05:06:39 AM
Well, so it's a good thing the Elders got what they wanted. Otherwise who knows what kind of pointless, destructive quagmire might have ensued?

The hostility towards Jonsu was quite unrelated to question of future crusades, and more based on her personal qualities. The fact that it allowed Medugnatos to call the crusade for Terran was an unintended consequence; indeed there was not even a hint at the possible need for a future crusade when all this took place. Had Rabisu "groomed" any other priest no one would have protested, and we would have had another anti-crusade Light of the Maddening.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 06, 2013, 05:19:32 AM
So much hostility before Jonsu even began to work against the Elders. Flattering really. And to think Jonsu played nice when Mordaunt was running for Regent.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 06, 2013, 05:31:47 AM
The mere fact that Jonsu was an elder was working against the elders.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 06, 2013, 05:35:52 AM
Working against your political agenda you mean.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 06, 2013, 06:14:51 AM
So, there's this (http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Sanguis_Astroism/Writings/Desert_Scrolls) now. It's unfinished.

Yes, I now officially have too much time on my hands.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on July 06, 2013, 07:12:17 AM
So much hostility before Jonsu even began to work against the Elders. Flattering really. And to think Jonsu played nice when Mordaunt was running for Regent.

There is literally nothing to like about Jonsu.

She's like Allison, except without the usefulness, motivational skill, and network of personal loyalties.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on July 06, 2013, 08:35:26 AM
There is literally nothing to like about Jonsu.

She's like Allison, except without the usefulness, motivational skill, and network of personal loyalties.

You really underestimate people you shouldn't underestimate. Jonsu has a plenty large network of personal loyalties.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 06, 2013, 10:12:58 AM
Its one of my favorite things really. Jonsu presents herself as loud and obnoxious out in public, and it causes her to be underestimated. I thoroughly enjoy that, it makes everything I've been doing behind the scenes for the past year soooo much easier. I mean yea, Jonsu pisses people off by being vocal, but those were the same people who took a stand against her long before she was very vocal (save against Allison, and in D'hara).

My advice, watch carefully these coming weeks, big things are happening.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 06, 2013, 02:20:50 PM
It's not the vocal part that puts people off. It's the fact that every time Jonsu opens her mouth, out come insults, scorn, anger, sexually oriented comments, and various vitriolic comments. Up until she got booted from the elders, Jonsu literally showed no knowledge of the stars, no decorum, no civility... nothing but personal attacks against everyone.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 06, 2013, 02:37:38 PM
It's not the vocal part that puts people off. It's the fact that every time Jonsu opens her mouth, out come insults, scorn, anger, sexually oriented comments, and various vitriolic comments. Up until she got booted from the elders, Jonsu literally showed no knowledge of the stars, no decorum, no civility... nothing but personal attacks against everyone.

Its like we are a match made in heaven... :'(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 06, 2013, 04:16:12 PM
Unfortunately for you, I think Jonsu is already married.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: JeVondair on July 06, 2013, 05:35:33 PM
Unfortunately for you, I think Jonsu is already married.

To the dearly departed Sevestan Guile, last ruler of Solaria and Duke of Balance's retreat.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vita` on July 06, 2013, 05:37:31 PM
Was married. Sevastian died from lung disease/failure some time ago.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 06, 2013, 06:17:24 PM
Well, that's good news for Glaumring then. He can get married to Jonsu. A match made in heaven. (Or, rather, a drug-induced haze of delusions.)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 06, 2013, 06:22:44 PM
It's not the vocal part that puts people off. It's the fact that every time Jonsu opens her mouth, out come insults, scorn, anger, sexually oriented comments, and various vitriolic comments. Up until she got booted from the elders, Jonsu literally showed no knowledge of the stars, no decorum, no civility... nothing but personal attacks against everyone.

Now you're getting your timelines twisted. There was a very distinct period where Jonsu stopped exercising decorum and civility with the Elders, and it coincided with the day Medugnatos was made Light. The vitriol, insults, scorn, etc was purely a result of this, because she didn't have to care anymore. Prior to that, I'll agree she wasn't the easiest person to get along with, mostly because she wasn't afraid to call people on their bull!@#$, and when you have a group of elders who are notorious for flip flopping on issues when its convenient, those calls are going to get made.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on July 06, 2013, 08:15:15 PM
ZING!11
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 06, 2013, 08:31:04 PM
No, Jonsu was that way since the beginning. She's always been a crass, crude bitch. She just got worse after she got spurned.

Why do you think no one wanted her as Light in the first place? It hadn't little to nothing to do with politics. (Except perhaps for Vellos.) It was because of her complete lack of civility and decorum. This was only proven by the way she reacted to not being promoted.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on July 07, 2013, 03:52:01 AM
No, Jonsu was that way since the beginning. She's always been a crass, crude bitch. She just got worse after she got spurned.

Why do you think no one wanted her as Light in the first place? It hadn't little to nothing to do with politics. (Except perhaps for Vellos.) It was because of her complete lack of civility and decorum. This was only proven by the way she reacted to not being promoted.

No, even for Hireshmont, it was a personality thing. Admittedly he also thought she might be an Aurvandil agent, but he thinks that about Rabisu too and didn't complain.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 08, 2013, 04:36:01 AM
Following the battle in Donghai and the initiation of the Lurian takeover attempt...

Quote
Rabisu spoke to a crowd of thousands, and his voice carried out even to the back rows, so furious was his strength.

"...The unbelievers attack us. Yea, the unbelievers rob and pillage, grasping towards the very things they worship - food, coin, wealth. These are their gods! Power is their idol, and theft is their veneration! What care they of the Holy Lands, except as targets of plunder and opportunity? Why should they? Behold, then, man as he is without the Bloodstars - deeply lost. Even their armies are turned to mere banditry. They might be victorious here, and win a battle there, but will they win in the end? No. They cannot. And I speak not only of the men and materiel required to achieve strategic success, though they lack these things as well. I speak of the power granted by true worship, the Divinity that only the path of the Bloodstars can achieve. Without it they are but dogs, Lurian dogs, soon driven away by true-believing Men! Should we fear them? No, I say! We should pity them! For they oppose the will of the Holy Prophet, and oppose the armies of the Faith! This Church is the single greatest force upon this world! No religion has surpassed its might! No faith has grander or more numerous temples! And no faith has a greater grasp on Truth itself! Indeed, they should fear us - and, my brothers, they do, I assure you! Why, just hours ago they tried to arrest me! Me, a single, unarmed man in a robe! Is it the fierce color of my cloth they fear? Is it my voice? No. It is that I speak the truth, and represent the truth, and they have only delusions and falsehoods to guide them. In the end, nothing can be greater than the Truth. The Truth burns out heretics, tumbles kingdoms, and puts whole armies to rout! Where the Truth shines, no darkness can be found! Therefore we have nothing to fear from these highwaymen, and they have everything to fear from the faith! They may set foot upon the holy lands of the Empire of Morek - indeed they may even come to visit the First Temple, but if they do admire its glory, they cannot understand it. Resist the unbelievers, and take heart, knowing that their soldiers will not win them lasting victory, and that the treasures they may carry away will be as worthless as ash."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on July 08, 2013, 05:37:59 AM
A Lurian takeover in Donghai? How's that even possible?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on July 08, 2013, 06:10:26 AM
A Lurian takeover in Donghai? How's that even possible?

Sea travel, I imagine. Assuming it succeeds, the region will probably revolt in short order given the distance from the Lurian capital.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on July 08, 2013, 06:19:00 AM
Sea travel, I imagine. Assuming it succeeds, the region will probably revolt in short order given the distance from the Lurian capital.
Unless they intend to setup a colony.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on July 08, 2013, 06:22:42 AM
Unless they intend to setup a colony.

Good luck with that :p There is no colony take over in place.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on July 08, 2013, 06:24:10 AM
Unless they intend to setup a colony.

They would have to take Donghaiwei first and then hold it long enough for it to secede. I do not think that would be possible.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on July 08, 2013, 06:38:13 AM
And there is no sea zone bordering both LN and Morek...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 08, 2013, 06:41:55 AM
They don't need one. A realm with a coast can takeover any coastal region.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on July 16, 2013, 01:55:52 AM
Mathurin Hossenfeffer is nowhere to be found...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on July 16, 2013, 01:59:41 AM
The prophet's account was deleted in the purge?  I guess there will be no word from the prophet on this situation.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on July 16, 2013, 02:20:27 AM
Was it deleted? I thought his characters were just paused...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lefanis on July 16, 2013, 02:23:34 AM
Was it deleted? I thought his characters were just paused...
Probably paused. I see his character isn't on the SA rolls anymore.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on July 16, 2013, 03:23:13 AM
he auto paused with the rest of them.   


I was briefly toying with the idea of banning him, arresting him and executing him while he sat alone in Terrans capitol for weeks on end.  I never followed through, but the idea did cross my mind. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 16, 2013, 03:25:05 AM
he auto paused with the rest of them.   


I was briefly toying with the idea of banning him, arresting him and executing him while he sat alone in Terrans capitol for weeks on end.  I never followed through, but the idea did cross my mind.

Oh, the hillarity of what could have been...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on July 16, 2013, 04:26:39 AM
he auto paused with the rest of them.   

I am totally not gonna make any accusations but if, if Mathurin turns out to be one of Mendicant's multis my head will literally explode like in Scanners.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on July 16, 2013, 05:15:43 PM
I am totally not gonna make any accusations but if, if Mathurin turns out to be one of Mendicant's multis my head will literally explode like in Scanners.

I think it's just that the cleanup code was broken.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 16, 2013, 10:59:47 PM
I think it's just that the cleanup code was broken.

Agreed. I doubt a player like Mendicant would be able to play a character like Mathurin.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Perth on July 16, 2013, 11:52:03 PM
The prophet's account was deleted in the purge?  I guess there will be no word from the prophet on this situation.

Perfect time for a new Prophet/Pope!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sarwell on July 17, 2013, 02:24:07 PM
Perfect time for a new Prophet/Pope!

Yeah, do they even have a procedure ready for when things like this happen?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on July 17, 2013, 02:27:22 PM
Yeah, do they even have a procedure ready for when things like this happen?

There's been a Regent in place for years. A Prophet is not needed for the faith to function.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 17, 2013, 03:30:52 PM
There's been a Regent in place for years. A Prophet is not needed for the faith to function.

Because its functioning so well!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on July 17, 2013, 03:40:43 PM
Because its functioning so well!

.... to function as it has been functioning previously!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 17, 2013, 06:09:17 PM
Because its functioning so well!
It actually functions very well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on July 17, 2013, 07:17:24 PM
To bad Allison is gone!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 17, 2013, 07:24:36 PM
Maybe it's time to reveal that Rabisu has been having visions.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 18, 2013, 12:02:25 PM
It actually functions very well.

Yea, how's that going for Astrum?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 18, 2013, 12:45:58 PM
Not too badly yet. But that's not a problem with the church itself. That's opportunistic expansionism, masquerading under a religious cloak.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 18, 2013, 12:47:44 PM
Not too badly yet. But that's not a problem with the church itself. That's opportunistic expansionism, masquerading under a religious cloak.

No, this is the backlash from the Church's mismanagement.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 18, 2013, 03:34:30 PM
Not too badly yet. But that's not a problem with the church itself. That's opportunistic expansionism, masquerading under a religious cloak.

Basically described Astrum...  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on July 18, 2013, 03:55:47 PM
Yes, and pious Asylon is only concerned with the well-being of the Church ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 18, 2013, 04:59:38 PM
Yes, and pious Asylon is only concerned with the well-being of the Church ::)

We are not a theocracy...  ???

In our realm we have Verdis Elementum, Truinists, Cult of Bloodmoon and Sanguis Astroists. Our kingdom has had a different history and way of dealing with our being the nexus point between everything. We were not blessed with the massive influx of nobles Morek and Astrum had to bolster their faith back in the days when none opposed their rise. Asylon has had to cobble together a disparate group of nobles under one flag, bind different thoughts together under one king and survive against almost insurmountable odds.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 18, 2013, 06:02:35 PM
No, this is the backlash from the Church's mismanagement.
No, that's just an excuse. Certain people are bored, or need to distract their nobility with an external focus. So, classic maneuver: start a war. Most of the realm nobility follow along.

Certain other people are angry that their individual agenda was not adopted. Or that they didn't get the power/position they feel they deserved.

And some people just have a persecution complex, and lash out mindlessly. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 18, 2013, 06:03:55 PM
Basically described Astrum...  ;D
Astrum does not masquerade at all. Astrum, and the church, has never made any secret of the fact that they desire to expand the influence of the church to cover the whole island. We've been very open and honest about it, all along.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 18, 2013, 06:12:53 PM
Astrum does not masquerade at all. Astrum, and the church, has never made any secret of the fact that they desire to expand the influence of the church to cover the whole island. We've been very open and honest about it, all along.

Oh come now Indirik I was merely joking. Everyone knows your are wrapped in the cloak of religion and then wrapped in another cloak and then another and another and another until your are wrapped in ten thousand cloaks of religious fervour.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 18, 2013, 06:16:07 PM
No, that's just an excuse. Certain people are bored, or need to distract their nobility with an external focus. So, classic maneuver: start a war. Most of the realm nobility follow along.

Certain other people are angry that their individual agenda was not adopted. Or that they didn't get the power/position they feel they deserved.

And some people just have a persecution complex, and lash out mindlessly. ;)

And they were handed the best of reasons by the Church. There were plenty of other wars brewing elsewhere with several of the participants. The church blundering about doing what it pleased with no thought of the consequences has brought this about.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on July 18, 2013, 06:22:22 PM
In other news, Paganism is quickly spreading throughout the Farronite Republic while the war lasts. In a few short weeks, FR will no longer be an SA-dominated realm. The question now is: how long can the Asylon-FR-Niselur alliance maintain that it's not seeking to destroy SA?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on July 18, 2013, 06:34:53 PM
And they were handed the best of reasons by the Church. There were plenty of other wars brewing elsewhere with several of the participants. The church blundering about doing what it pleased with no thought of the consequences has brought this about.

It's only a blunder if they lose. If they win, it was a stroke of genius to lure their reckless rivals into running off a cliff. Perspective!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 18, 2013, 06:37:55 PM
SA trolls Dwilight! :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 18, 2013, 07:48:36 PM
In other news, Paganism is quickly spreading throughout the Farronite Republic while the war lasts. In a few short weeks, FR will no longer be an SA-dominated realm. The question now is: how long can the Asylon-FR-Niselur alliance maintain that it's not seeking to destroy SA?

lol how would we destroy SA? Its about as ridiculous as having Morek march on Asylon to destroy CoB. Dwilight is far too big yet probably not as big as your sensationalist forum propaganda. How does Asylon destroy SA while temples and followers still do what they do freely in Asylon? Hilarious. This war is to see the stranglehold Astrum has on the north west loosened, that is all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 18, 2013, 11:04:43 PM
The silly thing is, you don't realize that while one end of the noose may be around your neck, the other end is in your own hand.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on July 18, 2013, 11:13:11 PM
In other news, Paganism is quickly spreading throughout the Farronite Republic while the war lasts. In a few short weeks, FR will no longer be an SA-dominated realm. The question now is: how long can the Asylon-FR-Niselur alliance maintain that it's not seeking to destroy SA?

I can not speak on behalf of the Farronites or Niselur, but Asylon has no intention of destroying SA, our enemy is Astrum, and I do not deny that I would like to see them broken.

I have even given orderst that NO SA temples shall be harmed by Asylonian nobles, such action WILL be punished.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 18, 2013, 11:35:45 PM
The silly thing is, you don't realize that while one end of the noose may be around your neck, the other end is in your own hand.

We arent here to be the last kingdom standing, we are here to have fun making a stand.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on July 18, 2013, 11:45:20 PM
The silly thing is, you don't realize that while one end of the noose may be around your neck, the other end is in your own hand.

Realms comes and goes, our will crumble to dust eventually aswell, but atleast we enjoy ours while it last.

and tbh, every turn we still stand at the moment, is one turn more then most players on this forum ever thought we would last.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 19, 2013, 12:23:06 AM
Born to lose baby! 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on July 19, 2013, 12:26:23 AM
If you've played Dwarf Fortress, you know where this leads.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Telrunya on July 19, 2013, 12:35:45 AM
Rampaging elephants and lots of lava?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on July 19, 2013, 12:37:05 AM
Pull the lever! Kill the demon elephants with LAVA!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on July 19, 2013, 01:01:42 AM
In other news, Paganism is quickly spreading throughout the Farronite Republic while the war lasts. In a few short weeks, FR will no longer be an SA-dominated realm.

Err.... wut? I looked at a spread report not too long ago, I don't think this is true.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on July 19, 2013, 01:56:47 AM
Err.... wut? I looked at a spread report not too long ago, I don't think this is true.

He's confused. If he were talking a couple weeks ago, when that religion losing followers bug was hitting, then he'd be right. But that was a bug.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 19, 2013, 03:59:54 AM
If you've played Dwarf Fortress, you know where this leads.

Huge DF fan... Its how I play BM , build stuff just to watch it crash.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on July 19, 2013, 03:46:40 PM
Realms comes and goes, our will crumble to dust eventually aswell, but atleast we enjoy ours while it last.

and tbh, every turn we still stand at the moment, is one turn more then most players on this forum ever thought we would last.

You act like the entire world is against Asylon, but it would really just ignore you if you didn't absolutely insist on poking it repeatedly with a sharp stick.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 19, 2013, 09:21:56 PM
You act like the entire world is against Asylon, but it would really just ignore you if you didn't absolutely insist on poking it repeatedly with a sharp stick.

Yeah they'd really just ignore us if we decided not to play... What a silly thing to say, we dont want to be ignored thats why we are constantly in your face annoying you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on July 19, 2013, 10:10:47 PM
Yeah they'd really just ignore us if we decided not to play... What a silly thing to say, we dont want to be ignored thats why we are constantly in your face annoying you.

I know that. I don't mind it either (it keeps things interesting), I just find the forum attitudes you have to be a little bewildering sometimes. In no way is Asylon some sort of persecuted underdog. They're the pitbull that latches onto your leg and won't let go for love or money. Sure, you can club it off eventually, but the damn thing keeps coming back at you as if you had a steak stuffed in your pant leg.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 19, 2013, 10:16:39 PM
Quit stuffing steaks down your pants!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on July 19, 2013, 11:33:59 PM
Maybe it's time to reveal that Rabisu has been having visions.
Do it :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on July 19, 2013, 11:39:56 PM
I know that. I don't mind it either (it keeps things interesting), I just find the forum attitudes you have to be a little bewildering sometimes. In no way is Asylon some sort of persecuted underdog. They're the pitbull that latches onto your leg and won't let go for love or money. Sure, you can club it off eventually, but the damn thing keeps coming back at you as if you had a steak stuffed in your pant leg.

Cheerio mate =D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 20, 2013, 01:56:22 AM
I know that. I don't mind it either (it keeps things interesting), I just find the forum attitudes you have to be a little bewildering sometimes. In no way is Asylon some sort of persecuted underdog. They're the pitbull that latches onto your leg and won't let go for love or money. Sure, you can club it off eventually, but the damn thing keeps coming back at you as if you had a steak stuffed in your pant leg.

Funny thats how we feel about Astrum.  :'(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 20, 2013, 01:59:13 AM
The silly thing is the pitbull is the one constantly complaining about the guy shoving his leg in the pitbull's mouth.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 20, 2013, 03:47:50 AM
Because we are pitbulls who want hugs...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on July 20, 2013, 04:16:57 AM
So, the Prophet just disappeared...

any idea if he's paused or deleted?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 20, 2013, 04:36:02 AM
Paused. The account, and characters, still exists.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 22, 2013, 05:11:37 PM
It's gotten really quite boring to be in SA. Unless you're an Elder, I'm guessing, with all those lively closed-door discussions. I've tried to get one or two things started and it's just going nowhere.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 22, 2013, 05:32:06 PM
Now you know...  :'(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on July 22, 2013, 05:34:45 PM
It's gotten really quite boring to be in SA. Unless you're an Elder, I'm guessing, with all those lively closed-door discussions. I've tried to get one or two things started and it's just going nowhere.

With the faithful being split in two opposed camps, I'm guessing there are not many comfortable topics for the full members channel. This is the perfect time to rekindle intra-realm activity.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 22, 2013, 06:20:00 PM
Trying to start anything in the full members channel is a recipe for disaster. Who wants to log in one day and see 245 messages of ridiculous arguments? Given the extreme partisan nature of the church right now, having a civil discussion is simply impossible.

And, for the record, nothing is really happening among the elders, either. What's there to discuss? Everyone has already picked their sides.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 22, 2013, 06:37:27 PM
The thing I tried to start was with a letter to Constantine, who promptly ignored it so eh.

I've got a whole like book of stuff written (on the wiki), not having anything to do with the splitting or whatever, but no one's read it (as far as I know) let alone let it spark any dialogue at all. If there really are partisan sides, zealous and uncomfortable topics... nobody's mentioned them. Even Jonsu proclaiming herself Regent provoked a big "meh" reaction. I don't think any of the Elders even noticed. Everyone's asleep.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 22, 2013, 06:47:55 PM
That happened while I was unable to do more than Quickplay for a period of four or so days. I personally had no intention of reading 450+ messages to dive into the whole thing.

It is being reacted to, just slowly.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on July 22, 2013, 07:54:50 PM
The thing I tried to start was with a letter to Constantine, who promptly ignored it so eh.

I've got a whole like book of stuff written (on the wiki), not having anything to do with the splitting or whatever, but no one's read it (as far as I know) let alone let it spark any dialogue at all. If there really are partisan sides, zealous and uncomfortable topics... nobody's mentioned them. Even Jonsu proclaiming herself Regent provoked a big "meh" reaction. I don't think any of the Elders even noticed. Everyone's asleep.
I've read your stuff, after all my character is interested in prophecies.  As far as debate about prophecy, I'm doing it quietly.

As your character mentioned earlier, people are afraid to debate on faith in fear of uniting one side against them, thus the lack of debate.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 22, 2013, 10:30:07 PM
The elders probably don't want to make a fuss about Jonsu, because they can't actually do anything to her, and thus it'd be a battle they can't win.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 22, 2013, 11:57:47 PM
Oh no, that's not it at all. It will move forward. The vote is already started, and it is pretty clear which way it will go.

Have fun, Daycryn. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 24, 2013, 06:49:20 AM
Oh no, that's not it at all. It will move forward. The vote is already started, and it is pretty clear which way it will go.

Have fun, Daycryn. ;)

Oh dear.

I think Rabisu just needs to stay away from priestesses in the future. Never turns out good.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 24, 2013, 12:36:58 PM
Is LN's judge even of SA? Does this mean that, when dealing with non-SA realms, a non-SA noble would have a 1/3 say on whether people are heretics or not?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on July 24, 2013, 12:50:23 PM
Is LN's judge even of SA?

Yes, she is.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 24, 2013, 12:58:17 PM
Yes, she is.

If she had not been, would she have been made a magistrate anyways?

Seems a little silly to use the judge rule with non-theocracies...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on July 24, 2013, 01:17:06 PM
If she had not been, would she have been made a magistrate anyways?

Seems a little silly to use the judge rule with non-theocracies...

The rules say no.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vita` on July 24, 2013, 05:34:23 PM
I *think* Lucini is a novice, not a full member.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 24, 2013, 05:58:57 PM
An Aspirant, actually.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 24, 2013, 06:11:10 PM
If she had not been, would she have been made a magistrate anyways?

Seems a little silly to use the judge rule with non-theocracies...
No, she would not have been. In that case, I *think* the charter says that the Lights pick a suitable alternative. You'd have to go check the wiki to be sure.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on July 24, 2013, 06:15:11 PM
No, she would not have been. In that case, I *think* the charter says that the Lights pick a suitable alternative. You'd have to go check the wiki to be sure.

The charter actually says nothing whatsoever about how to pick magistrates. There is a parallel set of rules written here:

http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Sanguis_Astroism/The_Magistratum

Is it binding? Who knows!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 24, 2013, 06:19:30 PM
Oh. Derp. I should have known that, I wrote it... :(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Hroppa on July 24, 2013, 06:35:16 PM
I know that I skip most messages from SA these days.

Makes me wonder if there might not be a readership for a newsletter summarising the week's communications in SA...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 24, 2013, 06:39:43 PM
I know that I skip most messages from SA these days.

Makes me wonder if there might not be a readership for a newsletter summarising the week's communications in SA...

Undoubtedly.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on July 24, 2013, 07:09:20 PM
I have specifically not joined SA because I don't want to read all the letters.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vita` on July 24, 2013, 07:25:02 PM
There is a special aspirant rank for believers who don't want the full member conversations. Unfortunately, many of the recent converts insist on talking in the everyone channel lately...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 24, 2013, 08:15:50 PM
It's really not all that busy these days.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on July 24, 2013, 08:54:43 PM
There is a special aspirant rank for believers who don't want the full member conversations. Unfortunately, many of the recent converts insist on talking in the everyone channel lately...

Probably because no one has promoted them...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vita` on July 24, 2013, 09:01:55 PM
I thought they hadn't asked for promotion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 24, 2013, 11:20:04 PM
Its all apart of the system man. The corrupt elders are just trying to keep the brothas down.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 25, 2013, 01:49:37 AM
Everyone gets auto-promoted to Novice. Then anyone who asks gets full member, but they need to ask.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 25, 2013, 01:59:03 AM
I enjoyed the letters in SA. I dont understand why people dont like reading things in BM... Its a text game...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 25, 2013, 02:12:38 AM
I enjoyed the letters in SA. I dont understand why people dont like reading things in BM... Its a text game...

Too much of the same thing, of the same arguments being repeated again and again.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on July 25, 2013, 02:47:21 AM
Too much of the same thing, of the same arguments being repeated again and again.

You wouldn't know anything about that now would you? ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 25, 2013, 03:20:13 AM
You wouldn't know anything about that now would you? ;)

I don't really participate in SA talks much. And I'd say it's a whole new ball game when it's done by 5 people at a time, 20 messages per day each, each message being essentially the same.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on July 25, 2013, 06:52:17 AM
Might be less active for a little while. Was very close to being killed today when I got electrocuted by 13800 volts at work. Minor Burns on both hands as the voltage passed through my body and across my chest.

Seem to be doing fine and had an unexpectedly lucky spell. I was even blown off my ladder and landed on my feet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 25, 2013, 09:32:36 AM
Might be less active for a little while. Was very close to being killed today when I got electrocuted by 13800 volts at work. Minor Burns on both hands as the voltage passed through my body and across my chest.

Seem to be doing fine and had an unexpectedly lucky spell. I was even blown off my ladder and landed on my feet.

Take care, electrocution is no joke. My old man is an electrician/relsy tech and has had his fair share of close calls. And at the risk of sounding like countless NCOs and officers I've known... Drink water.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: egamma on July 25, 2013, 02:32:41 PM
Take care, electrocution is no joke. My old man is an electrician/relsy tech and has had his fair share of close calls. And at the risk of sounding like countless NCOs and officers I've known... Drink water.

And..let us know if you develop superpowers. (http://marvel.wikia.com/Maxwell_Dillon_%28Earth-616%29)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on July 25, 2013, 04:45:04 PM
And..let us know if you develop superpowers. (http://marvel.wikia.com/Maxwell_Dillon_%28Earth-616%29)

That's a distinct possibility because when I replay the event in my head in no situation do I make it out with as little damage as I did. With that amount of voltage I should be dead.

The Bloodstars must have guided me!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on July 25, 2013, 05:20:17 PM
That's a distinct possibility because when I replay the event in my head in no situation do I make it out with as little damage as I did. With that amount of voltage I should be dead.

The Bloodstars must have guided me!

Near death experiences are sobering, aren't they? When I had mine I wasn't right for several days afterward... Couldn't stop thinking about it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 26, 2013, 06:27:29 AM
That's a distinct possibility because when I replay the event in my head in no situation do I make it out with as little damage as I did. With that amount of voltage I should be dead.

The Bloodstars must have guided me!

They've given you a second chance to set right the terrible wrongs of the Elders.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 30, 2013, 09:39:51 AM
Heated discussion, threats are made, passions flare and the tension comes to a boil in the Magistratum!

Actually none of those things.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on July 30, 2013, 12:46:52 PM
Heated discussion, threats are made, passions flare and the tension comes to a boil in the Magistratum!

Actually none of those things.
I've seen no discussion, mind you that I'm not a full member.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on July 30, 2013, 05:29:04 PM
I've seen no discussion, mind you that I'm not a full member.

The Magistrates discuss and decide the case amongst themselves in private. Not even the other elders are privy to what unspeakable things go on in a Magistratum. And it's quite saucy.
I mean like literal sauce. We ordered a pizza.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on July 30, 2013, 07:42:38 PM
The Magistrates discuss and decide the case amongst themselves in private. Not even the other elders are privy to what unspeakable things go on in a Magistratum. And it's quite saucy.
I mean like literal sauce. We ordered a pizza.
That is great. ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on July 31, 2013, 03:34:17 AM
The Magistrates discuss and decide the case amongst themselves in private. Not even the other elders are privy to what unspeakable things go on in a Magistratum. And it's quite saucy.
I mean like literal sauce. We ordered a pizza.

Lurian Luigis delivery! One pepperoni and rufie pizza for a Rabisu Daycrn? That'll be 5 gold.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Frostwood on July 31, 2013, 04:53:20 AM
The Magistrates discuss and decide the case amongst themselves in private. Not even the other elders are privy to what unspeakable things go on in a Magistratum. And it's quite saucy.
I mean like literal sauce. We ordered a pizza.
Are we talking about a virtual pizza, or literal pizza? ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on October 30, 2013, 01:40:19 AM
Sadly the great Pierre Von Genf has died in battle against the Lurians while defending his capital, Qubel Lighthouse. The particular man responsible for his death is Aldrakar Renodin, the Imperial Marshal of Luria Nova. Nobles all over Dwilight mourn over the great loss, albeit no time is wasted getting back to business as well as his duties now need to be fulfilled with his absence.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ironsides on October 30, 2013, 02:05:47 AM
Sadly the great Pierre Von Genf has died in battle against the Lurians while defending his capital, Qubel Lighthouse. The particular man responsible for his death is Aldrakar Renodin, the Imperial Marshal of Luria Nova. Nobles all over Dwilight mourn over the great loss, albeit no time is wasted getting back to business as well as his duties now need to be fulfilled with his absence.

Nooo! Not von Genf! *Grief
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on November 22, 2013, 07:53:30 PM
How often does Mathurin go inactive?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on November 22, 2013, 11:00:16 PM
Mathurin has been paused for quite some time. All of his characters are paused. He's done this twice. Not sure if he will ever come back.

http://battlemaster.org/UserDetails.php?ID=348
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on January 10, 2014, 04:51:28 AM
Given that there are only two remaining Theocracies, and Astrum, I am told, is about to be crushed (with Morek sure to follow, neh?); Mathurin's absence seems permanent (Rabisu has long believed, but never told anyone, that he is dead); and even though in terms of number and sizes of temples, shrines, and common followers the Church is greater than ever, one must nevertheless look about and ask: is Sanguis Astroism dying?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on January 10, 2014, 05:13:11 AM
Given that there are only two remaining Theocracies, and Astrum, I am told, is about to be crushed (with Morek sure to follow, neh?); Mathurin's absence seems permanent (Rabisu has long believed, but never told anyone, that he is dead); and even though in terms of number and sizes of temples, shrines, and common followers the Church is greater than ever, one must nevertheless look about and ask: is Sanguis Astroism dying?

*coughCorsanctumcough*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on January 10, 2014, 06:21:06 AM
Well everything is dying so no one should be surprised. We are losing about 20 players(give or take 5) per month so it is not really anything to be surprised about when you see SA dying.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 10, 2014, 08:06:27 AM
Given that there are only two remaining Theocracies, and Astrum, I am told, is about to be crushed (with Morek sure to follow, neh?); Mathurin's absence seems permanent (Rabisu has long believed, but never told anyone, that he is dead); and even though in terms of number and sizes of temples, shrines, and common followers the Church is greater than ever, one must nevertheless look about and ask: is Sanguis Astroism dying?

Morek isn't in danger at all. They're all the way across the sea even if Niselur and Asylon wanted to get at them the best they could manage is sending a few harassing raids when they're feeling bored.

Astrum is working on a peace agreement, but even if that fails we probably wont be destroyed outright because there are quite a few places we can turtle up and Morek and Corsanctum can continue backing us.

The end of the Northern Astroist Federation may end up leading to a very exciting time for Sanguis Astroism. I look forward to many rebellions and civil wars (duchy secessions) started by religeous fanatics to reestablish theocracies or even create new ones.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 10, 2014, 01:03:15 PM
one must nevertheless look about and ask: is Sanguis Astroism dying?
SA is transitioning into the same bland, boring, pointless religion as every other religion in the game. It is becoming something that people join just to be in it, but ignore. Or at best pay lip service to it. In that sense, yes it is dying. It will linger on for quite some time as a shadow of what it used to be. But no one outside it really cares about it anymore.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 10, 2014, 02:22:53 PM
SA is transitioning into the same bland, boring, pointless religion as every other religion in the game. It is becoming something that people join just to be in it, but ignore. Or at best pay lip service to it. In that sense, yes it is dying. It will linger on for quite some time as a shadow of what it used to be. But no one outside it really cares about it anymore.


You know you are starting to sound like me now right? I'm glad that we can finally agree on something. I ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 10, 2014, 05:30:27 PM
You know you are starting to sound like me now right? I'm glad that we can finally agree on something. I ;D
Craaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaap! >:(

This has really been the point of the war that Niselur started: To turn the church into a powerless/pointless entity. Just look at the peace terms that Niselur is demanding, and you can see it all spelled out.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: D`Este on January 10, 2014, 05:41:48 PM
Oh really? You blame Niselur?

The church and astrum have taken zero incentive during the war to solve the situation. You could have gotten far and far better terms regarding land, you could already have had Niselur back in the church. But that you failed at doing so, that truly demonstrates the lack of commitment in the church and the attitude in this game. Only black and freaking white, no grey, no middle way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on January 10, 2014, 06:15:41 PM
Why is it the Church, of all entities, that must be "gray" and have a "middle way," while the same is apparently not expected of Niselur? I could just as easily say, "You could have not left the Church at all" and I'd be more correct because that is the direct cause of all the war to follow. I mean you talk about "lack of commitment in the Church," it doesn't get any more noncommitted than "hey let's follow a heretic as he leaves the church and declares war on its theocracies."

SA has been far, far too compromising, too gray, too lenient. No backbone.

I think it's time for that to change.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on January 10, 2014, 06:36:42 PM
Oh really? You blame Niselur?

"Blame"?

Turn it around, it seems to me like he's saying you've won.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 10, 2014, 06:51:58 PM
Oh really? You blame Niselur?
Well of course. But not completely. Niselur did, after all, declare a war with the *exact* intent to reduce the power of the church and the theocracies. Niselur's explicitly stated intent, at the beginning of the war, was to throw off the chains of the church, and establish their power as an entity independent of the church. The treaty that Niselur has proposed is something that Leopold probably dreamed of when he started the war. He wouldn't have stopped there, though. He would have subjugated Astrum, and then kept on with the war against the church. Fulco isn't as obviously ambitious as Leopold was. Or at least not as transparent. The fact that Fulco, the king who rules at the end of the war, wasn't the one that clicked the "Declare war!" link doesn't change the intent behind how the war started. It just changes how it ends. Maybe.

Niselur isn't completely to blame in this. I am quite certain that there was a lot of collusion with the leaders of Asylon and the Farronites in this. They both wanted Astrum taken down for their own reasons. And they certainly succeeded, that's for sure.

The church also has some blame in the situation leading up to the war, and its outcome. I imagine we could really come up with some good ways that the church failed and contributed to the situation.

However... Let's not forget that Leopold specifically and intentionally engineered this war as a war against SA. He did everything he could, very cleverly, and very deliberately, to bring about the situation that has now evolved. He just lacked the persistence to see it through.

Quote
The church and astrum have taken zero incentive during the war to solve the situation.
Well that's certainly not true. The church bent over backward to stop the war before it started. The church went to extreme lengths to placate Leopold. Leopold didn't want that, though. He specifically wanted a war.

I will definitely agree that Astrum wasn't very communicative, and cooperative in bringing about the end of the war. I think a lot of the higher-ups in Astrum were wearing blinders. There was not much in the way of discussion about how bad things really were. I'm guilty of that, too, I know. I really haven't been very involved in Brance lately, and let a lot of things slide.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lorgan on January 10, 2014, 07:26:00 PM
Ahhh... the blame game.

As an outsider, it seems pretty obvious to me that the Church has aligned itself with her theocracies since... forever. It's only logical that when those theocracies (or at least Astrum) finally started losing in stead of conquering everything in their path, the Church's authority would diminish accordingly. No big surprise, no poor gameplay, just exactly what would have happened in the real world where, believe it or not, piety has never been an inherent trait of the upper classes. Except in the real world the church authority would probably find a way to compromise... just sayin'.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daimall on January 10, 2014, 09:00:09 PM
Leopold did have some far reaching ambitions I have to admit, in secret talks with my character, he mentioned that he wanted to resurrect the Dalian Kingdom and I assume at that time the old Duke of Valkyria was one of the last members or elites of that Kingdom. Of course with Leopold gone, it seems that person is gone as well so so much for that plan. Too bad he had to go inactive for everything to turn around in Niselur, after all, he had been completely silent and demoralized in the closing days of his reign.

You have to admit though that not just Leopold wanted war, a ton of other people whether OOC/IC wanted the war to happen. After all, if he accepted the offer from the church, it would of secured another "peace within our time" and likely that no wars would of rocked the northern Dwilight for some time to come, thus leading to more stagnation.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 10, 2014, 09:29:18 PM
The wars have been good for Dwilight and ultimately will lead to soul searching for SA. I know many will look and or act/say this is the end etc but often its times like these where a realm or characters can rise like a pheonix and make this a part of their character RP and history. I think this is an awesome time for Astrum and its players, now they have a goal, they have a drive, they have history and culture and they can be like the underdog and reorder things and create a new narrative one where their great and ancient civilization fell to foreign barbarians in the west. Its almost a Roman narrative of history. If you are playing BM souly to win then you are not paying enough attentiom to who your character is. Glaumring isnt great because of how awesome he is but by how frail and with foible his history has been. His entire history is clawing upward and failing and getting back up and fighting. This is Astrum now bloodied but unbowed. I know many of you will cry into pillows and quit or not log on as much because victory and gold and glory were what defined you, that when it comes down to it you were just here for yourself. For the ones who take this time in history and use it to enrich their characters and RP this is the best time to be active because drama and travesty, tragedy are the greatest stories ever written. And I know that many of you still have fight in you and its been a pleasure to take on Astrum and after years of failure finally actually winning. If you think it has only been tough for Astrum remember that Asylon was for much of history a pathetic backwater.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on January 10, 2014, 10:12:15 PM
Leopold did have some far reaching ambitions I have to admit, in secret talks with my character, he mentioned that he wanted to resurrect the Dalian Kingdom and I assume at that time the old Duke of Valkyria was one of the last members or elites of that Kingdom. Of course with Leopold gone, it seems that person is gone as well so so much for that plan. Too bad he had to go inactive for everything to turn around in Niselur, after all, he had been completely silent and demoralized in the closing days of his reign.

You have to admit though that not just Leopold wanted war, a ton of other people whether OOC/IC wanted the war to happen. After all, if he accepted the offer from the church, it would of secured another "peace within our time" and likely that no wars would of rocked the northern Dwilight for some time to come, thus leading to more stagnation.

He was really upset about people not joining Niselur when the war started. Don't know about him but I busied myself getting people left and right. Though most of those people have either moved to other realms and quit the game after I paused :( The war was really fun though. Doubt I will ever be able to devote myself to another war. I can only play as silent zombie characters these days  :o
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daimall on January 10, 2014, 10:32:17 PM
From what I heard he was trying to get people to join to actively, but had little success apparently from his outlets. The ironic thing was that once Fulco came to power we suddenly started having an influx of nobles, whether from defeated realms or new players.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BarticaBoat on January 10, 2014, 11:30:19 PM
Why is it the Church, of all entities, that must be "gray" and have a "middle way," while the same is apparently not expected of Niselur? I could just as easily say, "You could have not left the Church at all" and I'd be more correct because that is the direct cause of all the war to follow. I mean you talk about "lack of commitment in the Church," it doesn't get any more noncommitted than "hey let's follow a heretic as he leaves the church and declares war on its theocracies."

SA has been far, far too compromising, too gray, too lenient. No backbone.

I think it's time for that to change.
this. all the way. like in astrum when i suggested we burn asylon to the ground to prove a point i was met with "we've completed our objectives in this war". then when rumors of niselur vassalizing libero surfaced i suggested we do so first and was met with silence.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 11, 2014, 12:02:02 AM
this. all the way. like in astrum when i suggested we burn asylon to the ground to prove a point i was met with "we've completed our objectives in this war". then when rumors of niselur vassalizing libero surfaced i suggested we do so first and was met with silence.

This goes all the way back to when I was on the council of SA and in a small pathetic kingdom called Asylon right under Caerwyn, asking to be more integral to SA and asking Astrum for more support as a potential theocracy and then Astrum deciding that Asylon was the biggest enemy of SA ever even though we weren't and could have been utilized better by the elders in SA if they were capable of seeing further than 5 minutes of strategy.  Asylon was a shoe in for inclusion, yet in both circumstances SA and the Moot both decided that this small weak kingdom that was supposedly indefensible was not important enough...You guys had a pro-SA king on the throne in Asylon building temples and begging priests to come and preach and you guys still messed it up!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on January 11, 2014, 12:32:42 AM
This goes all the way back to when I was on the council of SA and in a small pathetic kingdom called Asylon right under Caerwyn, asking to be more integral to SA and asking Astrum for more support as a potential theocracy and then Astrum deciding that Asylon was the biggest enemy of SA ever even though we weren't and could have been utilized better by the elders in SA if they were capable of seeing further than 5 minutes of strategy.  Asylon was a shoe in for inclusion, yet in both circumstances SA and the Moot both decided that this small weak kingdom that was supposedly indefensible was not important enough...You guys had a pro-SA king on the throne in Asylon building temples and begging priests to come and preach and you guys still messed it up!

What?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 11, 2014, 12:41:57 AM
What?

I'm just rubbing it in...  ;)

You probably weren't around back then anyways...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on January 11, 2014, 12:56:28 AM
I'm just rubbing it in...  ;)

You probably weren't around back then anyways...

His character Kihalin was a high-ranking Astrumite at the time, IIRC; I think he may have been my character's lord to boot.  Don't think Kihalin was ever in the full members channel though, I don't recall.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 11, 2014, 01:10:39 AM
 ;) I'm just having fun trying to rile up Indirik.   ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 11, 2014, 01:14:40 AM
One thing I've got to say is the church totally played with kid gloves in this war and it bit us in the ass big time. No Auto De Fes and we only excommunicated one person. We could have done so much more damage if we'd played hardball. I think that serves to highlight what's gone wrong with SA.

The problem is we're afraid to be rabble rousers. We're afraid to send priests into lands where they're forbidden. We're afraid to sponsor pro SA rebellions. We think if we do that our priests will be persecuted and our temples burned. We're afraid to excommunicate people. We think if we do that all it means is fewer members. What we fail to realize is that' these are the things which make SA an exciting religion to be in. Some people want the chance to become martyrs or heretics. We shouldn't be afraid to lose characters in this way. If you can't get kicked out of SA then being a member has no meaning. If you can't become a martyr then there's nothing to aspire to. In the end we'll lose way more characters if we simply make the religion boring and bland because people will just plain leave.

The current situation could lead to an exciting age of fundamentalism. Now that the religion has more followers then ever it means more lords and rulers can't risk going against the church. SA players need to start checking their modern day sensibilities at the door and start getting medieval. We need more people to see Pagans and Heathens as their enemies and to see it as their duty to see Sanguis Astroism become the state religion. Priests will be killed, temples will be burned, astroist peasants will riot, duchies will secede, rebellions will be hatched. These are all good things for the game and for Sanguis Astroism.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on January 11, 2014, 01:37:36 AM
His character Kihalin was a high-ranking Astrumite at the time, IIRC; I think he may have been my character's lord to boot.  Don't think Kihalin was ever in the full members channel though, I don't recall.

Kihalin only had three knights during my time as a duke of Astrum. The only one I remember is Khari(?). Kihalin was a full member for a long time but I did pause him after Astrum defeated Caerwyn. I only unpaused him to check on Astrum only to find out how boring Astrum had become. I tried to remove Sergio but Leopold declared war so that didn't happen :(. Then I had to pause Kihalin in the middle of the war due to my school work and exams. I doubt I will have time to play him for a long time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eduardo Almighty on January 11, 2014, 02:18:00 AM
I have to agree with pcw27 here. Looking from outside, or the Church have no power anymore or have too much fear to adopt a real religious power over its enemies.

However, while you still have Morek, the religion can reborn again and again. Harm the west is another history with the fall of Astrum, but a religion is much more than just one of its realms.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on January 11, 2014, 02:25:56 AM
Kihalin only had three knights during my time as a duke of Astrum. The only one I remember is Khari(?). Kihalin was a full member for a long time but I did pause him after Astrum defeated Caerwyn. I only unpaused him to check on Astrum only to find out how boring Astrum had become. I tried to remove Sergio but Leopold declared war so that didn't happen :(. Then I had to pause Kihalin in the middle of the war due to my school work and exams. I doubt I will have time to play him for a long time.

Duke of Chrysantalys, right?  Several of the Niselurian exiles were vassals of that city, although Sergio might have been Duke there at the time.

I agree with Pat also:  the Church playing hardball is much more interesting than the Church playing softball.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 11, 2014, 04:36:35 AM
There's nothing wrong with the church playing hardball. You just have to choose the right time. As far as my character saw it, this war was not the right time. May it have helped Astrum win the war? Maybe. Maybe not. But what is victory worth of you have to sacrifice your principles to gain it? ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eduardo Almighty on January 11, 2014, 04:55:27 AM
Well... you have a point. Mainly when the result can be the Lords closing the temples of SA everywhere.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kain on January 11, 2014, 05:36:58 AM
One thing I've got to say is the church totally played with kid gloves in this war and it bit us in the ass big time. No Auto De Fes and we only excommunicated one person. We could have done so much more damage if we'd played hardball. I think that serves to highlight what's gone wrong with SA.

The problem is we're afraid to be rabble rousers. We're afraid to send priests into lands where they're forbidden. We're afraid to sponsor pro SA rebellions. We think if we do that our priests will be persecuted and our temples burned. We're afraid to excommunicate people. We think if we do that all it means is fewer members. What we fail to realize is that' these are the things which make SA an exciting religion to be in. Some people want the chance to become martyrs or heretics. We shouldn't be afraid to lose characters in this way. If you can't get kicked out of SA then being a member has no meaning. If you can't become a martyr then there's nothing to aspire to. In the end we'll lose way more characters if we simply make the religion boring and bland because people will just plain leave.

The current situation could lead to an exciting age of fundamentalism. Now that the religion has more followers then ever it means more lords and rulers can't risk going against the church. SA players need to start checking their modern day sensibilities at the door and start getting medieval. We need more people to see Pagans and Heathens as their enemies and to see it as their duty to see Sanguis Astroism become the state religion. Priests will be killed, temples will be burned, astroist peasants will riot, duchies will secede, rebellions will be hatched. These are all good things for the game and for Sanguis Astroism.

Now that is a religion you want to be a part of! A religion that takes itself seriously enough to risk upsetting people.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 11, 2014, 06:42:39 AM
Well... you have a point. Mainly when the result can be the Lords closing the temples of SA everywhere.

Have you ever tried to close a temple dedicated to the faith the majority of your peasants worship? I tried it in Outer Tilog because why not it's outer Tilog. First of all I failed to close the temple because the peasants defended it. Then the attempt drove the entire region into full revolt not just losing my own lordship but also driving it rogue.

That's the kind of power SA needs right now.

There's nothing wrong with the church playing hardball. You just have to choose the right time. As far as my character saw it, this war was not the right time. May it have helped Astrum win the war? Maybe. Maybe not. But what is victory worth of you have to sacrifice your principles to gain it? ;)

Principles for a more civalized time  ;). At the start SA made huge strides by funding colonists. It paid to be a little flexible. But now there are no new lands to conquer, but most of them have SA peasants, now it's time to be uncompromising zealots.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eduardo Almighty on January 11, 2014, 06:57:39 AM
Don't worry... because os that we are spreading the word of the Sacred Fruit around... to avoid too much problems if at some point we really need to close temples.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 11, 2014, 07:04:59 AM
Don't worry... because os that we are spreading the word of the Sacred Fruit around... to avoid too much problems if at some point we really need to close temples.  8)

That might work in Asylon, but Niselur is chock full of Astroist peasants. In my day it was something like 95%. There's also D'Hara which has a tone of Astroists, and no matter what becomes of Astrum's lands, the peasants will be almost all astroists.

Undoing this will take a lot of dedicated priests, and I think ours will be more dedicated.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 11, 2014, 07:20:58 AM
The Moonies have spread as far as Corsanctum last I heard.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 11, 2014, 07:30:33 AM
Yeah but how many? I know there aren't any temples of it there because they're illegal in Corsanctum.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eduardo Almighty on January 11, 2014, 09:22:35 AM
You can imagine that new religions will appear here and there if there's a sense that SA is falling apart. Or if the SA began to act like the devil we like to paint. People will prefer to save their realms instead of save a religion... if it change, well, then you really have a good religion.

Among the others, I think Asylon is the only one with a powerful religion as shield for most of its regions.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 11, 2014, 07:00:34 PM
You can imagine that new religions will appear here and there if there's a sense that SA is falling apart. Or if the SA began to act like the devil we like to paint. People will prefer to save their realms instead of save a religion... if it change, well, then you really have a good religion.

Among the others, I think Asylon is the only one with a powerful religion as shield for most of its regions.

At this point, in many realms, they'll risk losing their realms by attempting to remove the religion. If people put their realms first they'll more likely convert to keep their peasants happy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on January 16, 2014, 04:53:41 AM
The wars have been good for Dwilight and ultimately will lead to soul searching for SA. I know many will look and or act/say this is the end etc but often its times like these where a realm or characters can rise like a pheonix and make this a part of their character RP and history. I think this is an awesome time for Astrum and its players, now they have a goal, they have a drive, they have history and culture and they can be like the underdog and reorder things and create a new narrative one where their great and ancient civilization fell to foreign barbarians in the west. Its almost a Roman narrative of history. If you are playing BM souly to win then you are not paying enough attentiom to who your character is. Glaumring isnt great because of how awesome he is but by how frail and with foible his history has been. His entire history is clawing upward and failing and getting back up and fighting. This is Astrum now bloodied but unbowed. I know many of you will cry into pillows and quit or not log on as much because victory and gold and glory were what defined you, that when it comes down to it you were just here for yourself. For the ones who take this time in history and use it to enrich their characters and RP this is the best time to be active because drama and travesty, tragedy are the greatest stories ever written. And I know that many of you still have fight in you and its been a pleasure to take on Astrum and after years of failure finally actually winning. If you think it has only been tough for Astrum remember that Asylon was for much of history a pathetic backwater.

For once, you and I can agree.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Geronus on January 16, 2014, 04:59:55 AM
One thing I've got to say is the church totally played with kid gloves in this war and it bit us in the ass big time. No Auto De Fes and we only excommunicated one person. We could have done so much more damage if we'd played hardball. I think that serves to highlight what's gone wrong with SA.

The problem is we're afraid to be rabble rousers. We're afraid to send priests into lands where they're forbidden. We're afraid to sponsor pro SA rebellions. We think if we do that our priests will be persecuted and our temples burned. We're afraid to excommunicate people. We think if we do that all it means is fewer members. What we fail to realize is that' these are the things which make SA an exciting religion to be in. Some people want the chance to become martyrs or heretics. We shouldn't be afraid to lose characters in this way. If you can't get kicked out of SA then being a member has no meaning. If you can't become a martyr then there's nothing to aspire to. In the end we'll lose way more characters if we simply make the religion boring and bland because people will just plain leave.

The current situation could lead to an exciting age of fundamentalism. Now that the religion has more followers then ever it means more lords and rulers can't risk going against the church. SA players need to start checking their modern day sensibilities at the door and start getting medieval. We need more people to see Pagans and Heathens as their enemies and to see it as their duty to see Sanguis Astroism become the state religion. Priests will be killed, temples will be burned, astroist peasants will riot, duchies will secede, rebellions will be hatched. These are all good things for the game and for Sanguis Astroism.

And this is why we should all miss Allison Kabrinksi. That's right, Haters, Kabrinski was the best thing that ever happened to SA no matter how many people she pissed off. Those of us with vision knew that despite her (many) faults and the amount of trouble she caused, she was worth every moment of aggravation. Because she would do anything to expand the faith, she didn't need official help or sanction to do it, and in the end that meant that her actions could always be disavowed, even when they resulted in major gains for the Church.

Hell, for all intents and purposes, she provided the spark that set off the war between Caerwyn, Astrum and Averoth, which up until the current war was the most danger Astrum ever faced. Rowan eventually found out what she did, before his death, but he did nothing about it, said nothing about it. Because he knew how much she was needed, and how much the Church stood to gain if the war was successful, which in the end it was.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on January 16, 2014, 05:50:55 AM
Old-school Alison may have been a net positive for the Church, but latter-day Alison wasn't.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 16, 2014, 06:10:54 AM
Old-school Alison may have been a net positive for the Church, but latter-day Alison wasn't.

But later day Allison gave it all up to bring Mendicant down...  That easily makes the top 5 of Allison's best hits.   Number one might be kicking Aram out of the church, then auto da fe'd him.  Then my RP about looting his wine cellars as the peasant followers burned down his estates.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 16, 2014, 08:19:47 AM
But later day Allison gave it all up to bring Mendicant down...  That easily makes the top 5 of Allison's best hits.   Number one might be kicking Aram out of the church, then auto da fe'd him.  Then my RP about looting his wine cellars as the peasant followers burned down his estates.

Is that cannon? I was under the impression that was a last ditch effort to reenter the church after Orthodox Astroism failed to gain followers. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 16, 2014, 12:59:50 PM
It was.

Allison was a great force for change and chaos. But toward the end, it was all a bunch of 180 degree turns from church zealot to "death to the church". Back and forth several times.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 16, 2014, 03:40:19 PM
Moon priests versus star priests. A match made in heaven. Finally Astroism has its enemy and Asylon will gladly don the red shirt.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 16, 2014, 05:14:27 PM
Is that cannon? I was under the impression that was a last ditch effort to reenter the church after Orthodox Astroism failed to gain followers.

I never tried to recruit many nobles to OA.

But it was canon.  I RPed poisoning mendicant and that he died or was in a coma
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 16, 2014, 05:40:24 PM
I never tried to recruit many nobles to OA.

But it was canon.  I RPed poisoning mendicant and that he died or was in a coma

Allison claimed it, whether anyone actually bought it or not is another matter.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 16, 2014, 07:03:30 PM
Allison claimed it, whether anyone actually bought it or not is another matter.

Its not a claim.  It happened.  I should Getty some credit for all the work I did to pin down that cheater.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 17, 2014, 07:56:43 AM
I never tried to recruit many nobles to OA.

But it was canon.  I RPed poisoning mendicant and that he died or was in a coma

I meant the idea that OA was all a ploy to get close to Mendicant. I know you told me the prophet was in on it but then the prophet said that was an outright lie.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 17, 2014, 06:53:38 PM
I meant the idea that OA was all a ploy to get close to Mendicant. I know you told me the prophet was in on it but then the prophet said that was an outright lie.
You really think the prophet is going to admit he allowed a creation of heresy? I am not saying its true, but I can't see Mathurin admitting that either way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 17, 2014, 07:38:41 PM
Some nobles knew about it before I left the church and founded OA.  It wasn't worth fighting over at the time.  I was ready to be done with Allison so I let her be executed.  She was dying from the poison she have to mendicant. So she cut a secret deal with FR and let them execute her so out was quick rather than the painful slow death she was facing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on January 17, 2014, 09:09:18 PM
That was a sad day for Khari.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on January 18, 2014, 04:38:38 AM
*whistles innocently*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on January 18, 2014, 11:13:15 PM
Some nobles knew about it before I left the church and founded OA.  It wasn't worth fighting over at the time.  I was ready to be done with Allison so I let her be executed.  She was dying from the poison she have to mendicant. So she cut a secret deal with FR and let them execute her so out was quick rather than the painful slow death she was facing.

Sometimes you just want to be done with a character. Allison had one hell of an adventure.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 19, 2014, 07:22:27 PM
Sometimes you just want to be done with a character. Allison had one hell of an adventure.  8)


I had a lot of fun with Allison.   I'm glad that other players found there interactions with her to be fun.   A lot of the things I did with Allison was to create some fun and interaction.  Thankfully only some of the shenanigans she pulled became public knowledge.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on January 21, 2014, 03:58:41 AM
Alison did have a huge impact on Rabisu. Their falling out in Kabrinskia was a big eye-opener for an otherwise ordinary naive young priest. Helped him see human nature for what it really is.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 21, 2014, 02:50:05 PM
Alison did have a huge impact on Rabisu. Their falling out in Kabrinskia was a big eye-opener for an otherwise ordinary naive young priest. Helped him see human nature for what it really is.


That was fun.  We sorta planned that out ahead of time.  It worked well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: cenrae on January 21, 2014, 09:21:52 PM
Yeah I remember that. Khari was like what the hell is Allison doing now?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 21, 2014, 11:37:18 PM
From an OOC perspective Allison didn't have too many enemies at that time.  We had won the Caerwyn war and we built Kabrinskia.  She was at one of the peaks of her popularity.  Things were getting quiet and a little chaos was needed.


 I pulled strings and got Rabisu made an Elder and then we talked OOC so he knew what was going on.   Then I trumped up charges and forged a couple things and banished him.  Made for lots of fun because we bashed our heads together more than once after that.

It was completely out of the blue and no one saw it coming. One minute chummy chummy then Rabisu contradicts Allison and then she rages on him.  Worked out great for Rabisu.  Being part of the anti Allison coalition got him promoted to Light shortly afterwards and then he became Duke of Caiyun. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on January 22, 2014, 05:11:54 AM
Nobody expects what's coming next!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 24, 2014, 08:32:46 AM
(http://gretachristina.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341bf68b53ef01156fb855cc970c-800wi)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 24, 2014, 11:42:56 AM
(http://gretachristina.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341bf68b53ef01156fb855cc970c-800wi)

From left to right:

Hireshmont, Rabisu, Turin.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 25, 2014, 07:35:59 AM
No fair I want the big hat!

I would pick Katrina for one of them she's Light of the Maddening.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 25, 2014, 07:49:04 AM
I gotta get in on this inquisition business.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 25, 2014, 09:29:31 AM
In order to be come an inquisitor you must learn our ways.

First lesson, Our chief weapon is surprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... Our two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Our *three* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to the the Light of the Austere.... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as fear, surprise....

Let me start over.

Amongst our weaponry are such diverse elements as: fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, an almost fanatical devotion to the Light of the Austere, and nice red uniforms - Oh damn!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 25, 2014, 01:47:22 PM
When ouverture fails, fundamentalism prevails.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 25, 2014, 09:28:08 PM
I've always thought Fundamentalism is a good answer for all of SA's problems.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: D`Este on January 25, 2014, 09:37:03 PM
I've always thought Fundamentalism is a good answer for all of SA's problems.

It will mean that the church will do a lot of damage to itself, on short time they might seem strong but in the end they will only lose influence.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 25, 2014, 09:48:58 PM
It will mean that the church will do a lot of damage to itself, on short time they might seem strong but in the end they will only lose influence.

Flexing muscle always has costs. But so does passivity. One has to compare the costs to decide what is best. Fundamentalism is likely to make it harder to gain new converts. However, passivity will result in a Niselur-Asylon-Luria Nova axis being able to break up the powerbase of the church and decide continental politics.

In this case, the Church's hands were forced. The new changes were adopted with unanimity, even if a lot of the elders would otherwise have been considered to be a lot more passive and open.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 25, 2014, 09:50:39 PM
It will mean that the church will do a lot of damage to itself, on short time they might seem strong but in the end they will only lose influence.

Nothing can happen that will be worse then everyone getting bored of the religion and quitting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 25, 2014, 10:03:11 PM
Flexing muscle always has costs. But so does passivity. One has to compare the costs to decide what is best. Fundamentalism is likely to make it harder to gain new converts. However, passivity will result in a Niselur-Asylon-Luria Nova axis being able to break up the powerbase of the church and decide continental politics.

In this case, the Church's hands were forced. The new changes were adopted with unanimity, even if a lot of the elders would otherwise have been considered to be a lot more passive and open.

Good god man, you're throwing Luria Nova into this? Or have you not noticed Seoras's blatant attempts at sucking up to the Church? Or have you failed to realize the real reason behind their alliance with Asylon?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 25, 2014, 10:07:33 PM
The only nations without a significant following are Fissoa and Barca, which, honestly, are really of little importance to the Church, strategically speaking. Converting the far south would be a huge boon for the Church, sure, but not if it's by losing the North.

Snakes always spread their honeyed words when they are up to something or want to avoid their due.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 25, 2014, 10:12:27 PM
The only nations without a significant following are Fissoa and Barca, which, honestly, are really of little importance to the Church, strategically speaking. Converting the far south would be a huge boon for the Church, sure, but not if it's by losing the North.

Snakes always spread their honeyed words when they are up to something or want to avoid their due.

Snakes like blatantly political converts to SA?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on January 25, 2014, 10:22:24 PM
a Crusade like this will be good to help flush out those political converts.    Before they had nothing they had to give to the church.  Now with a war they will be called on to perform some sort of duty.   Then we watch and see who listens.     


No listen then no more church for them.   
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on January 25, 2014, 10:57:20 PM
"I love the Inquisition. Before the Inquisition I was addicted to crack cocaine. The Inquisition helped set me straight and gave me this job which I love."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 25, 2014, 11:29:35 PM
Snakes like blatantly political converts to SA?

Blatant to lurians and heretics, perhaps. I doubt many, if any (now that Malus was demoted), of the elders really view Machiavel that way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 25, 2014, 11:46:31 PM
Blatant to lurians and heretics, perhaps. I doubt many, if any (now that Malus was demoted), of the elders really view Machiavel that way.

Well of course they don't, but the value of their opinion is becoming worth less and less.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 25, 2014, 11:54:17 PM
Well of course they don't, but the value of their opinion is becoming worth less and less.

The opinion of those who value the elders less and less is really not of my concern. The elders have the power to cast people out and have them targeted by priests, not the dissenters, which are made up of a bunch of people that are no friends of mine anyways.

When an institution is weak, opportunities present themselves, whether one chooses to help it back up or to deliver the death knell. I don't really see Leopold's successors winning. Jonsu's ploys have a tendency to dazzle at first, and then fizzle.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 25, 2014, 11:57:07 PM
The opinion of those who value the elders less and less is really not of my concern. The elders have the power to cast people out and have them targeted by priests, not the dissenters, which are made up of a bunch of people that are no friends of mine anyways.

When an institution is weak, opportunities present themselves, whether one chooses to help it back up or to deliver the death knell. I don't really see Leopold's successors winning. Jonsu's ploys have a tendency to dazzle at first, and then fizzle.

She has yet to begin to dazzle.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 26, 2014, 12:14:50 AM
She has yet to begin to dazzle.

It will still, no doubt, fizzle.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 26, 2014, 12:23:57 AM
It will still, no doubt, fizzle.

As everything does. The question is, what will be consumed in the blaze?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 26, 2014, 12:32:24 AM
Snakes like blatantly political converts to SA?

Those are the best kind!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 26, 2014, 01:17:58 AM
The opinion of those who value the elders less and less is really not of my concern. The elders have the power to cast people out and have them targeted by priests, not the dissenters, which are made up of a bunch of people that are no friends of mine anyways.

When an institution is weak, opportunities present themselves, whether one chooses to help it back up or to deliver the death knell. I don't really see Leopold's successors winning. Jonsu's ploys have a tendency to dazzle at first, and then fizzle.
By not caring of the opinions of those who do not value the elders instead of making it powerful once again, you are further weakening it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 26, 2014, 02:03:18 AM
By not caring of the opinions of those who do not value the elders instead of making it powerful once again, you are further weakening it.

The crack that was done long ago is now resulting in a break. One can't be on both sides. Some can decide not to pick sides, but if you do pick one, why should you care what those who stand against you think?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on January 26, 2014, 02:41:55 AM
I'm excited for the future of the church. Things get stagnent too often and without a bit of ebb and flow to keep people on their toes there is no point to the growth. If the church ISN'T an interesting and dynamic thing to be appreciated, then it doesn't deserve to rule Dwilight. The reverse is also true.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on January 26, 2014, 03:09:37 AM
For a long time after Niselur broke from the federation and the crusade ensued not much happened within SA. There were members on both sides, and lots of fighting going on, but everyone was basically quiet in the Church. Boring, really. So I'm liking this as a player because the conflict is coming out into the open and declarations are being made and battle lines are being drawn and insults are being thrown around and a Kabrinski is running around independently messing things up and Jonsu's being evil behind the scenes and Glaumring is being a crazy bastard and I think even some Torenists are doing something or other. Good times!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 26, 2014, 03:14:11 AM
Damn Torenists. Apparently Brance didn't get them all. To bad they didn't have the balls to stick their heads up while he was still alive!  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on January 26, 2014, 08:10:48 AM
The crack that was done long ago is now resulting in a break. One can't be on both sides. Some can decide not to pick sides, but if you do pick one, why should you care what those who stand against you think?
Why should you care about the 90% of the church who don't care what the elders say? So that they actually listen to the elders. Thats like saying "Why should I care about the opinions of the people not voting for me in an election?".  SA is eager to kick people out of the church and silence everyone, but doesn't care for discussion or actually involving the church in a crusade. Some people are a little crazy in what could have been done, but certainly more could have been done than was with priests.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 26, 2014, 09:10:29 AM
For a long time after Niselur broke from the federation and the crusade ensued not much happened within SA. There were members on both sides, and lots of fighting going on, but everyone was basically quiet in the Church. Boring, really. So I'm liking this as a player because the conflict is coming out into the open and declarations are being made and battle lines are being drawn and insults are being thrown around and a Kabrinski is running around independently messing things up and Jonsu's being evil behind the scenes and Glaumring is being a crazy bastard and I think even some Torenists are doing something or other. Good times!

I'm excited because the new dividing line is more clear. When things first started to break it was clear Jonsu and Kas just wanted to complain about whatever they could so they could try and build controversy in the hopes of gaining power. Jonsu had no consistency, one minute she's protesting the Terran Theocracy, the next she's complaining that Alaster surrendered it to D'Hara. Then when we ask why she suddendly cares she claims it's because Astroists died to form the Terran Theocracy, funny because Astroists also died to form the Niselurian Theocracy yet she was a very vocal supporter of Leopold.

The ideals emerging now are concrete, you're either for theocracies or against them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: D`Este on January 26, 2014, 09:18:43 AM
The problem with SA are the elders, simply because of the fact that the majority of the discussions is kept private and then the members are just told what to do. If you want an involved church, involve the members more. If you want discussion in the church, you actually have to start it and add fuel to it. Almost none of the elders spoke in discussions in members in the past and now you are creating an unnecessarily conflict to hide your, and I will say it nicely, "laziness". Niselur could have easily rejoined the church and Astrum got have gotten their old borders back, if the elders would have been more pro-active.

And for me this situation is annoying really, wanted to spend my time building up a better realm, instead my time is being spend on giving some other nobles attention.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 26, 2014, 09:39:13 AM
The problem with SA are the elders, simply because of the fact that the majority of the discussions is kept private and then the members are just told what to do. If you want an involved church, involve the members more. If you want discussion in the church, you actually have to start it and add fuel to it. Almost none of the elders spoke in discussions in members in the past and now you are creating an unnecessarily conflict to hide your, and I will say it nicely, "laziness". Niselur could have easily rejoined the church and Astrum got have gotten their old borders back, if the elders would have been more pro-active.

And for me this situation is annoying really, wanted to spend my time building up a better realm, instead my time is being spend on giving some other nobles attention.


We engage the full members. In fact the consuls are supposed to be there to represent full members. If every last thing the elders said was in public that would ruin the allure. Secrecy is intriguing, it's the sort of thing that makes people go "I sure wish I knew what they were talking about."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: D`Este on January 26, 2014, 09:47:58 AM

We engage the full members. In fact the consuls are supposed to be there to represent full members. If every last thing the elders said was in public that would ruin the allure. Secrecy is intriguing, it's the sort of thing that makes people go "I sure wish I knew what they were talking about."

Secrecy is what is killing most realms or the game really. To keep people interested you have to share most of what is going on, you don't have to copy all letters but you certainly can involve people a lot more then just say "do this, do that" and that's it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 26, 2014, 11:28:41 AM
I'm excited because the new dividing line is more clear. When things first started to break it was clear Jonsu and Kas just wanted to complain about whatever they could so they could try and build controversy in the hopes of gaining power. Jonsu had no consistency, one minute she's protesting the Terran Theocracy, the next she's complaining that Alaster surrendered it to D'Hara. Then when we ask why she suddendly cares she claims it's because Astroists died to form the Terran Theocracy, funny because Astroists also died to form the Niselurian Theocracy yet she was a very vocal supporter of Leopold.

The ideals emerging now are concrete, you're either for theocracies or against them.

If being opposed to one and not the other makes me inconsistent... What does that say about the Church? Jonsu was really only opposed to Terran merging with D'hara because she hates D'hara. Everything else was just pretext :p Hell, if she didn't hate D'hara she would have never leaked Pierre's lies about Phantaria being on board with the merger.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 26, 2014, 03:49:55 PM
Why should you care about the 90% of the church who don't care what the elders say? So that they actually listen to the elders. Thats like saying "Why should I care about the opinions of the people not voting for me in an election?".  SA is eager to kick people out of the church and silence everyone, but doesn't care for discussion or actually involving the church in a crusade. Some people are a little crazy in what could have been done, but certainly more could have been done than was with priests.

90%? Really? Want to write up a list of those PRO-Niselur and those Anti-Niselur? 'cause I can't see it being 90%. After all, Consuls are elected, and not a single consul (or elder) voted against the Holy Inquisition.

As for "why would I care about the opinions of the people not voting for me in an election", well, that's pretty obvious. Because they didn't put you in power, and you don't need them to get in power again. Constantly courting those who are against you is a great way of alienating those who are actually for you.

SA isn't eager to kick people out. The war has been going on for a LONG time. The Church had declared a crusade against it LONG ago. Yet it let everyone be. It just now came to a breaking point where the elders had to act in order to respect the Charter and protect the foundations of the Church. Alaster, by the way, isn't an elder.

The problem with SA are the elders, simply because of the fact that the majority of the discussions is kept private and then the members are just told what to do. If you want an involved church, involve the members more. If you want discussion in the church, you actually have to start it and add fuel to it. Almost none of the elders spoke in discussions in members in the past and now you are creating an unnecessarily conflict to hide your, and I will say it nicely, "laziness". Niselur could have easily rejoined the church and Astrum got have gotten their old borders back, if the elders would have been more pro-active.

And for me this situation is annoying really, wanted to spend my time building up a better realm, instead my time is being spend on giving some other nobles attention.

"Oh no, I'm trying to build my power by attacking someone, and they decided not to let themselves be bullied! How dare they distract me!"

It amazes me how anyone in Niselur can seriously claim that the Church is, in any way, the instigator. Literally everything that could have been done to piss off the Church was done.

Secrecy is what is killing most realms or the game really. To keep people interested you have to share most of what is going on, you don't have to copy all letters but you certainly can involve people a lot more then just say "do this, do that" and that's it.

Says you. A large part of the faith is made up of nobles that don't even want to hear any discussion and are intentionally holding aspirant ranks. A lot of realms are decaying, and a lot of them aren't secretive, while a lot of those who are are losing just as many people that are "in the know" than those who aren't. The elders don't refuse to talk to the full members, it's the full members that rarely say anything worth replying to. And there has been a LOT of public talk over the months that preceded this decision. It really doesn't come out of the blue.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on January 26, 2014, 04:57:53 PM
Secrecy is what is killing most realms or the game really. To keep people interested you have to share most of what is going on, you don't have to copy all letters but you certainly can involve people a lot more then just say "do this, do that" and that's it.

I'm not sure about the other Elders, but I find myself neck-deep in messages. Between the making of the sausage in the Elder Council, interesting priest chatter, and my own personal correspondence; I really don't give the full member discussion the attention it deserves. I like to think I answer all the private questions that come to me, at least.

Yet there are a fair number of Elder positions. If people are unhappy with how the sausage is made and want to get their hands dirty, Consul elections and maybe even special representative spots are a good foot in the door.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 26, 2014, 05:03:21 PM
90%? Really? Want to write up a list of those PRO-Niselur and those Anti-Niselur? 'cause I can't see it being 90%. After all, Consuls are elected, and not a single consul (or elder) voted against the Holy Inquisition.

As for "why would I care about the opinions of the people not voting for me in an election", well, that's pretty obvious. Because they didn't put you in power, and you don't need them to get in power again. Constantly courting those who are against you is a great way of alienating those who are actually for you.

SA isn't eager to kick people out. The war has been going on for a LONG time. The Church had declared a crusade against it LONG ago. Yet it let everyone be. It just now came to a breaking point where the elders had to act in order to respect the Charter and protect the foundations of the Church. Alaster, by the way, isn't an elder.

"Oh no, I'm trying to build my power by attacking someone, and they decided not to let themselves be bullied! How dare they distract me!"

It amazes me how anyone in Niselur can seriously claim that the Church is, in any way, the instigator. Literally everything that could have been done to piss off the Church was done.

Says you. A large part of the faith is made up of nobles that don't even want to hear any discussion and are intentionally holding aspirant ranks. A lot of realms are decaying, and a lot of them aren't secretive, while a lot of those who are are losing just as many people that are "in the know" than those who aren't. The elders don't refuse to talk to the full members, it's the full members that rarely say anything worth replying to. And there has been a LOT of public talk over the months that preceded this decision. It really doesn't come out of the blue.

Except that you weren't present for the long build up to Niselur's breaking from the Church. You're not qualified to speak on it. Nieslur has not done everything it can to piss off the church. The fact that no temples have been razed is proof of that (there might have been a couple rogue incidents of this happening I'm sure, it happened infrequently even before the current conflicts). If Niselur really wanted to antagonize the Church, it could. It is after all, winning the war.

However, the Elders antagonized the rest of the Church for quite some time prior to the current conflict, which is what lead to the break. Declaring crusade to defend the joke that was Theocratic Terran was really, really unpopular, especially outside of the theocracies and their sycophants. Its what lead to Leopold breaking from the church. I was apart of that, and encouraged him along the way, because frankly, it was very convenient for us in Luria Nova planning to wage war on D'hara at the time. Jonsu had private sermons with a large number of nobles throughout the church in influential secular positions, and it helped to line things up to meet her goals perfectly. Theocratic power eroded, Morek unable to come to D'hara's aid.

However, you were not present for a vast majority of the protests leading up to the Crusade of Follies, and probably what was a key moment for the break was when Mordaunt up and decided to take offensive action against Phantaria (a realm with a sizeable Astroist population) despite the fact that the scope of the crusade was only ever meant to be defensive. Mordaunt being a noble of Iashular/Niselur at time really brought things to a boil. Leopold had instructed his nobles to not partake, and wanted nothing to do with crusading against fellow astroists. The church then proceeded to undermine him, and really he was left with two options: play along with the Church where he was outnumbered in support in the Elders, who supported very hokey politics (I mean suddenly declaring your realm a theocracy to save your ass from a war sets a terrible precedent, now anytime someone loses a war against a non-theocratic party all they have to do is declare themselves a theocracy), or stand up for his own rights within his realm. We all know the story from there.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 26, 2014, 05:27:42 PM
Sacking temples wouldn't have been a move to antagonize the Church, it would have been a move to mobilize the Church. If I was leading Niselur, and I wanted to destroy the Chuch, I wouldn't have sacked the temples either. It'd be a stupid thing to do.

Yes, the Terran fiasco had grave consequences. It was a bad move, and I never even suggested otherwise. Even I was opposed to it, but that didn't make me go attack Astrum. The elders' mistakes may have made cracks, but nothing forced Niselur to reform itself into a monarchy and to go ally up with Asylon and sack Astrum. And seriously, you want me to believe that Leopold was against attacking fellow astroists? Why the heck is that exactly what he did, then? He took his actions because that's what he wanted to do, not because he was forced to do it. He wanted to shake things up and make things more fun for the nobles of his realm, and the most geopolitically sound manoeuvre was attacking Astrum, which it had less affinities to and possibilities to expand into, and get in league with realms that were more to his liking, like Asylon, FR, and Phantaria. It suited his ambitions. He's not a victim.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 26, 2014, 05:35:20 PM
I might also add that I am not new to the Church, and that my involvement in Church affairs predates my joining it. You may have been too busy calling Machiavel a "political convert" while you were undermining church politics to Luria's benefits by your own sayings, that doesn't mean I'm clueless as to how events evolved into what they are now. Don't confuse how many times you repeat your proganda with how many people actually believe it. Machiavel has always petitioned in favor of a strong yet open Church, unlike those who made it a point to slander him, who have only ever petitioned for a weak powerless church at the mercy of secular powers.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 26, 2014, 05:48:57 PM
If you would recall, Leopold attempted to make peace with the theocracies after withdrawing from the federation. He did not want war, he wanted independence. The Church said no, and voted to excommunicate him and declared war. It wasn't like Leopold was like "Sup guys, we're not apart of you anymore, by the way our troops are looting you and we're besties with Asylon now."

What Niselur did was the only logical course of action left to them if they wanted to retain independence in governance from the Church. Chew on that before you go stuffing your fingers in your ears and chanting "lalalalalaalala the church can do no wrong"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 26, 2014, 06:06:18 PM
If you would recall, Leopold attempted to make peace with the theocracies after withdrawing from the federation. He did not want war, he wanted independence. The Church said no, and voted to excommunicate him and declared war. It wasn't like Leopold was like "Sup guys, we're not apart of you anymore, by the way our troops are looting you and we're besties with Asylon now."

What Niselur did was the only logical course of action left to them if they wanted to retain independence in governance from the Church. Chew on that before you go stuffing your fingers in your ears and chanting "lalalalalaalala the church can do no wrong"

He could have negotiated the withdrawal, but instead decided a unilateral move and then only pretended to want discussion. By which time, it was already clear to everone, IC and OOC, what his goals and aspirations were. He had been OOC recruiting for a while. He WANTED conflict, and thus made sure he got it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 26, 2014, 06:27:33 PM
He could have negotiated the withdrawal, but instead decided a unilateral move and then only pretended to want discussion. By which time, it was already clear to everone, IC and OOC, what his goals and aspirations were. He had been OOC recruiting for a while. He WANTED conflict, and thus made sure he got it.

Then we shall have to agree to disagree. The war could have been avoided. The Elders just weren't having it, and now this is the end result. I'm amused that the Church thinks its in position to make ultimatums.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 26, 2014, 08:05:03 PM
Then we shall have to agree to disagree. The war could have been avoided. The Elders just weren't having it, and now this is the end result. I'm amused that the Church thinks its in position to make ultimatums.

Why, because your friend D'Este plans on abusing game mechanics by switching to priest class before he can get expelled and then using priest actions to lower following? Even you had the decency to leave on your own instead of going down that path.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 26, 2014, 08:18:47 PM
I think this goes here...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wntX-a3jSY
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 26, 2014, 08:32:55 PM
Why, because your friend D'Este plans on abusing game mechanics by switching to priest class before he can get expelled and then using priest actions to lower following? Even you had the decency to leave on your own instead of going down that path.

Cry some more. It wouldn't be the first time someone in the world used position within an organization to undermine it. That, and I was not talking about that anyway. D'este the wicked priest aside, the Church is not in a position to make ultimatums. I really find their demands amusing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: D`Este on January 26, 2014, 08:38:10 PM
Why, because your friend D'Este plans on abusing game mechanics by switching to priest class before he can get expelled and then using priest actions to lower following? Even you had the decency to leave on your own instead of going down that path.

Well, actually, no, not for those reasons. But not going to argue with you here, because you won't believe me as I have a different opinion then you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on January 26, 2014, 09:17:02 PM
I'm not sure about the other Elders, but I find myself neck-deep in messages. Between the making of the sausage in the Elder Council, interesting priest chatter, and my own personal correspondence; I really don't give the full member discussion the attention it deserves. I like to think I answer all the private questions that come to me, at least.

Yet there are a fair number of Elder positions. If people are unhappy with how the sausage is made and want to get their hands dirty, Consul elections and maybe even special representative spots are a good foot in the door.

The... sausage?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 26, 2014, 09:20:53 PM
The... sausage?

Does this mean its appropriate to refer to the elders of SA as "the Sausage Festival"?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on January 26, 2014, 09:33:32 PM
Well, actually, no, not for those reasons. But not going to argue with you here, because you won't believe me as I have a different opinion then you.

Psh. Sure.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on January 26, 2014, 10:45:30 PM
The... sausage?

In case you're unaware, this refers to a famous quote often misattributed to Bismarck:

"Laws, like sausages, cease to inspire respect in proportion as we know how they are made."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 26, 2014, 11:44:41 PM
Sooooo.... Whats up with the lands that jumped from Corsanctum?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on January 27, 2014, 12:11:47 AM
Sooooo.... Whats up with the lands that jumped from Corsanctum?
No idea what you're talking about. *whistles and walks away*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 27, 2014, 12:48:40 AM
Lands did what now?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on January 27, 2014, 01:52:57 AM
Lands did what now?
Exactly.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 27, 2014, 02:16:10 AM
Lands did what now?

Nothing.

Stay focused.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 27, 2014, 02:20:39 AM
Nothing looks different on the map...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on January 27, 2014, 07:17:04 AM
In case you're unaware, this refers to a famous quote often misattributed to Bismarck:

"Laws, like sausages, cease to inspire respect in proportion as we know how they are made."

Oh, I didn't know that. I thought it was a surreal metaphor interjected casually into the discussion.

Now I feel like a silly sausage.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 27, 2014, 06:27:58 PM
However, the Elders antagonized the rest of the Church for quite some time prior to the current conflict, which is what lead to the break.
This is false. The player of Leopold returned to the game specifically to try and take down SA. The entire war was set up specifically to meet the player's OOC objective: War against SA. As such, Leopold took specific actions intended to Start the war. Everything else was window dressing.

I'm not saying that having such an OOC objective/plan for your character is bad. Everyone has to set up some background/motivation for their characters. All I'm saying is that this war would have happened one way or another. The only thing that would have changed was the wording on the declaration of war.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 27, 2014, 06:32:05 PM
If you would recall, Leopold attempted to make peace with the theocracies after withdrawing from the federation. He did not want war, he wanted independence. The Church said no, and voted to excommunicate him and declared war. It wasn't like Leopold was like "Sup guys, we're not apart of you anymore, by the way our troops are looting you and we're besties with Asylon now."
Not true. The Elders never voted to excommunicate Leopold. Several people wanted to do so, but it was never done. The elders also offered Leopold a compromise that would have given him almost everything he wanted. He shot it down, accusing everyone of being corrupt, guaranteeing that the war started.

Leopold wanted this war. It was going to happen no matter what course anyone took.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on January 27, 2014, 06:58:03 PM
Then he left the game :o Don't know what exactly happened but he was really disappointed by the fact people weren't joining Niselur. I think Fulco did a much better job of gathering people than Leopold. Maybe he didn't try hard enough.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on January 27, 2014, 07:32:53 PM
Then he left the game :o Don't know what exactly happened but he was really disappointed by the fact people weren't joining Niselur. I think Fulco did a much better job of gathering people than Leopold. Maybe he didn't try hard enough.

What happened was he's Arrakis. This is what, about the 5th or 6th time he's done this?

It's especially likely that he'll up and delete his account if the things he's stirred up into something interesting are getting intense.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 27, 2014, 09:35:51 PM
Not true. The Elders never voted to excommunicate Leopold. Several people wanted to do so, but it was never done. The elders also offered Leopold a compromise that would have given him almost everything he wanted. He shot it down, accusing everyone of being corrupt, guaranteeing that the war started.

Leopold wanted this war. It was going to happen no matter what course anyone took.

You're right, there was no vote. He was just excommunicated.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on January 27, 2014, 10:46:57 PM
You're right, there was no vote. He was just excommunicated.

He never was excommunicated
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on January 27, 2014, 10:48:47 PM
What happened was he's Arrakis. This is what, about the 5th or 6th time he's done this?

It's especially likely that he'll up and delete his account if the things he's stirred up into something interesting are getting intense.

So there is probably a chance of him coming back just to start something only to ditch it later? lol
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 28, 2014, 01:20:01 AM
Quote
You're right, there was no vote. He was just excommunicated.
Wrong again. He left on his own. He was never excommunicated, although several people would have liked to do it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 28, 2014, 01:22:32 AM
Yes, Dorjan wad very disappointed that the war against SA did not gather much popular support. Too bad he didn't stick it through. He would have been happy with this outcome. Although i doubt he would have stopped, and instead just kept on going.

And yes, he started and deleted at least 6 accounts over the years.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 28, 2014, 01:51:05 AM
Why did Indirik pause? Woulda been good to have him around. :(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 28, 2014, 02:40:15 AM
I decide Brance's story was done, so i killed him. He starved to death in Libidizedd.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 28, 2014, 02:42:12 AM
A pity, the Church only woke up after his death, he'll never see the conclusion of the story.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lorgan on January 28, 2014, 09:47:33 AM
On Arrakis: Most of the accomplishments in BM require you to spend a lot of time. If you're part of a likeminded group that's fine since you can delegate. If you're alone, against a behemoth like SA, it's a different story. He was ambitious and kept piling the hay on his fork, more than that, he's enthusiastic enough about BM to have been dragged into it multiple times. Sure, most (all) of us prefer to see the story through till the end but that doesn't mean someone should just keep on playing for our entertainment. If he's tired of it, let him quit. During the time he played at least he did stuff, changed things and inspired a ton of conflict.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: D`Este on January 28, 2014, 10:25:05 AM
Wrong again. He left on his own. He was never excommunicated, although several people would have liked to do it.

Why is the church claiming he is then?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on January 28, 2014, 11:04:05 AM
Why is the church claiming he is then?

Perhaps they are annoyed they never got the chance to, perhaps it fits their desired history better, or perhaps they are all bat!@#$ crazy and have convinced themselves of this alternate past.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 28, 2014, 12:43:28 PM
Doesn't need to be excommunicated to be called a heretic. :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 28, 2014, 01:46:28 PM
Why is the church claiming he is then?

Because they did. I remember it very clearly. He demoted himself from his elder rank, back down to full membership, and then he was kicked out. I remember jumping on this and demanded that he be given a trial by magistratum, and the response was "No magistratum, we all know he's guilty."

Indirik is wrong on this. Leopold was kicked from the Church. He was apart of Jonsu's congregation, and had no intent on leaving as he was interested in starting a schism  with me(back when Delvin had told me schisms would be implemented in three months tops).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 28, 2014, 02:49:13 PM
The logs say he demoted himself, but unfortunately, share no insight as to what happened next.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 28, 2014, 06:39:11 PM
Because they did. I remember it very clearly. He demoted himself from his elder rank, back down to full membership, and then he was kicked out. I remember jumping on this and demanded that he be given a trial by magistratum, and the response was "No magistratum, we all know he's guilty."

Indirik is wrong on this. Leopold was kicked from the Church. He was apart of Jonsu's congregation, and had no intent on leaving as he was interested in starting a schism  with me(back when Delvin had told me schisms would be implemented in three months tops).
Leopold was never formally excommunicated by the church. He may have been kicked out, but I don't think he was. But this was during the time when a bug kept everyone from leaving a religion (does this bug still exist?) and *everyone* had to be kicked out.

Now, people may claim that he was excommunicated for various reasons of their own. Some may mis-remember it, misunderstand what happened, or deliberately spreading misinformation. But he was never formally excommunicated.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 28, 2014, 06:49:14 PM
Wrong again. He left on his own. He was never excommunicated, although several people would have liked to do it.

Leopold was excommunicated. He stepped down willingly from the elder council but didn't leave the church. Jonsu left willingly.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on January 28, 2014, 07:00:22 PM
Leopold was excommunicated.
Not through any vote or trial. Some individuals may claim that, but it was never a decision of the elder council.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on January 28, 2014, 09:28:43 PM
No magistratum was held. The rest may be up to a matter of semantics...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vita` on January 28, 2014, 11:19:15 PM
I too recall a letter from one of the elders (Mordaunt? Medugnats? Not 100% on which) kicking him out and declaring him excommunicated. But no, there was not a vote by the elders to my understanding (not that I would not, know being an elder, but it wasn't announced as 'vote from the elders', just as a church-wide order from an elder). Thus, Jonsu did protest the lack of voting.

TL;DR: elder declared Leopold excommunicated the church; elders didn't vote.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on January 29, 2014, 12:13:19 AM
99% sure we voted to excommunicate Leopold. There is that 1% chance I'm wrong... but I'm pretty darn sure he was excommunicated. Kills me to side with Stabbity, but my recollection is also of an excommunication, and I think we actually did vote.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on January 29, 2014, 12:13:51 AM
However, it's also true he demoted himself. I believe he was trying to act preemptively, and then we excommunicated after he had already done the deed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 29, 2014, 12:36:06 AM
I too recall a letter from one of the elders (Mordaunt? Medugnats? Not 100% on which) kicking him out and declaring him excommunicated. But no, there was not a vote by the elders to my understanding (not that I would not, know being an elder, but it wasn't announced as 'vote from the elders', just as a church-wide order from an elder). Thus, Jonsu did protest the lack of voting.

TL;DR: elder declared Leopold excommunicated the church; elders didn't vote.

It would have been Mordaunt who was regent at the time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 29, 2014, 12:58:02 AM
99% sure we voted to excommunicate Leopold. There is that 1% chance I'm wrong... but I'm pretty darn sure he was excommunicated. Kills me to side with Stabbity, but my recollection is also of an excommunication, and I think we actually did vote.

Hard to argue about something when Vellos and I agree.

I'm 100% sure he was booted and declared excommunicated. Jonsu protested the lack of a Magistratum, and that event was what lead to her eventual leaving of the Church, as opposed to Jonsu's previous plan of schisming.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vita` on January 29, 2014, 05:46:11 AM
It would have been Mordaunt who was regent at the time.

And Medugnatos was Light.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 29, 2014, 07:14:11 PM
And Medugnatos was Light.

Of the Austere? Lets just ask him he'd know.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vita` on January 29, 2014, 10:14:04 PM
Of the Austere? Lets just ask him he'd know.

Of the Maddening.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on January 30, 2014, 03:02:42 AM
Austere is the one that's supposed to handle punishments and excommunications.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on January 30, 2014, 04:54:25 AM
Austere is the one that's supposed to handle punishments and excommunications.

Yes, and this was shortly before Malus's disappearance, so he was still Light of the Austere, but not active.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daimall on February 03, 2014, 12:30:55 AM
An interesting announcement by the regent to say the least.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 03, 2014, 12:54:42 AM
This is ridiculous. If this isn't an abuse I don't know what is. Done with BM now.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on February 03, 2014, 01:06:51 AM
Is Jonsu the Regent?
I am confused right now.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 03, 2014, 01:10:32 AM
Enoch promoted Jonsu to Regent.
Enoch then demoted himself.
That leaves Jonsu as the Regent.

So until and unless she ever steps down, or if Mathurin's player ever comes back and does something about it, she gets to hang on to that title forever now.

Which means that SA has nowhere to go but down.  :(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 03, 2014, 01:13:16 AM
Basically it's a kill switch on an entire religion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vita` on February 03, 2014, 01:13:33 AM
I'm rather sure Mathurin's account autodeleted some time ago, but I haven't doublechecked myself.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 03, 2014, 01:17:03 AM
In light of the recent controversial in-character actions, I'd like to remind everyone in the strongest possible terms to be civil on this thread, and not to bring in-character disputes to the forum. Violation of either of these principles will be moderated with extreme prejudice.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 03, 2014, 01:46:32 AM
I think like many things, SA has served its purpose. It has been quite stagnant for awhile and it didn't find any way of solving it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 03, 2014, 02:01:49 AM
On the contrary, SA has been very exciting lately. It's also good, in a sense, that things happen in SA. Religion has a very great potential in the game, and SA experiences might be able to help the dev team improve the system.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on February 03, 2014, 02:11:50 AM
Well, that was cute.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 03, 2014, 02:14:07 AM
I'd like to first say that I hope noone ragequits. I'll be forthcoming with any pertinent information if anyone wants to create a magistrate case, but it was a judgement call and I saw the game mechanics and RP for the character and made that call. I want no OOC hard feelings and accept any judgement rendered.

If it is any consolation, Enoch has plotted against most of Dwilight since arriving. I've played this character as a weasily smart-ass since the beginning. He and Bowie talked of different ways to undermine SA quite often. I tried to make sure that he put on a good face, but there were tell-tale signs that he was dicking you over.

I also want to point out that I spoke with Stabbity and asked him not to simply destroy the religion. I asked that he kept it 'a viable entity'. It will certainly see people leave, but there have always been people who stayed with their church even when it reformed itself.

I had it suggested to me to declare myself second prophet. I'm sure we would have seen something like this eventually if Regency elections ran for a while. It simply didn't feel right for the character, in this situation.

I was going to continue RP announcements with explanations, but I demoted myself too low and was kicked.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on February 03, 2014, 02:22:00 AM
I'd like to first say that I hope noone ragequits. I'll be forthcoming with any pertinent information if anyone wants to create a magistrate case, but it was a judgement call and I saw the game mechanics and RP for the character and made that call. I want no OOC hard feelings and accept any judgement rendered.

If it is any consolation, Enoch has plotted against most of Dwilight since arriving. I've played this character as a weasily smart-ass since the beginning. He and Bowie talked of different ways to undermine SA quite often. I tried to make sure that he put on a good face, but there were tell-tale signs that he was dicking you over.

I also want to point out that I spoke with Stabbity and asked him not to simply destroy the religion. I asked that he kept it 'a viable entity'. It will certainly see people leave, but there have always been people who stayed with their church even when it reformed itself.

I had it suggested to me to declare myself second prophet. I'm sure we would have seen something like this eventually if Regency elections ran for a while. It simply didn't feel right for the character, in this situation.

I was going to continue RP announcements with explanations, but I demoted myself too low and was kicked.

Yes, this has been planned for a bit, and I do intend on keeping the Church viable. I really do hope no one rage quits over some IC intrigue, and it saddens me to see Vellos pausing. As someone pointed out in an OOC message, yes this did occur on Superbowl Sunday. It was not planned, there was no "no one can stop us if we do it on Superbowl Sunday". It is the result of a culmination of IC events, and resolved naturally, and so happened to fall on today.

I am interested to see where this goes, and see if it breathes new life into Sanguis Astroism. I believe the organization has enough inertia to survive this turbulence, and come out better, in whatever form it so happens to do so, for it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 03, 2014, 02:27:00 AM
I hadn't actually planned for it to be today, but Jonsu joined the church and I already had everything written up for the event. I had hoped to get a bit farther away from potential infiltrators and bans, though. Now it'll be a more interesting escape, but it didn't occur to me that Superbowl Sunday would impact this.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 03, 2014, 02:29:25 AM
Intrigue? What intrigue? There's nothing to do. It's pointless. Jonsu has the top rank now, and there's absolutely nothing anyone can do about it. Why bother? That sure sounds GREAT for intrigue. Do you actually believe that?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 02:32:17 AM
I'd like to first say that I hope noone ragequits. I'll be forthcoming with any pertinent information if anyone wants to create a magistrate case, but it was a judgement call and I saw the game mechanics and RP for the character and made that call. I want no OOC hard feelings and accept any judgement rendered.

If it is any consolation, Enoch has plotted against most of Dwilight since arriving. I've played this character as a weasily smart-ass since the beginning. He and Bowie talked of different ways to undermine SA quite often. I tried to make sure that he put on a good face, but there were tell-tale signs that he was dicking you over.

I also want to point out that I spoke with Stabbity and asked him not to simply destroy the religion. I asked that he kept it 'a viable entity'. It will certainly see people leave, but there have always been people who stayed with their church even when it reformed itself.

I had it suggested to me to declare myself second prophet. I'm sure we would have seen something like this eventually if Regency elections ran for a while. It simply didn't feel right for the character, in this situation.

I was going to continue RP announcements with explanations, but I demoted myself too low and was kicked.

If a situation occurs where a large institution looks to be destroyed, in an event which a large part of the involved player base didn't see coming nor felt able to influence, then there is going to be lots of fallout. It might just be character deletions, it could well be account deletions. That is just to be expected, people have invested tons of time into things, and losing them is hard.

The issue of if that should dictate your actions or not is not so clear cut. Personally I like to ensure when I set things in motion that there is plenty of scope for others to discover and work counter to my own plans. In this situation it appears people don't feel that happened. That the intrigue was something a small group participated in and that was largely impossible to detect, influence or stop. Now that of course happens in real life all the time, so in general I don't think there is anything wrong with it, its just not how I choose to play.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on February 03, 2014, 02:36:45 AM
You've laid low a lot of people's hard work into their characters; I doubt they'll be happy about that, especially since they have no in-game recourse whatsoever.  There is no "protest" option against the head of a religion and since there are no schism mechanics we won't see someone leading the vast majority of the church away.  That is bound to be extremely frustrating and honestly I wouldn't be surprised if people whose characters are more invested into the church (and thus who are themselves more invested by the work they've put in on behalf of those characters) did quit.  Hoping against it is a pointless gesture, and that goes for both of you.  If you've ever played Diplomacy you know there are going to be actual hard feelings for what you did in the game; the only question is whether people get over them.

Will this kill SA? I don't know, but it is extremely obnoxious.  Is this a circumvention of game mechanics?  I mean, only in that there is no recourse whatsoever.  If you look at this in a historical light, there would be an Anti-Prophet in Morek in roughly *now*.  That is impossible in Battlemaster; since roughly half of Dwilight is part of SA, I hope this can in some way move up the timetable on adding schisms to the game.

With that said, are you amenable to an OOC schism agreement?  I mean it'd render priests basically powerless at working against the other part of the schismatic faction but it would allow people to roleplay acceptance or rejection of the new "Prophet" while retaining their religion.

Also everything De-Legro said.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 02:43:38 AM
Intrigue? What intrigue? There's nothing to do. It's pointless. Jonsu has the top rank now, and there's absolutely nothing anyone can do about it. Why bother? That sure sounds GREAT for intrigue. Do you actually believe that?

Not necessarily. For one thing people can become priests and refuse to obey Jonsu's orders. They can attack the realm harboring her until it relents, bans her and attempts to execute her.

I agree it is way to hard to fight back.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 03, 2014, 02:46:25 AM
I feel that this us total abuse.  Jonsu was a declared heretic.   She shouldn't have been able to join the religion. 


This might be it for me to. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 02:47:04 AM
Not necessarily. For one thing people can become priests and refuse to obey Jonsu's orders. They can attack the realm harboring her until it relents, bans her and attempts to execute her.

I agree it is way to hard to fight back.

I think you miss the power that the leader of the religion has in game mechanics.

I feel that this us total abuse.  Jonsu was a declared heretic.   She shouldn't have been able to join the religion. 


This might be it for me to. 

I think this proves something I have thought for a while. Guilds and Religions need a way to set up a more distributed power structure. While the existing structure should remain an option, it would also be good to have a system that enforces votes for things like promoting someone to a full member.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on February 03, 2014, 02:47:40 AM
You've laid low a lot of people's hard work into their characters; I doubt they'll be happy about that, especially since they have no in-game recourse whatsoever.  There is no "protest" option against the head of a religion and since there are no schism mechanics we won't see someone leading the vast majority of the church away.  That is bound to be extremely frustrating and honestly I wouldn't be surprised if people whose characters are more invested into the church (and thus who are themselves more invested by the work they've put in on behalf of those characters) did quit.  Hoping against it is a pointless gesture, and that goes for both of you.  If you've ever played Diplomacy you know there are going to be actual hard feelings for what you did in the game; the only question is whether people get over them.

Will this kill SA? I don't know, but it is extremely obnoxious.  Is this a circumvention of game mechanics?  I mean, only in that there is no recourse whatsoever.  If you look at this in a historical light, there would be an Anti-Prophet in Morek in roughly *now*.  That is impossible in Battlemaster; since roughly half of Dwilight is part of SA, I hope this can in some way move up the timetable on adding schisms to the game.

With that said, are you amenable to an OOC schism agreement?  I mean it'd render priests basically powerless at working against the other part of the schismatic faction but it would allow people to roleplay acceptance or rejection of the new "Prophet" while retaining their religion.

Also everything De-Legro said.

There are plenty of options from here. Jonsu may command the Church, but the religion isn't tangible. Its more than the numbers the game tells you in regards to temples and followers. I have always been, and will continue to remain, open to interesting ideas so long as it makes sense for Jonsu as a character. Yes, the lack of a proper schism mechanic sucks, but it has worked against me in the past as well.

And yes Chenier, intrigue. Intrigue lead to this, and good intrigue could fix it again. Easily? No. But taking over the biggest religion in the game wasn't easy either. This thing, played right by the right people could blow up in Jonsu's face, hard.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 03, 2014, 02:49:42 AM
Not necessarily. For one thing people can become priests and refuse to obey Jonsu's orders. They can attack the realm harboring her until it relents, bans her and attempts to execute her.

I agree it is way to hard to fight back.

And cause the loss of most of the religion's followers? Not to mention that our own realms are much more exposed to this kind of behavior than hers is.

Her realm supports her. Even if we went to outright destroy Niselur, she could just hop on a ship until the realm is deleted from the database and never even risk capture. She'd likely just go to Asylon, though, which is confy with the Zuma on one side, the seas on another, and Niselur on the other. And without significant SA following in most of their core regions. No way we could crack that nut.

Resistance is utterly futile. Dishman used the click to win button. Nothing more to do. Attempting to resist is to legitimize this click to win situation.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 03, 2014, 02:54:24 AM
I admit that I wanted to stir the pot, but I still hope it doesn't stir people away from the game. It's an online game guild where a lot of decisions are made with little to no cooperation, so I'm not overly concerned about that. Does anyone even recall the lack of interest in the Regency election?

I expect Jonsu will have some fun with old rivals, but I also expect someone with 21 fun medals can see SA going through a new age.

The monster spawns also came at an unanticipated time. It kind of flavors the madness a bit more, I have to say.

With that said, are you amenable to an OOC schism agreement?  I mean it'd render priests basically powerless at working against the other part of the schismatic faction but it would allow people to roleplay acceptance or rejection of the new "Prophet" while retaining their religion.

This sounds like a very good way to approach it. If Stabbity is up for it, it could liven up the church a bit while leaving old-schoolers their own familiar part. 

This is the kind of reaction I'd like to see, rather than people wanting to flip the board and walk away. If this is too much of a backstab for you to handle, is there a way it could be eased that you can tolerate it enough to continue playing a friendly game of backstab? It might have been a mistake to demote myself, as now it is up to Stabbity, but I think he will work with other players.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 03, 2014, 02:58:11 AM
Any act of "dissent" or "rebellion" or "backstab" against Jonsu is destructive to SA as a whole.

The more people try, the more, if in time Jonsu abdicates or if schisms are implemented, the Church will be in tatters by then.

I'm not one to play games where my actions are meaningless and the outcome is predetermined.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 03, 2014, 03:03:26 AM
Exactly,  the only way to oppose this is to actively destroy the thing I literally spent IRL years building.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 03:05:35 AM
Any act of "dissent" or "rebellion" or "backstab" against Jonsu is destructive to SA as a whole.

The more people try, the more, if in time Jonsu abdicates or if schisms are implemented, the Church will be in tatters by then.

I'm not one to play games where my actions are meaningless and the outcome is predetermined.

That would tend to be the case when a institution has suffered a hostile takeover though. If we discount any hard feelings about the manner the takeover was achieved, then I can't really see a way that makes sense for things to be resolved without some sort of damage to the church, though the degree of damage is certainly something to consider.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 03:06:23 AM
And cause the loss of most of the religion's followers? Not to mention that our own realms are much more exposed to this kind of behavior than hers is.

Her realm supports her. Even if we went to outright destroy Niselur, she could just hop on a ship until the realm is deleted from the database and never even risk capture. She'd likely just go to Asylon, though, which is confy with the Zuma on one side, the seas on another, and Niselur on the other. And without significant SA following in most of their core regions. No way we could crack that nut.

Resistance is utterly futile. Dishman used the click to win button. Nothing more to do. Attempting to resist is to legitimize this click to win situation.

She doesn't have much actual power when you think about it. She can select elders and she can ban lay members of the church, who evidently can then just join again. If the entire priesthood disregards her orders and considers her illegitimate she's not that powerful at all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 03:08:47 AM
I admit that I wanted to stir the pot, but I still hope it doesn't stir people away from the game. It's an online game guild where a lot of decisions are made with little to no cooperation, so I'm not overly concerned about that. Does anyone even recall the lack of interest in the Regency election?

I expect Jonsu will have some fun with old rivals, but I also expect someone with 21 fun medals can see SA going through a new age.

The monster spawns also came at an unanticipated time. It kind of flavors the madness a bit more, I have to say.

This sounds like a very good way to approach it. If Stabbity is up for it, it could liven up the church a bit while leaving old-schoolers their own familiar part. 

This is the kind of reaction I'd like to see, rather than people wanting to flip the board and walk away. If this is too much of a backstab for you to handle, is there a way it could be eased that you can tolerate it enough to continue playing a friendly game of backstab? It might have been a mistake to demote myself, as now it is up to Stabbity, but I think he will work with other players.

If enough people agree maybe we could have Tom split it into Eastern and Western Astroist Churches. It makes sense that she'd have serious trouble commanding temples and priests located hundreds of miles away which are lorded over by nobles who hate her.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 03:10:25 AM
She doesn't have much actual power when you think about it. She can select elders and she can ban lay members of the church, who evidently can then just join again. If the entire priesthood disregards her orders and considers her illegitimate she's not that powerful at all.

How long are people going to persist if she simply boots people out as soon as they join? Not saying this is the plan but what do you think the consequences are if everyone that is not a priest is stuck in a infinite loop of join/boot?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 03:11:47 AM
If enough people agree maybe we could have Tom split it into Eastern and Western Astroist Churches. It makes sense that she'd have serious trouble commanding temples and priests located hundreds of miles away which are lorded over by nobles who hate her.

The chances of direct modification to the live database are so very, very, very low. Besides the fact it would set a precedent, there is so much scope for getting something wrong when manually making edits.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 03:14:34 AM
How long are people going to persist if she simply boots people out as soon as they join? Not saying this is the plan but what do you think the consequences are if everyone that is not a priest is stuck in a infinite loop of join/boot?

The dissenters learn to keep their traps shut.

Form secret societies where people can plot the downfall of the false prophet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 03, 2014, 03:15:37 AM
I have to say that it's very fun, but I wonder if there -is- a way to effectively counter Jonsu. Basically, the only one left who can actually go against her is the founder (who is gone). I see it as a problem for the religion system, since all it takes is for one Elder to seize control and effectively be untouchable. Maybe there should be a mechanic (heh, schisms, please!) in place so that things like this don't become a sort of "game over" situation -- right now, people within SA can harp on all they like, but there is no viable way to regain control of the religion.

And one of the fun things about SA is the structure. Jonsu may be rendered useless if people just ignore her... but that defeats "fun", and fun is what this should be.

RE: keeping their traps shut and plotting the downfall:

How, exactly? Am I missing a mechanic in place that allows for the removal of an Elder and countering a hostile takeover of a church?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 03:16:08 AM
The dissenters learn to keep their traps shut.

Form secret societies where people can plot the downfall of the false prophet.

That makes an assumption that only dissenters are kicked.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 03:20:53 AM
That makes an assumption that only dissenters are kicked.

He's said he wont just dismantle the religion. Even if he tried the religion could endure as long as the priests were still there. According to the wiki if he fails to appoint any elders for so long that the temples start to decay the game will automatically select a new leader who can then lead the religion.



RE: keeping their traps shut and plotting the downfall:

How, exactly? Am I missing a mechanic in place that allows for the removal of an Elder and countering a hostile takeover of a church?

Infiltrators, rebellions, bribe a judge, bribe a ruler, refuse to invite her to any dinner parties.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 03, 2014, 03:24:18 AM
We all build these sandcastles, and it does suck to see them wash away. It could be much worse.

Like I said before, this was going to happen. I was almost handed the Regency, and I left a decent trail of evidence of dishonesty. There was a power-vacuum and eventually someone would have filled it. I'd prefer a long-term player with good RP than someone who just got elected and decided to keep the title.

If people are frustrated that they don't feel 'involved', don't neglect passing offers to work together. Enoch met Jonsu while she was ferreting around Bowie, and kept in contact. I remember probing other characters for intrigue, but some of them came off as unapproachable (or unresponsive) with such things. The backroom plots are exclusive once they really begin, but to actually start one all you need is a few partners.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 03:25:56 AM
I have to say that it's very fun, but I wonder if there -is- a way to effectively counter Jonsu. Basically, the only one left who can actually go against her is the founder (who is gone). I see it as a problem for the religion system, since all it takes is for one Elder to seize control and effectively be untouchable. Maybe there should be a mechanic (heh, schisms, please!) in place so that things like this don't become a sort of "game over" situation -- right now, people within SA can harp on all they like, but there is no viable way to regain control of the religion.

And one of the fun things about SA is the structure. Jonsu may be rendered useless if people just ignore her... but that defeats "fun", and fun is what this should be.

RE: keeping their traps shut and plotting the downfall:

How, exactly? Am I missing a mechanic in place that allows for the removal of an Elder and countering a hostile takeover of a church?

Nope, nor does infil actions remove her from her position. Sort of someone managing to execute her there is little to do to force her out of the position.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 03, 2014, 03:27:43 AM
I have no problem with intrigue and feuding.

I have a problem with the fact that anyone with half a brain can realize this is NOT intended function.

Edited to remove material contravening the Social Contract.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 03:29:01 AM
Nope, nor does infil actions remove her from her position. Sort of someone managing to execute her there is little to do to force her out of the position.

I believe if she's wounded for long enough she'll be removed due to inactivity. Plus she might just decide it's not worth it anymore if she keeps getting stabbed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 03, 2014, 03:31:05 AM
I believe if she's wounded for long enough she'll be removed due to inactivity.

This is untrue.

The only way to forcibly remove someone from a guild or religion position is to remove them from the continent. That means deport, execute, or cold-storage pause (which includes autopause).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on February 03, 2014, 03:35:47 AM
This is untrue.

The only way to forcibly remove someone from a guild or religion position is to remove them from the continent. That means deport, execute, or cold-storage pause (which includes autopause).

I heard people complaining about being wounded long enough that they lost feudal positions.  Does being wounded for long enough induce an auto-pause or is something else happening that makes them lose their spots?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 03:36:28 AM
This is untrue.

The only way to forcibly remove someone from a guild or religion position is to remove them from the continent. That means deport, execute, or cold-storage pause (which includes autopause).

I forget can you execute a priest after one arrest or do you need to ban them first?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 03:36:50 AM
We all build these sandcastles, and it does suck to see them wash away. It could be much worse.

Like I said before, this was going to happen. I was almost handed the Regency, and I left a decent trail of evidence of dishonesty. There was a power-vacuum and eventually someone would have filled it. I'd prefer a long-term player with good RP than someone who just got elected and decided to keep the title.

If people are frustrated that they don't feel 'involved', don't neglect passing offers to work together. Enoch met Jonsu while she was ferreting around Bowie, and kept in contact. I remember probing other characters for intrigue, but some of them came off as unapproachable (or unresponsive) with such things. The back room plots are exclusive once they really begin, but to actually start one all you need is a few partners.

Again disclaimer, I'm not involved in any of this. You might THINK you left a reasonable obvious trail of dishonesty, but the fact that several highly active and savvy players were completely blind sided suggest it might not have been as obvious as you though. Anyone that has been a GM in RP games is likely used to this. It feels like you have to make things blindly obvious before players pick up on it. This is not really the case though, got to remember that lots of things look really obvious when you view things from certain perspectives with complete knowledge. How many players were likely to have full details of this previous dishonest actions? How many would have known you had any association with Jonsu at all?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on February 03, 2014, 03:37:08 AM
I heard people complaining about being wounded long enough that they lost feudal positions.  Does being wounded for long enough induce an auto-pause or is something else happening that makes them lose their spots?

It makes them lose their secular titles, it does not induce an auto-pause.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 03:38:04 AM
I heard people complaining about being wounded long enough that they lost feudal positions.  Does being wounded for long enough induce an auto-pause or is something else happening that makes them lose their spots?

No. There is as system specific to realm position (Lord, Council, Duke) for this, it does not affect guilds or religions.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 03, 2014, 03:39:31 AM
I forget can you execute a priest after one arrest or do you need to ban them first?

The only player characters that can ever be executed without a ban are commoners and outlaws (nobles with honour below about 5).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vita` on February 03, 2014, 03:42:37 AM
Again disclaimer, I'm not involved in any of this. You might THINK you left a reasonable obvious trail of dishonesty, but the fact that several highly active and savvy players were completely blind sided suggest it might not have been as obvious as you though. Anyone that has been a GM in RP games is likely used to this. It feels like you have to make things blindly obvious before players pick up on it. This is not really the case though, got to remember that lots of things look really obvious when you view things from certain perspectives with complete knowledge. How many players were likely to have full details of this previous dishonest actions? How many would have known you had any association with Jonsu at all?

If Seoras had known of Enoch's association with Jonsu, Seoras wouldn't have constantly pushed Enoch to become Consul and then Regent.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 03:45:15 AM
Again disclaimer, I'm not involved in any of this. You might THINK you left a reasonable obvious trail of dishonesty, but the fact that several highly active and savvy players were completely blind sided suggest it might not have been as obvious as you though. Anyone that has been a GM in RP games is likely used to this. It feels like you have to make things blindly obvious before players pick up on it. This is not really the case though, got to remember that lots of things look really obvious when you view things from certain perspectives with complete knowledge. How many players were likely to have full details of this previous dishonest actions? How many would have known you had any association with Jonsu at all?

I can't remember him ever taking Jonsu's side in a debate when she was part of the church. I don't remember anything linking them what so ever.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on February 03, 2014, 03:50:16 AM
I'm pretty sure the only one who would connect Enoch with Jonsu is Rabisu. Jonsu and Enoch became associated when Jonsu was Luminary of the Maddening, hunting down Bowie's mystic cult that took root in Morek that I'm sure next to one was aware of either.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on February 03, 2014, 04:02:32 AM
I can certainly understand why having someone swoop in and take control over a large organisation such as SA could be devastating IC, but as someone outside SA and Dwilight as a whole, I'm not understanding where the OOC hate and even possible account deletions are coming from. Can someone explain, please?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 04:04:21 AM
I can certainly understand why having someone swoop in and take control over a large organisation such as SA could be devastating IC, but as someone outside SA and Dwilight as a whole, I'm not understanding where the OOC hate and even possible account deletions are coming from. Can someone explain, please?

They feel he's exploited a poorly designed game mechanic that made this takeover too easy.

I personally feel like the elders may have been a little careless in letting Enoch become Regent. Not in the sense that there was any evidence to link him to Jonsu but simply in the sense that he was kind of a quiet do nothing character. At that time the church was still pretty moderate and I was a less popular choice as a hardline zealot. They actually nullified the elections and started them again when I would have won. They were probably concerned that I was going to shake things up, sick our priests on Niselur and hurt the faith, so they went with the quiet guy. It's hard to say that the people who put a guy they knew nothing about in the highest seat of power were blameless when he started running amok.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on February 03, 2014, 04:07:45 AM
They feel he's exploited a poorly designed game mechanic that made this takeover too easy.
And have spent actual years putting real effort into SA while having no recourse against the power now wielded by the individual in question in the organization.  If I had been there from the beginning I'd probably be pissed enough not to come back too; though I have had two accounts auto-deleted due to losing interest so take that with a grain of salt.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 04:12:15 AM
If Seoras had known of Enoch's association with Jonsu, Seoras wouldn't have constantly pushed Enoch to become Consul and then Regent.

Obviously. And this is the problem inherent with "intrigue" To be effective you want to limit the amount of participants, that is just logical. However in striving to be successful you are increasing the chance that people are going to react in a seriously adverse way when the you are successful.

Likewise it makes total sense not to go advertising an association with Jonsu in terms of being successful.

Again it is just a personal thing, if my plot requires a fair number of people to be successful, then the possibility of being sold out is reasonable (dependent on what I know about the characters of course) and I shouldn't need to self sabotage. If I require very few people, and the chances of being discovered are very low, then some form of self sabotage are required. The aim here would be to do so in a way that success is still possible, and if successful hopefully people, with the advantage of hindsight can see the possibilities missed. It is hard to balance dropping enough hints to have a chance of being foiled, while still ensuring a chance of success, but if the relevant players are all at a loss after the event, then I consider myself to have failed in ensuring "fun" for the wider group.[/list]
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 04:16:49 AM
And have spent actual years putting real effort into SA while having no recourse against the power now wielded by the individual in question in the organization.  If I had been there from the beginning I'd probably be pissed enough not to come back too; though I have had two accounts auto-deleted due to losing interest so take that with a grain of salt.

The thing about SA is the true power comes from its player base. If someone founds a new astroist inspired religion now they have a good shot at having it spread like wild fire. That would itself be a continuation of the SA people spent so long building. Sure the temples will be smaller at first and it will take a while to convert the peasants but eventually the new church will catch up to the old one.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 03, 2014, 04:21:40 AM
You might THINK you left a reasonable obvious trail of dishonesty, but the fact that several highly active and savvy players were completely blind sided suggest it might not have been as obvious as you though.

I knew Enoch was bad news; Pierre warned the Elder Council and worked quite a lot to push it to do something about Swordfell back then. I'm quite flabbergasted to learn he could have been made regent. There were some signs sent, some subtle ones in direct letters, but I remember at least one very clear RP.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 04:26:37 AM
I knew Enoch was bad news; Pierre warned the Elder Council and worked quite a lot to push it to do something about Swordfell back then. I'm quite flabbergasted to learn he could have been made regent. There were some signs sent, some subtle ones in direct letters, but I remember at least one very clear RP.

You know they actually declared an election void so they could have a do over and make sure Enoch won instead of me.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 03, 2014, 04:27:54 AM
You know they actually declared an election void so they could have a do over and make sure Enoch won instead of me.

Well, when people are that determined to give power to a nutcase… ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 04:28:27 AM
The thing about SA is the true power comes from its player base. If someone founds a new astroist inspired religion now they have a good shot at having it spread like wild fire. That would itself be a continuation of the SA people spent so long building. Sure the temples will be smaller at first and it will take a while to convert the peasants but eventually the new church will catch up to the old one.

Its the time and resources spent on the Temples and followers that prevent people from considering this avenue. We are talking about years of gold poured into the infrastructure. Few people are really going to want to do all that again just to get the new church to replace the old. That is assuming you even could. Remember that many of the members of SA are likely to be semi inactive. I would think at best you might get 60-70% of the SA Lords to convert to the new religion, and that is optimistic. Even if all the "leaders" pushed for the new break away, chances are you will never recreate the level of success of SA, and for some people that just won't be good enough.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 04:31:24 AM
Its the time and resources spent on the Temples and followers that prevent people from considering this avenue. We are talking about years of gold poured into the infrastructure. Few people are really going to want to do all that again just to get the new church to replace the old. That is assuming you even could. Remember that many of the members of SA are likely to be semi inactive. I would think at best you might get 60-70% of the SA Lords to convert to the new religion, and that is optimistic. Even if all the "leaders" pushed for the new break away, chances are you will never recreate the level of success of SA, and for some people that just won't be good enough.

But think of it from the perspective of the new players. Now they have a chance to build something big. SA took a lot of work that's true and many of us veterans spent years building it. That legacy will live on in the new sect. The history of SA is far more interesting to me then the number of followers or size of its temples.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 04:35:20 AM
But think of it from the perspective of the new players. Now they have a chance to build something big. SA took a lot of work that's true and many of us veterans spent years building it. That legacy will live on in the new sect. The history of SA is far more interesting to me then the number of followers or size of its temples.

That would assume a influx of new players, that is something we haven't had in a long long time. The reality right now is that we aren't replacing the veterans leaving the game without major events causing rage quits. If a sizeable group really wanted to try and replicate SA we would have seen serious attempts on other islands. Chances are if SA implodes, you won't see its like again.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 03, 2014, 04:37:04 AM
I'm pretty sure the only one who would connect Enoch with Jonsu is Rabisu. Jonsu and Enoch became associated when Jonsu was Luminary of the Maddening, hunting down Bowie's mystic cult that took root in Morek that I'm sure next to one was aware of either.

Honestly, that may have happened, but I wasn't saving letters in BM back then and as a player I don't remember Enoch until rather later. Enoch's action did seem to come out of left field. Maybe that'd be different if I kept detailed dossiers and records like I do nowadays, but otherwise if Enoch was leaving breadcrumbs they were very very small. I'll go back and see but so far my impression has been that it's been a touch too subtle, especially in comparison to the not-subtle consequence the progression has resulted in.

Which I get, if you don't want other characters to know your character is plotting betrayal, obviously you're not going to telegraph that to other characters. On the other hand, roleplays that players read (but which characters wouldn't know about) can serve to telegraph to other players what's going on, so that it doesn't come as a surprise, and what we see is a believable character progression and a narrative we can figure on having a part in.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 04:40:01 AM
Honestly, that may have happened, but I wasn't saving letters in BM back then and as a player I don't remember Enoch until rather later. Enoch's action did seem to come out of left field. Maybe that'd be different if I kept detailed dossiers and records like I do nowadays, but otherwise if Enoch was leaving breadcrumbs they were very very small. I'll go back and see but so far my impression has been that it's been a touch too subtle, especially in comparison to the not-subtle consequence the progression has resulted in.

Which I get, if you don't want other characters to know your character is plotting betrayal, obviously you're not going to telegraph that to other characters. On the other hand, roleplays that players read (but which characters wouldn't know about) can serve to telegraph to other players what's going on, so that it doesn't come as a surprise, and what we see is a believable character progression and a narrative we can figure on having a part in.

While that is ideally true, far to many people fear players using such OOC knowledge so unfortunately that is not the culture that has been fostered in game.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 04:40:49 AM
That would assume a influx of new players, that is something we haven't had in a long long time. The reality right now is that we aren't replacing the veterans leaving the game without major events causing rage quits. If a sizeable group really wanted to try and replicate SA we would have seen serious attempts on other islands. Chances are if SA implodes, you won't see its like again.

We weren't seeing an influx of new players because until recently the continent was stagnant. Naturally players would lose interest if they joined a peaceful realm with nothing going on. Now when new players show up they should be getting invited to join either side of a continent spanning religious war.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 04:42:15 AM
We weren't seeing an influx of new players because until recently the continent was stagnant. Now when new players show up they should be getting invited to join either side of a spiritual war.

We aren't seeing new players to the game at all. New players to the continent is also going to be hard. Most people that have a interest playing on Dwilight are already there. There will be small amounts obviously, but nothing in the order of what would be required to set up even a small amount of the success of SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: BarticaBoat on February 03, 2014, 04:46:17 AM
Oh so when your toy you put years into is destroyed, it becomes a problem?  ::)

This is the name of the game people. There was a nice core of players who thought they were the best, the smartest, the craftiest and well... you've been had. By an old timer and a newbie. Deal with it. Realms with literally a decade of history have been destroyed and they didn't take to the forums to complain, SA will persevere in a different form. Circle of life, yada yada.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 03, 2014, 04:53:31 AM
While that is ideally true, far to many people fear players using such OOC knowledge so unfortunately that is not the culture that has been fostered in game.

Well take Abington. That realm had tons of characters - more than are in all of SA, I believe, and like SA it was the big guy on the block, lots of work and investment gone into it. Gauihu came along and basically just ended the whole thing. Executed some people, declared people rebels when they weren't, declared war on the whole continent, went stark raving mad. But it wasn't a surprise to anyone because the character was slowly spiralling into madness, sadism and megalomania for years. He put on the good PR face, but in the roleplays you still saw the progression from well-intentioned extremist to bat!@#$-insane king. Something like that in Enoch would have been welcome as a player.

I think in general its best to give people benefit of the doubt. That way if OOC info is abused somehow its easier to spot. The answer shouldn't be, keep everyone in the dark, that makes the game much less interesting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 04:55:21 AM
Well take Abington. That realm had tons of characters - more than are in all of SA, I believe, and like SA it was the big guy on the block, lots of work and investment gone into it. Gauihu came along and basically just ended the whole thing. Executed some people, declared people rebels when they weren't, declared war on the whole continent, went stark raving mad. But it wasn't a surprise to anyone because the character was slowly spiralling into madness, sadism and megalomania for years. He put on the good PR face, but in the roleplays you still saw the progression from well-intentioned extremist to bat!@#$-insane king. Something like that in Enoch would have been welcome as a player.

I think in general its best to give people benefit of the doubt. That way if OOC info is abused somehow its easier to spot. The answer shouldn't be, keep everyone in the dark, that makes the game much less interesting.

I completely agree. I am just being realistic in stating that a sizeable group are not going to take the risk of posting RP's of this nature.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 03, 2014, 05:01:27 AM
They feel he's exploited a poorly designed game mechanic that made this takeover too easy.

I personally feel like the elders may have been a little careless in letting Enoch become Regent. Not in the sense that there was any evidence to link him to Jonsu but simply in the sense that he was kind of a quiet do nothing character. At that time the church was still pretty moderate and I was a less popular choice as a hardline zealot. They actually nullified the elections and started them again when I would have won. They were probably concerned that I was going to shake things up, sick our priests on Niselur and hurt the faith, so they went with the quiet guy. It's hard to say that the people who put a guy they knew nothing about in the highest seat of power were blameless when he started running amok.

"Let"?

SA tried to be inclusive. It was innovative in the sense that leadership positions are regularly elected. This is generally considered a good and fun thing, because it involves players. SA has a whooping, what, 13 elders? This game is losing more and more nobles, and in SA, like in most realm, it had become hard to find new blood. Most of the people with a minimum of ambition were already elders. And as Vita said, some supported Enoch without the slightest hint of what he was planning.

You know they actually declared an election void so they could have a do over and make sure Enoch won instead of me.

That election ended with barely any candidates making any announcement, and thus barely any elders having actually cast a vote. Also, I don't think the first vote had you as a winner, did it?

Its the time and resources spent on the Temples and followers that prevent people from considering this avenue. We are talking about years of gold poured into the infrastructure. Few people are really going to want to do all that again just to get the new church to replace the old. That is assuming you even could. Remember that many of the members of SA are likely to be semi inactive. I would think at best you might get 60-70% of the SA Lords to convert to the new religion, and that is optimistic. Even if all the "leaders" pushed for the new break away, chances are you will never recreate the level of success of SA, and for some people that just won't be good enough.

Why bother, if it can all happen again the next time the founder disappears? I sure wouldn't.

We aren't seeing new players to the game at all. New players to the continent is also going to be hard. Most people that have a interest playing on Dwilight are already there. There will be small amounts obviously, but nothing in the order of what would be required to set up even a small amount of the success of SA.


That's nonsense. The whole continent was at war.

Oh so when your toy you put years into is destroyed, it becomes a problem?  ::)

This is the name of the game people. There was a nice core of players who thought they were the best, the smartest, the craftiest and well... you've been had. By an old timer and a newbie. Deal with it. Realms with literally a decade of history have been destroyed and they didn't take to the forums to complain, SA will persevere in a different form. Circle of life, yada yada.

I can't think of a single realm that, after years of existence, was destroyed by a click and win mechanic like this.

I completely agree. I am just being realistic in stating that a sizeable group are not going to take the risk of posting RP's of this nature.

He could have sent RPs, and it wouldn't have changed anything. By then, he already had total immunity.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 03, 2014, 05:09:39 AM
Notably that Enoch was essentially inactive for the last few weeks, or at least appeared to be.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 03, 2014, 05:34:48 AM
Notably that Enoch was essentially inactive for the last few weeks, or at least appeared to be.

I never noticed him to be active at all. A few letters here and there, at most, but never participated in anything. There was no power struggle. He just played along until he decided not to.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 05:39:09 AM
I never noticed him to be active at all. A few letters here and there, at most, but never participated in anything. There was no power struggle. He just played along until he decided not to.

It is always the quiet ones don't you know.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vita` on February 03, 2014, 05:40:41 AM
Dishman has always been an involved player by my count. He did share that he got rather ooc distracted moving earlier this month though. Anyway, he's always been quite good at replying to anything I sent him.

For the record, I'm not upset about Seoras not knowing - it's quite an interesting character development to work through.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 05:57:06 AM
How easy would it be to actually destroy the whole religion? The wiki mentions a reformation mechanic when does that kick in?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 03, 2014, 06:01:38 AM
How easy would it be to actually destroy the whole religion? The wiki mentions a reformation mechanic when does that kick in?

When there are no elders.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 06:12:27 AM
How easy would it be to actually destroy the whole religion? The wiki mentions a reformation mechanic when does that kick in?

Would you consider it destroyed if they eradicated all the Elder ranks but there own? How about if they delete all the ranks high enough to be able to manage temples, then as the only character able to expand or shrink temples goes around shutting them all down?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 03, 2014, 06:17:25 AM
People on both sides of this conflict have the power to either litterally or effectively destroy SA within a rather short time frame. Jonsu & co. could cause a collapse by kicking out all priests from the eldership, and heck kicking out all faithful while she is at it, whereas the opposing priests could unconvert almost all of the following within but a few months at most.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2014, 06:25:32 AM
People on both sides of this conflict have the power to either litterally or effectively destroy SA within a rather short time frame. Jonsu & co. could cause a collapse by kicking out all priests from the eldership, and heck kicking out all faithful while she is at it, whereas the opposing priests could unconvert almost all of the following within but a few months at most.

I don't see the loss of followers being a huge issue. It would take about as long to restore them if such and action would actually lead to change. It is an effort, but certainly one that is manageable. Now if people start shrinking the larger temples, that has the potential to be seriously damaging depending on how many they could get to before/if they are stopped.

But really until people start making some plays in game, the cries about the end of SA are premature. There is far too much assumption about what Jonsu is going to do the religion so far as I can see, and little hard evidence that anyone is preparing to seriously damage the church.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 03, 2014, 06:31:26 AM
But really until people start making some plays in game, the cries about the end of SA are premature. There is far too much assumption about what Jonsu is going to do the religion so far as I can see, and little hard evidence that anyone is preparing to seriously damage the church.

Indeed, it is worth noting that all previous top Elders of all religions had the same powers that are now feared in the hands of Jonsu.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 03, 2014, 06:34:24 AM
I don't see the loss of followers being a huge issue. It would take about as long to restore them if such and action would actually lead to change. It is an effort, but certainly one that is manageable. Now if people start shrinking the larger temples, that has the potential to be seriously damaging depending on how many they could get to before/if they are stopped.

But really until people start making some plays in game, the cries about the end of SA are premature. There is far too much assumption about what Jonsu is going to do the religion so far as I can see, and little hard evidence that anyone is preparing to seriously damage the church.

No followers, no way to fund the upkeeps, no temple. Keeping the temples big as long as possible would drain the global treasury incredibly fast.

Converting regions takes ages. Unconverting them takes days.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 06:40:13 AM
Would you consider it destroyed if they eradicated all the Elder ranks but there own? How about if they delete all the ranks high enough to be able to manage temples, then as the only character able to expand or shrink temples goes around shutting them all down?

Well for starters she can't kick out the priests. By extension I don't think she can eliminate all the full member ranks, so that would be pointless.

As for physically shutting down temples, the realm authority can arrest her and ban her so she could only deconstruct temples in willing realms and I think that would still cause extreme unrest.

When there are no elders.

So if there's just one it doesn't happen?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 03, 2014, 06:43:14 AM
Well for starters she can't kick out the priests. By extension I don't think she can eliminate all the full member ranks, so that would be pointless.

As for physically shutting down temples, the realm authority can arrest her and ban her so she could only deconstruct temples in willing realms and I think that would still cause extreme unrest.

So if there's just one it doesn't happen?

No.

If there is just one elder, and that elder is a priest, the religion can remain on cruise forever.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 06:45:33 AM
Ok religions need a protest feature.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 03, 2014, 06:50:34 AM
I would like everyone to calm down some on this. Its certainly a controversial move with Jonsu gaining large power over the church's well being but I think we should let some things happen somewhat before deciding that SA is destroyed. Justin has shown he is open to players' suggestions, although allowing Alaster to get the position isn't thrilling everyone else but at that same time, people can calmly give suggestions OOC of what they view as the best way for things to go other than Jonsu should quit because you don't like what he did. There is a difference between working with people to allow for fun and conflict to happen well and simply demanding he undo what he  did because you don't like it.

To be honest, I personally am not a huge fan of what has transpired exactly the way it was done but I am giving the player a chance, something most of you are not. Maybe Justin isn't trying to have Jonsu destroy SA or be a complete dictator, we don't really know until we at least give him a chance beyond the first several hours.

I am not saying Jonsu's actions are actually a good thing, but I am not saying they are necessarily bad either, I am saying we should give it a little time to actually see how things turn out, and reevaluate then.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 03, 2014, 07:06:01 AM
Indeed, it is worth noting that all previous top Elders of all religions had the same powers that are now feared in the hands of Jonsu.

Yes because while one might expect the Pope to wield a great deal of power, if the Pope one day twirled his mustache and made some heretic the new Pope, it's a bit weird that the only option all the hiearachy really have are:

1. Sit around uncomfortably while Pope Evil does whatever.
2. Try to pretend to be Pope Evil's best friend in order to eventually somehow backstab him.
3. Leave the religion and become apostates, either trying to found a new religion of their own or just attacking the old one.

Am I wrong here? I mean these are basically the choices. Now dustole and stabbity have introduced Pope Evil 2 so you can choose Pope Evil 1 or Pope Evil 2 (even though Pope Evil 1 had no plausible reason to make Pope Evil 2 a Pope, and it's similarly weird that Pope Evil 1 even *can* do that in the first place) but that's not adding any real options.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 03, 2014, 07:09:15 AM
Why are people so angry? Elders were literally just sitting there. They weren't doing anything interesting.

At least let the guy do something interesting. Some people seem to be pissed that years of work are about to be destroyed but sometimes that is exactly what you need. Instead of dwelling on what happened, why not look forward to things that haven't happened? Who knows, Jonsu might even be the man who revitalizes the church. At least it seems he is making people talk.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 07:14:12 AM
The real problem is he already failed repeatedly in the past to ascend to power through the player created charter, so instead he's gone through game mechanics that people have often complained were flawed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 03, 2014, 07:26:37 AM
In the grander scheme of things  Jonsu probably has the backing of Niselur and Asylon.   So she might have the power to pull off declaring herself the "pope".   



Why Alaster?   Well because it was my idea and because Kabrinski's hate Himoura's.    Alaster has been training himself to be a Paladin of the Stars for a long time.   Swordsmandship, Spell Casting and Oratory.   I think that SA needs another Prophet like Mathurin.   One who stays in the background and lets the church do its thing.  Only getting involved when things are drastic.   That is the route I am going with Alaster.   My RP was about him getting consumed by the Light of the Stars. 


So if my side wins this thing I can concentrate on a different continent for  a while.



Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 07:46:04 AM
Why are people so angry? Elders were literally just sitting there. They weren't doing anything interesting.

At least let the guy do something interesting. Some people seem to be pissed that years of work are about to be destroyed but sometimes that is exactly what you need. Instead of dwelling on what happened, why not look forward to things that haven't happened? Who knows, Jonsu might even be the man who revitalizes the church. At least it seems he is making people talk.

The elders were doing a ton of !@#$. Once Katrina and I became light and luminary of the maddening we were preparing for an all out priest invasion on Niselur. That's what makes this coup all the more frustrating.

In the grander scheme of things  Jonsu probably has the backing of Niselur and Asylon.   So she might have the power to pull off declaring herself the "pope".   


If she really had their backing she should have founded a new religion so we could have a legitimate struggle between old and new Astroist beliefs rather then this exploitative coup that's left us with a bizzare ad hoc roleplay event.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: D`Este on February 03, 2014, 10:53:21 AM
People, there are ways to deal with this IC, that you don't see them, doesn't mean there arent.

Personally I believe it's a good thing SA is getting damage, the enforced peace of the faith has created a too stable relation between major realms in the north. Wars against those realms used to be suicide. SA as well only went for their win, accepting only their outcome/solution. So don't be surprised if something is plotted against the all mighty SA that you can't stop despite having massive numbers. Accept what has happened, regroup, think what you can do and for godssake don't just sit on your ass and accept it ic-ly.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Kaltenthal on February 03, 2014, 01:45:37 PM
I dont know exactly what happened because Norgard was wounded but i saw that Jonsu has declared herself the new prophet. Ok. There where more then one    that tried that before. ´But as i see that, she also has the rank of prophet in the game mechanics, and that has to stop NOW!

Even if the player of Enoch has declared her the new prophet by making her so, there should be possibilities to PROTEST against that like you can when your regent does something against your will.

HELLO !! GM'S!! Please patch that ASAP! !!!!!!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 03, 2014, 02:27:18 PM
I dont know exactly what happened because Norgard was wounded but i saw that Jonsu has declared herself the new prophet. Ok. There where more then one    that tried that before. ´But as i see that, she also has the rank of prophet in the game mechanics, and that has to stop NOW!

Even if the player of Enoch has declared her the new prophet by making her so, there should be possibilities to PROTEST against that like you can when your regent does something against your will.

HELLO !! GM'S!! Please patch that ASAP! !!!!!!

No.

And who the hell do you think you are to be making loud demands of "GMs"?

Everything that happened, happened through perfectly IC game mechanics that are shared by every religion out there.

We understand that the result is controversial; however, it has been well-known for many years now that whoever holds the top rank in a guild or religion owns it, and there is no recourse if you don't like what they're doing.

The fact that this is the first time—in the nearly 10 years since religion was implemented in the game—that there has been what amounts to a hostile takeover of a major religion should be a strong indicator that the game mechanics are, by and large, working well.

Does it suck for those who don't want Prophet Jonsu? Yeah, it sure does. But so do a lot of other things in BattleMaster that are totally legitimate, like losing a rebellion or having your character banned, then executed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 03, 2014, 02:34:34 PM
Yes because while one might expect the Pope to wield a great deal of power, if the Pope one day twirled his mustache and made some heretic the new Pope, it's a bit weird that the only option all the hiearachy really have are:

1. Sit around uncomfortably while Pope Evil does whatever.
2. Try to pretend to be Pope Evil's best friend in order to eventually somehow backstab him.
3. Leave the religion and become apostates, either trying to found a new religion of their own or just attacking the old one.

Am I wrong here? I mean these are basically the choices. Now dustole and stabbity have introduced Pope Evil 2 so you can choose Pope Evil 1 or Pope Evil 2 (even though Pope Evil 1 had no plausible reason to make Pope Evil 2 a Pope, and it's similarly weird that Pope Evil 1 even *can* do that in the first place) but that's not adding any real options.

I fully agree that both schisms and/or some kind of protest option for religious Elders would be great additions to the game mechanic.

However, my point is that for all we know, any previous top Elder could have been an heretic too. You think you know what Jonsu is going is going to do and you don't like it, but Justin is allowed to play the game, and there is no indication that he would abuse his position in any way. And if he did, there are OOC recourses against that. I think it's fair to say he is the most watched player of BM right now, nothing is going to fly under the radar.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 03, 2014, 03:07:48 PM
I would like everyone to calm down some on this. Its certainly a controversial move with Jonsu gaining large power over the church's well being but I think we should let some things happen somewhat before deciding that SA is destroyed. Justin has shown he is open to players' suggestions, although allowing Alaster to get the position isn't thrilling everyone else but at that same time, people can calmly give suggestions OOC of what they view as the best way for things to go other than Jonsu should quit because you don't like what he did. There is a difference between working with people to allow for fun and conflict to happen well and simply demanding he undo what he  did because you don't like it.

To be honest, I personally am not a huge fan of what has transpired exactly the way it was done but I am giving the player a chance, something most of you are not. Maybe Justin isn't trying to have Jonsu destroy SA or be a complete dictator, we don't really know until we at least give him a chance beyond the first several hours.

I am not saying Jonsu's actions are actually a good thing, but I am not saying they are necessarily bad either, I am saying we should give it a little time to actually see how things turn out, and reevaluate then.

Destroying SA can be done in more ways than just utterly collapsing it via game mechanics.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 03, 2014, 04:29:32 PM
Yeah, no way now that I'm playing along while the two most hated people in SA are playing Game of Thrones with the church, and no one else can do anything to stop it. Short of dismantling the whole religion and starting over, or sucking up, I'm not sure there is anything that can be done. Do tell if we're missing something.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 03, 2014, 04:38:16 PM
Do tell if we're missing something.

Barring a change in game mechanic, the other option I can think of is to kill them both; obviously that's far from trivial to achieve.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 03, 2014, 04:41:08 PM
Barring a change in game mechanic, the other option I can think of is to kill them both; obviously that's far from trivial to achieve.

Save utter stupidity on their part, it's impossible. And all Jonsu would need to do is take a royal, like Fulco, make him an elder, and BAM: unbannable loyal elder "priest".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on February 03, 2014, 04:48:17 PM
Save utter stupidity on their part, it's impossible. And all Jonsu would need to do is take a royal, like Fulco, make him an elder, and BAM: unbannable loyal elder "priest".

You could start talking to Fulco to win him back to your side then.

I'm only half sarcastic here. I understand the frustration, but the religion game has always been about talking to people and convincing them to do things they don't want to do because the gods want it. It's not so different here.

In-game, I imagine my reaction would be "the Stars have abandoned us! Repent your sins before it's too late!" This event happened, you may not like it, you may think the game mechanics should work differently ( I agree), but it is possible to keep playing the game in good faith.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 03, 2014, 04:49:48 PM
You could start talking to Fulco to win him back to your side then.

I'm only half sarcastic here. I understand the frustration, but the religion game has always been about talking to people and convincing them to do things they don't want to do because the gods want it. It's not so different here.

In-game, I imagine my reaction would be "the Stars have abandoned us! Repent your sins before it's too late!" This event happened, you may not like it, you may think the game mechanics should work differently ( I agree), but it is possible to keep playing the game in good faith.

It is not possible to keep playing the game in good faith with people who have no good faith when playing with you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 03, 2014, 05:22:47 PM
I have good faith.  I'm doing thus to savethe church.  Even if I gotta change how I play Alaster.




If people truly don't want Alaster I will just pause him and you all can deal with Jonsu on your own.


I was about to pause when I talked to Jonsu and reputed to find a way for us to win the church back.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 03, 2014, 06:26:37 PM
Yeah and it makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER that Jonsu promoted Alaster to Prophet. That character would have no reason to do that kind of thing and the only reason it happened is because you two are making OOC deals - just the way you're appealing to me OOC to support Alaster. My character would have absolutely no reason to do that either, certainly not just because you're sending me OOC messages to gain IC support. And all this convoluted, implausible, poorly roleplayed, game-mechanics winning crap is just too much for me, I'd rather play an enjoyable game with believable characters and events and up until this "controversial" situation that's exactly what it's been - regardless of how well things are going for my characters. So yeah, I'm tapping out, have fun.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 03, 2014, 06:30:23 PM
Daycryn,

I've sent you IC messages as well.    At least I thought I did before I started sending OOC messages.     My OOC messages were more of a plea to help me.  If current situation isn't the best then help me figure one out.   


Jonsu the character did not promote me to Elder.    Justin the player did.   He did that so that there is a means by which to oppose his take over of the church.  I spoke to you as a player to try and help you understand the situation OOC. 

I am going to go back and make sure I sent Rabisu an IC letter.  Because it was hectic last night and I might have missed a few people.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 08:03:47 PM
No.

And who the hell do you think you are to be making loud demands of "GMs"?

Everything that happened, happened through perfectly IC game mechanics that are shared by every religion out there.

We understand that the result is controversial; however, it has been well-known for many years now that whoever holds the top rank in a guild or religion owns it, and there is no recourse if you don't like what they're doing.

The fact that this is the first time—in the nearly 10 years since religion was implemented in the game—that there has been what amounts to a hostile takeover of a major religion should be a strong indicator that the game mechanics are, by and large, working well.

Does it suck for those who don't want Prophet Jonsu? Yeah, it sure does. But so do a lot of other things in BattleMaster that are totally legitimate, like losing a rebellion or having your character banned, then executed.

There's never been a situation like this before because no religion has actually mattered enough that this could come about. This entire event highlights a truly absurd situation. Let suppose that one day pope Francis declared Justin Bieber the second coming of Christ, and then Jesus Bieber started tweeting from all the way in Toronto that all the cardinals are excommunicated. Do you think anything would happen beyond the Cardinals declaring Francis has gone nuts, having his crazy ass thrown out of the church and convening to elect a new pope?

Come on the game mechanics here are absurd and we're only seeing that now because few religions have ever been important enough that people actually plotted to take them over.

Now that they've created a metagame with rules they agreed on out of character. That's just absurd.

People, there are ways to deal with this IC, that you don't see them, doesn't mean there arent.

We've discussed our options and they all pretty much suck, will cut the religeon's membership in half and have about a one in a million chance of working anyway.


Personally I believe it's a good thing SA is getting damage, the enforced peace of the faith has created a too stable relation between major realms in the north. Wars against those realms used to be suicide. SA as well only went for their win, accepting only their outcome/solution. So don't be surprised if something is plotted against the all mighty SA that you can't stop despite having massive numbers. Accept what has happened, regroup, think what you can do and for godssake don't just sit on your ass and accept it ic-ly.

Did you get knocked on the head and forget the last year and a half? The religion already lost it's power. Your realm defeated Astrum. We were going for a last ditch priest attack. The Pax Dwilight was over a long time ago.

On that note why the hell did Enoch take his sweet sweet time doing this? He was elected regent a really long time ago. He just passively let everything transpire. It's like he was waiting for the most frustrating moment to spring this on us.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Charles on February 03, 2014, 08:31:06 PM
One method that might be easiest to solve this problem (potentially) is to make the top person(s) in any religion mortal.  As in, they can be killed killed when attacked by an infiltrator, like heroes.  This makes sense historically as usually when a powerful head of church/state needed to be replaced, they were assassinated.

The religion mechanics do seem like a problematic aspect of the game.  This is from someone who has no vested interest in SA and am just now attempting to partake in the whole religious aspect of the game (on a different continent). 

I actually have more interest in the destruction of SA, if SA starts to crumble I may just loot the temple in my region for the gold.  My character does hate Jonsu though.  And I must say that the player of Jonsu plays her in a very different way than I like, but that is his/her choice.  The scheming which she does, in my opinion, should have gotten her executed a while ago.  My character disliked many of her previous stunts, this one I am uncomfortable with. 

One thing that probably should be considered is that the game as it is makes things very fun and interesting for Jonsu and a few others who partake in what she is doing, but less fun for nearly everyone else.  Telling people who have spent years building something that has suddenly been torn from them to "suck it up, it's a game" is a bit unfair and not useful.  This is not backgammon or risk where starting over is even an option.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 08:32:58 PM
Is Mathurin still paused? It would be just fantastic if he'd show up and fix all this.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 03, 2014, 08:38:32 PM
But there is another option.    I understand that not everyone likes Alaste.   I am trying to make the best out of a bad situation.   


Feel free to talk to me on the Forums or through in game means to help me come up with a solution that isn't.   "Just delete your character"
I am actually quite open to ideas and ways to make this fun for everyone.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 03, 2014, 08:39:52 PM
But there is another option.    I understand that not everyone likes Alaste.   I am trying to make the best out of a bad situation.   


Feel free to talk to me on the Forums or through in game means to help me come up with a solution that isn't.   "Just delete your character"
I am actually quite open to ideas and ways to make this fun for everyone.

You are trying to make a crap situation from a crappier situation is how most people would see it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: D`Este on February 03, 2014, 08:44:57 PM
chenier, stop behaving like a kid who's candy is stolen. In every thread in the past week you have been like this. man up.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on February 03, 2014, 08:52:29 PM
Let suppose that one day pope Francis declared Justin Bieber the second coming of Christ

Maybe that would be similar if Pope Francis was actually Richard Dawkins in disguise. Enoch hated the church and entered it with the sole intention of messing it up.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 03, 2014, 09:06:52 PM
Should have chosen your elder more carefully. It looks like the church brought itself down.

It would be nice to have an option to get rid of your superior with enough support from your colleagues though.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 09:09:55 PM
Should have chosen your elder more carefully. It looks like the church brought itself down.

It would be nice to have an option to get rid of your superior with enough support from your colleagues though.

Exactly there should be some means to resist, just like how in a rebellion the loyalists have a chance to fight back and if your realm gets taken over by a tyrant you have the chance to rebel.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 03, 2014, 09:35:03 PM
Sweet jesus.   I'm giving you a means to fight back.  Take it.       Stop complaining and help me fight back. 

You want to burn Alaster at the stake?  I might be willing to do it...     The point is that I know Alaster isn't the most popular.  I'm willing to play this out however it needs to go. 

Fight back and lets turn this into something fun.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 03, 2014, 09:35:53 PM
OOC message to SA, but I suppose I'll post it here, too.

Personally, what is frustrating is that the entire SA is being held hostage, RP-wise, due to the mechanics of BM's religion system.

There was little to no RP for the majority of the church leading up to the takeover. For the most part, it was mechanics. Jonsu returns to SA despite being a declared heretic, because the mechanics allowed her to. Enoch raises Jonsu to an Elder position, giving her mechanical powers to wield in the Church. Jonsu demotes most of the other Elders and bars those people from using those same mechanics against Jonsu.

We are then suggested to find an RP way out of this mess, despite the fact that it was a mess mostly done through the mechanics and not RP. We can RP all we want, but so long as Jonsu or whoever else has Eldership holds mechanical advantage in SA, RP will, at best, be a band-aid. Mechanics will (almost) always trump RP.

Well, what's done is done. At least certain issues in the religion system were exposed. Maybe Elders could not be demoted unless approved by a majority of the other Elders. Maybe Elders could only be elected by a majority of full members. Of course, that does mess with religions whose RP may not be as democratic...

In the end, I suppose, Jonsu wins. Players in religions can no longer expect a certain level of decorum when dealing with each other, since now someone has abused the position of Elder. The powers of the position have always been there, of course, but in the past its uses were tempered by the respect between the players who have access to it and those who do not. That has changed, and now I feel that the mechanics must be changed in order to avoid a repeat of this debacle. The trust between the players, though, cannot be replaced.

@Alaster

Except we can't fight back, unless Jonsu allows us to. There are no mechanics in place that allows full members from deposing Elders. As long as Jonsu keeps the Elder position within her followers, there is no way for the majority of SA to do anything about the hostage.

Mechanics got us here, and mechanics should be able to get us back. RP can only go so far.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 03, 2014, 09:54:01 PM
But Jonsu is willing to step down if she loses.      That is what is happening here.   
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 09:59:58 PM
But she can only lose on terms Justin created for her. The RP bone she's thrown you doesn't make things better it makes things worse.

We'll play your stupid game because the alternative is throwing away years of RP work, but stop being all "why are you all mad at me what did I do?"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 03, 2014, 10:05:01 PM
But Jonsu is willing to step down if she loses.      That is what is happening here.

If she loses to you, which is utterly stupid. And so she says. We only have his word on that. Which, given what he just did, is worth absolutely nothing to me.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on February 03, 2014, 10:11:58 PM
One "bright side" to this is that now we have a schism but all the schismatic individuals are still part of our message boards.  I mean I'm going to play on; I don't like what happened (at all., period intentional), but I'm willing to work with it.  I would strongly suggest giving it a few days

The problem I think a lot of people are having (myself to a lesser extent included) is that this new RP is essentially forced on us; we were not given a choice whether we wanted to RP this schism with power in other people's hands and it looks a lot like the resources and hard work of other people just got hijacked (because they did).  If you all are willing, as players, to let a real and actual power struggle ensue with different factions without booting malcontents from the church then I am willing to work with you.  I am willing to have my character say "I belong to Cephas, or I belong to Apollonius, or I belong to Paul".  But there has to be a *lot* of flexibility to allow for the rise of various factions (faction of Jonsu, faction of Alaster, faction of Constantine, etc.) that is not supported by the game.

I would suggest using any unused ranks that may exist to create a Knight of Jonsu & Knight of Alaster (etc.) rank for those of us who choose to support one of the new "prophets".  Hell, even a Knight of Mathurin rank would work out for those who refuse to recognize them.

And Chenier: if you don't trust Justin and Dustin then who do you trust to administer this whole debacle?  Because unfortunately it's not going away and things aren't going back to the way they were as much as any of us wish they would.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on February 03, 2014, 10:24:39 PM
OFaolain, I appreciate your willingness to work with it, and I hope I can make this enjoyable for everyone. Yes, you are right, the situation was forced on you. However, if this was purely a game of mutual cooperation where nothing happened without consent from both sides, nothing would ever happen. Yes, Jonsu just usurped a position, but this is a game about politics, and the occasional usurper will arise from time to time. Maybe not in this fashion, as it is extremely unique, but it will happen. I also recognize the inherent failures in the game mechanics (I hope this helps speed along the schism mechanic and some religious retooling for example), and am working towards a solution I hope everyone will find mutually enjoyable.

In fact, your faction suggestion is exactly what dustole and I are working to implement. I rushed ahead last night with promoting him, because I trust Dustole as a player, and frankly, I trust him as a great counter to any personal bias I might carry. Any suggestions on how to improve the overall experience are most welcome.

I have acquired 22 trust medals since they were incorporated, and 21 fun medals, and as a player, I have a great love for battlemaster, have played it for over 10 years, and hope to continue, and hope everyone continues. I trust myself, when paired with someone whose bias is damn near polar opposite of mine, to be fair when in the execution of what is to come.

No one will be booted from the faith (unless they are actively attacking the infrastructure of the faith) from now on. Anyone who becomes an Anti-Regent who attempts to boot people who are not actively attacking the infrastructure of the faith, however, will be booted from Anti-Regent status, and will not be given a second chance. I see no reason why we cannot be gentlemanly about this.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 03, 2014, 11:05:40 PM
See? Everything will be fine. you are always bound to upset some people when you go against the status quo.

I think this event will make Dwilight more interesting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on February 03, 2014, 11:09:32 PM
I certainly hope so.

To clear up any misconception about what is happening:

This is NOT Jonsu vs Alaster and everyone else can either join or watch. Get involved. Form your own faction, its why we set up the Anti-Regent rank. The Maddening is superior right now people, act like it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 03, 2014, 11:34:01 PM
And why would my character want to be an anti-regent?

What Jonsu and Enoch (and now Alaster) did was supposed to be impossible in SA's Charter. There is a way you become Regent; Jonus (and Alaster) is NOT the Regent. She became it by doing a thing which is physically impossible.

Yes, mechanics trump RP. You played a trump card. You won. Congrats. You won BM. You did the thing we all agree can't be done; don't be surprised so many other people are pissed: because BM isn't like Diplomacy or Risk because you're not supposed to be able to win.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on February 03, 2014, 11:47:12 PM
And why would my character want to be an anti-regent?

What Jonsu and Enoch (and now Alaster) did was supposed to be impossible in SA's Charter. There is a way you become Regent; Jonus (and Alaster) is NOT the Regent. She became it by doing a thing which is physically impossible.

Yes, mechanics trump RP. You played a trump card. You won. Congrats. You won BM. You did the thing we all agree can't be done; don't be surprised so many other people are pissed: because BM isn't like Diplomacy or Risk because you're not supposed to be able to win.

Have I won? I hardly think so. Forget your damn charter, and remember that words are only as strong as the pieces of paper they're written on. You want to oust Jonsu? You can do it, but you'll need steel, or some very creative words.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 03, 2014, 11:51:42 PM
Here's the only way I see to make this work.

You want to represent the church is divided, sure whatever, but don't make some stupid contest out of it with rules you created or worse no rules beyond your subjective opinion of the situation. Protestants and Catholics have existed for centuries, no one ever won, neither side ever conceded. If faction A has one priest and one realm backing them, fine, let them stay faction A.

Admit to everyone that you powergamed, and then promise there will be no further power gaming. Don't hide behind any more game mechanics to make yourself untouchable. Put yourself at risk. Venture into enemy territory including the territory of enemies who have banned you. Push your realm leader around to the point where they might just ban you as well. Join underground movements. Accept duel offers. Don't give us any of that "but I worked so hard, I planned this for years" crap. A lot of things we'd been planning for years have gone down the tubes. I play a hero character, every time I go into battle there's a chance I'll die and whatever I've been working on will come to not.

You can't just us RP to simulate a mechanic that doesn't exist with rules you've come up with and expect good results.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 03, 2014, 11:57:32 PM
Why would he do that?

He played his cards right and he became the regent. You guys just got outplayed. Time to type gg and admit the fact you got outplayed and play by his rule.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 03, 2014, 11:58:43 PM
Why would he do that?

He played his cards right and he became the regent. You guys just got outplayed. Time to type gg and admit the fact you got outplayed and play by his rule.  8)

Thank you for making my point EXACTLY.

And that's why I've stopped playing. That. EXACTLY that.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 04, 2014, 12:01:17 AM
lol You stopped playing because he outplayed you? yikes.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 04, 2014, 12:02:27 AM
Why would he do that?

He played his cards right and he became the regent. You guys just got outplayed. Time to type gg and admit the fact you got outplayed and play by his rule.  8)

He won by exploiting a flawed mechanic. This coup makes no sense in character. There's no logical way this would ever happen in any world real or fantasy that had anything remotely resembling rules of said reality.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: sharkattack on February 04, 2014, 12:02:40 AM
I agree Lapallanch, also same old story, player Kingdoms/Religions fall and they just rage and quit the game.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on February 04, 2014, 12:03:55 AM
Here's the only way I see to make this work.

You want to represent the church is divided, sure whatever, but don't make some stupid contest out of it with rules you created or worse no rules beyond your subjective opinion of the situation. Protestants and Catholics have existed for centuries, no one ever won, neither side ever conceded. If faction A has one priest and one realm backing them, fine, let them stay faction A.

Admit to everyone that you powergamed, and then promise there will be no further power gaming. Don't hide behind any more game mechanics to make yourself untouchable. Put yourself at risk. Venture into enemy territory including the territory of enemies who have banned you. Push your realm leader around to the point where they might just ban you as well. Join underground movements. Accept duel offers. Don't give us any of that "but I worked so hard, I planned this for years" crap. A lot of things we'd been planning for years have gone down the tubes. I play a hero character, every time I go into battle there's a chance I'll die and whatever I've been working on will come to not.

You can't just us RP to simulate a mechanic that doesn't exist with rules you've come up with and expect good results.

I didn't power game. If I was powergaming and looking simply to win, I would not have taken the Church. I did it because it was in character for Jonsu. I'm not going to suddenly admit to doing something because you think I did it, and because you don't like what happened. I'm offering recourse, but my patience for it is wearing very thin for it. I am also not going to suddenly start throwing Jonsu into suicidal actions because you want her dead. She has been playing a very deliberate and patient game for a very long time now, and it bore some very unexpected fruit, and I'm not just going to throw it away. Yes, there is a chance the faith will splinter, and that years of war will inevitably end inconclusively. The protestant reform did not happen in the middle ages, it did not occur until 1517. This is more of an anti-pope situation, and some of those wars lasted a very long time.

Is this battlemaster, or sit-back-and-whine-master?

The gauntlet is thrown. Pick it up, or leave it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 04, 2014, 12:06:25 AM
He won by exploiting a flawed mechanic. This coup makes no sense in character. There's no logical way this would ever happen in any world real or fantasy that had anything remotely resembling rules of said reality.

There have been many flawed mechanics and there will always be. Like all the previous cases, nothing will be reversed and devs will fix it in time if they(or just Tim now) will fix it if they see it is exploitable.

This has happened what once in the past 10 years? Now that you know this is very possible, I am sure people will be more careful when they are appointing elders.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 04, 2014, 12:11:44 AM
I agree Lapallanch, also same old story, player Kingdoms/Religions fall and they just rage and quit the game.

Indeed. People either quit or just don't give a damn. When your realm loses a war, people won't quit. They will fight to the end. That doesn't happen in the real world. People surrender and hope they get another chance.

Sure Jonsu became the regent, but who knows. someone might outplay Jonsu in time and kick his ass out. game mechanics are part of this game and all our characters are supposed to play accordingly. you can't expect everything you don't like to be changed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 04, 2014, 12:19:31 AM
I believe this discussion has probably run its course. There is little chance that people are going to change their minds regarding the events that have occurred if they have not already done so. Further rehashing of both sides of the argument are unlikely to be productive.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 04, 2014, 12:19:51 AM
This... Is... AWESOME!!!!  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 04, 2014, 12:23:59 AM
I didn't power game. If I was powergaming and looking simply to win, I would not have taken the Church. I did it because it was in character for Jonsu. I'm not going to suddenly admit to doing something because you think I did it, and because you don't like what happened. I'm offering recourse, but my patience for it is wearing very thin for it. I am also not going to suddenly start throwing Jonsu into suicidal actions because you want her dead. She has been playing a very deliberate and patient game for a very long time now, and it bore some very unexpected fruit, and I'm not just going to throw it away. Yes, there is a chance the faith will splinter, and that years of war will inevitably end inconclusively. The protestant reform did not happen in the middle ages, it did not occur until 1517. This is more of an anti-pope situation, and some of those wars lasted a very long time.

Is this battlemaster, or sit-back-and-whine-master?

The gauntlet is thrown. Pick it up, or leave it.

Oh really it's not power gaming then why are you offering a role play consolation prize?

Don't even try to say this was in character. Jonsu left the church declaring it a failed institution. You tried to establish multiple cults with Jonsu and they all failed miserably. Now you're pretending that was all for show? What show is that exactly? Explain how this trick works where being a total failure as a cult leader suddenly makes you eligible to take over a major religion. You had a sleeper who's a borderline inactive player end up on top who hands over the whole religion to you creating a scenario where no one can touch you. How is that not power gaming? What's the roleplay explanation for why Enoch remained loyal to Jonsu all these years even to the point of giving up his own power for her?  Historically that almost never happens. No one willingly hands over authority to someone else when they've reached the top.

You could have done plenty of other things with Enoch in your back pocket but you chose the most exploitative and disruptive one possible. You could have just founded some Eastern Astroist cult and ordered him to accept it and declare your stance friendly to it. You could have just gotten readmitted to the council with him retaining control (as any sane person would in that situation). Nope you chose click to win and now you're using the mechanical power you wield in game as a bargaining chip to play by whatever rules YOU want.

And now you've as much as said you're going to take 0 risks so that you can keep it this way until you get bored with it. But no that's not power gaming in the least.

You know what, !@#$ all your trust and RP medals cause now they don't mean !@#$. I don't care if you've got a congregational medal of honor that doesn't give your free reign to sell nuclear secrets to North Korea.

The funny thing is you've gotten a mountain of universally negative feedback and you don't seem to understand you've done anything wrong. Literally the only people on your side right now are people not playing or people that you've given free crap to.

Indeed. People either quit or just don't give a damn. When your realm loses a war, people won't quit. They will fight to the end. That doesn't happen in the real world. People surrender and hope they get another chance.

Sure Jonsu became the regent, but who knows. someone might outplay Jonsu in time and kick his ass out. game mechanics are part of this game and all our characters are supposed to play accordingly. you can't expect everything you don't like to be changed.

Well no not really because as Justin has admitted he will take absolutely 0 risks with Jonsu so there's absolutely no conceivable way to stop her.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 04, 2014, 12:31:08 AM

Well no not really because as Justin has admitted he will take absolutely 0 risks with Jonsu so there's absolutely no conceivable way to stop her.


You were given a conceivable way to defeat Jonsu.  You didn't like it.  We offered you another way to do it and you didn't like it. 


You haven't actually given any productive advice or help. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on February 04, 2014, 12:32:03 AM
Oh really it's not power gaming then why are you offering a role play consolation prize?

Don't even try to say this was in character. Jonsu left the church declaring it a failed institution. You tried to establish multiple cults with Jonsu and they all failed miserably. Now you're pretending that was all for show? What show is that exactly? Explain how this trick works where being a total failure as a cult leader suddenly makes you eligible to take over a major religion. You had a sleeper who's a borderline inactive player end up on top who hands over the whole religion to you creating a scenario where no one can touch you. How is that not power gaming? What's the roleplay explanation for why Enoch remained loyal to Jonsu all these years even to the point of giving up his own power for her?  Historically that almost never happens. No one willingly hands over authority to someone else when they've reached the top.

You could have done plenty of other things with Enoch in your back pocket but you chose the most exploitative and disruptive one possible. You could have just founded some Eastern Astroist cult and ordered him to accept it and declare your stance friendly to it. You could have just gotten readmitted to the council with him retaining control (as any sane person would in that situation). Nope you chose click to win and now you're using the mechanical power you wield in game as a bargaining chip to play by whatever rules YOU want.

And now you've as much as said you're going to take 0 risks so that you can keep it this way until you get bored with it. But no that's not power gaming in the least.

You know what, !@#$ all your trust and RP medals cause now they don't mean !@#$. I don't care if you've got a congregational medal of honor that doesn't give your free reign to sell nuclear secrets to North Korea.

The funny thing is you've gotten a mountain of universally negative feedback and you don't seem to understand you've done anything wrong. Literally the only people on your side right now are people not playing or people that you've given free crap to.

Well no not really because as Justin has admitted he will take absolutely 0 risks with Jonsu so there's absolutely no conceivable way to stop her.

Taking risks =/= committing suicidal actions.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 04, 2014, 12:33:25 AM
Taking risks =/= committing suicidal actions.

Do you plan to do anything at all that carries with it the risk of deportation or execution?


You were given a conceivable way to defeat Jonsu.  You didn't like it.  We offered you another way to do it and you didn't like it. 


You haven't actually given any productive advice or help.

We were given a made up game, and then another made up game only this time with no rules except your subjective opinion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: sharkattack on February 04, 2014, 12:36:22 AM
He said Jonsu and Alaster are trying to set up a counterplay and wants help with it but all these rage and whine posts are not helping. Help him setup counterplay instead of whining here.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 04, 2014, 12:36:56 AM
There's never been a situation like this before because no religion has actually mattered enough that this could come about. This entire event highlights a truly absurd situation. Let suppose that one day pope Francis declared Justin Bieber the second coming of Christ, and then Jesus Bieber started tweeting from all the way in Toronto that all the cardinals are excommunicated. Do you think anything would happen beyond the Cardinals declaring Francis has gone nuts, having his crazy ass thrown out of the church and convening to elect a new pope?

If I lived in a world of magic and medieval zealotry, maybe. We just had all the continents experience a magic world-shift. We are now plagued by monsters and undead. Every character can sense doom ticking down slowly upon the world. It isn't a much greater RP stretch to say a new prophet was primed and presented by the one elected 'closest to the prophet'. Weird !@#$ did happen in the medieval age without magic.

On that note why the hell did Enoch take his sweet sweet time doing this? He was elected regent a really long time ago. He just passively let everything transpire. It's like he was waiting for the most frustrating moment to spring this on us.

Sort of, yes. Several other people have complained that Enoch didn't talk much, and it is true that he made only token announcements to the general body and barely attended tasks...but I assure you he wasn't inactive. He kept as much of his correspondence 1on1 as possible. I tried to run several plots, all of which gained no traction. He did actively work toward the theocracies defeat, slipping tidbits of information that might be useful here and there...but he kept face. Should I have not let Dwilight have one great war before distracting everyone? Should I have pulled this in the middle of Niselur burning...or Astrum burning?

I actually have more interest in the destruction of SA, if SA starts to crumble I may just loot the temple in my region for the gold.  My character does hate Jonsu though.  And I must say that the player of Jonsu plays her in a very different way than I like, but that is his/her choice.  The scheming which she does, in my opinion, should have gotten her executed a while ago.  My character disliked many of her previous stunts, this one I am uncomfortable with. 

One thing that probably should be considered is that the game as it is makes things very fun and interesting for Jonsu and a few others who partake in what she is doing, but less fun for nearly everyone else.  Telling people who have spent years building something that has suddenly been torn from them to "suck it up, it's a game" is a bit unfair and not useful.  This is not backgammon or risk where starting over is even an option.

The player of Jonsu isn't to blame for this. Enoch came to her out of the blue, offering the reigns of the church (after a little haggling). I started working with Stabbity OOC to make sure that the fallout of this would be more fun than devastating. I was ready to bail on the plan if Stabbity was just going to destroy the church. I wanted SA the church (not the nobles, who are busy with monsters/undead/rebuilding) to have to reshape itself. Every election everyone hammered on and on about the charter....cause it seemed there was little else to do. Talk more about how we love the bloodstars? The war was nice....but what was likely to come after?

Enoch hated the church and entered it with the sole intention of messing it up.

You'd be surprised how many secret gathering places for Mysticism there are. It is largely inactive without Bowie, but I'm hoping for a revival. Enoch has been a panthiest this entire time, often talking about bloodmoon fruit and little tidbits here and there of other things. He wanted the church undermined significantly so that paganism will prosper.

I think this event will make Dwilight more interesting.

That was the intent.

I didn't power game. If I was powergaming and looking simply to win, I would not have taken the Church.....
The gauntlet is thrown. Pick it up, or leave it.

I like the idea of incorporating a schism. Much better than your original idea. Just try to make it fun, even for the complainers.

It's funny, a Kabrinski was the first one I had thought to offer the church to, but correspondence between Enoch and Alaster were somewhat sour.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 04, 2014, 12:44:19 AM
Trust me, if there was any way for SA to have completely banned Jonsu from ever joining again, we would have. Except there wasn't. Mechanics prevented us from doing this. If there was any way for us to regain control of the church (no, I do not include her scheme, which basically allows us to regain control of the church only if she allows it), we would have. Except there isn't.

There is nothing stopping Jonsu from simply ignoring the results of her "conflict" if it doesn't go her way. And, after everything that she has done, I can't say I trust her not to do so.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 04, 2014, 12:47:49 AM
If I lived in a world of magic and medieval zealotry, maybe. We just had all the continents experience a magic world-shift. We are now plagued by monsters and undead. Every character can sense doom ticking down slowly upon the world. It isn't a much greater RP stretch to say a new prophet was primed and presented by the one elected 'closest to the prophet'. Weird !@#$ did happen in the medieval age without magic.

Only that one was a convicted heretic booted out by every single high ranking elder. That every single lay person would go "well he's the regent" is preposterous. You want to say some people would go along with it, sure fine, but all of them? That's preposterous. Unless we're living in a high fantasy world that has mind control that would never happen.

Sort of, yes. Several other people have complained that Enoch didn't talk much, and it is true that he made only token announcements to the general body and barely attended tasks...but I assure you he wasn't inactive. He kept as much of his correspondence 1on1 as possible. I tried to run several plots, all of which gained no traction. He did actively work toward the theocracies defeat, slipping tidbits of information that might be useful here and there...but he kept face. Should I have not let Dwilight have one great war before distracting everyone? Should I have pulled this in the middle of Niselur burning...or Astrum burning?

What the hell kind of sense does any of that make? Why wouldn't you just declare the crusade over? You didn't need to scheme anymore you'd already won!


The player of Jonsu isn't to blame for this. Enoch came to her out of the blue, offering the reigns of the church (after a little haggling). I started working with Stabbity OOC to make sure that the fallout of this would be more fun than devastating. I was ready to bail on the plan if Stabbity was just going to destroy the church. I wanted SA the church (not the nobles, who are busy with monsters/undead/rebuilding) to have to reshape itself. Every election everyone hammered on and on about the charter....cause it seemed there was little else to do. Talk more about how we love the bloodstars? The war was nice....but what was likely to come after?

The war was awesome and it was still going on! We keep trying to convert more people. We keep looking for new prophecies. We search for a new prophet but in a way that's not patently ridiculous.

But you're right Justin isn't to blame for this. You both are. Good job you ruined the most fun thing in all of battle master.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on February 04, 2014, 12:50:07 AM
I love the new "fun" church... its so fun we have to create an artificial OOC mini-game that circumnavigates/ignores game mechanics in order to make it "interesting"...  ::)

Honestly I hope the interested parties man up and the church schisms, with the breakaway groups fighting each other until one or none gain supremacy. Sure it would suck to see the hard work of so many players (including myself) go to waste, but honestly what is the point of keeping SA institutionally whole when it ceases to be a church and becomes a framework for some strange OOC minigame run by a couple of players?

It's like trying to decide who rules a realm with "Duchy warfare" by exploiting mechanics like murderous settings and whatnot- not fun, gamey and totally immersion breaking. Best to acknowledge that the realm has been broken beyond repair and should just split, and the same goes for the Church. Simply put religions were not meant for the type of factional civil wars and takeovers that we're experiencing now- Jonsu was only able to do what she did because everyone (erroneously) assumed players would respect long established rp over game mechanics; now that people are aware of the risk it would be beyond stupid for Jonsu or anyone else to allow for another takeover, and without the possibility of another takeover an inter-church "civil war" is simply OOC nonsense.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 04, 2014, 12:50:35 AM
Trust me, if there was any way for SA to have completely banned Jonsu from ever joining again, we would have. Except there wasn't. Mechanics prevented us from doing this. If there was any way for us to regain control of the church (no, I do not include her scheme, which basically allows us to regain control of the church only if she allows it), we would have. Except there isn't.

There is nothing stopping Jonsu from simply ignoring the results of her "conflict" if it doesn't go her way. And, after everything that she has done, I can't say I trust her not to do so.

OOC-wise, if Jonsu is offering a convienant way to oppose her and you are afraid she won't let you easily topple her....then why would you refuse to even try? Even if she is the tyrant queen of the bloodstars, you can actively work against her...inside the church and out. Enoch did it within the church, Jonsu did it without. If this comes to it SA will be refounded under the old charter and it will be tasked with colonizing Dwilight from the heretic popess.  Does that really sound so horrible?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 04, 2014, 12:56:10 AM
OOC-wise, if Jonsu is offering a convienant way to oppose her and you are afraid she won't let you easily topple her....then why would you refuse to even try? Even if she is the tyrant queen of the bloodstars, you can actively work against her...inside the church and out. Enoch did it within the church, Jonsu did it without. If this comes to it SA will be refounded under the old charter and it will be tasked with colonizing Dwilight from the heretic popess.  Does that really sound so horrible?

Because it isn't fun to play in someone else's ego-trip?

And talk about the chilling effects here. If this is to be acceptable use of game mechanics, it kinda raises some questions about the reliability of investing in religions.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 04, 2014, 12:56:54 AM
I'm refusing to try because there is absolutely no guarantee that it's even worth it.

Case A:

We lose, Jonsu retains control.

Case B:

We win, Jonsu retains control because she can.

Case C:

We win, Jonsu willingly lets go of control.


Jonsu apparently worked hard on this scheme. Jonsu is in the best position in Dwilight right now. Why on earth would she willingly let that go?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 04, 2014, 12:56:59 AM
OOC-wise, if Jonsu is offering a convienant way to oppose her and you are afraid she won't let you easily topple her....then why would you refuse to even try?

Why wouldn't we? We've just been shown that game mechanics trump role play so why should we bother with his role play when he already used the game mechanics as a cudgel? If we're to continue our best bet is to disregard the mini game and play by the real mechanics.

Even if she is the tyrant queen of the bloodstars, you can actively work against her...inside the church and out. Enoch did it within the church, Jonsu did it without. If this comes to it SA will be refounded under the old charter and it will be tasked with colonizing Dwilight from the heretic popess.  Does that really sound so horrible?

The main problem is it's ridiculous that Jonsu gets handed the church and we start from scratch when all common sense says it should be the other way around.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 04, 2014, 01:01:18 AM
We refuse to participate, because we refuse to condone this type of behavior. That it's okay to hijack the combined efforts of many people because the mechanics allowed for it. There are no rules against it, and quite frankly, from the history of how Battlemaster handles things, I'm pretty sure nothing short of account deletions will this gain the attention it requires. But hey, we are here discussing OOCly because despite what Jonsu and Enoch say, this was made possible because the OOC mechanics made it possible.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bronnen on February 04, 2014, 01:22:21 AM
I say that we just have a referendum in the church and elect a third party and just ignore the other two. The person who is elected will be the Official head of the church and JOnsu and Alaster will have to seethe and rage because they're being completely ignored.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 04, 2014, 01:24:12 AM
I say that we just have a referendum in the church and elect a third party and just ignore the other two. The person who is elected will be the Official head of the church and JOnsu and Alaster will have to seethe and rage because they're being completely ignored.

That might work.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on February 04, 2014, 01:32:20 AM
Fine then. Change class from Priest, and I will remove you from the religion. It was abuse a few days ago when Fulco was a Priest, and he was decent enough to change class to be removed (thereby circumnavigating game mechanics as you now condemn me for trying to do IN YOUR FAVOR). Maybe I'll just destroy the organization, if thats going to be the attitude.

I just find it funny that for ages the attitude of some of the very people crying "I'm taking my ball and going home" was "The Elders are the Elders, and that is it." and now suddenly that is proven wrong, and they decide to quit because they're not "winning". I don't give a !@#$ about "winning" because you can't win BM.

I've heard "but thats not provided for in the charter!" from some people who have no right to reference Sanguis Astroism's charter. That Charter is a joke, and for ages its been ignored when politically convenient (read Niselur) or even completely replaced to achieve purely political purposes. Now someone else is ignoring it, successfully, and not in the favor of those who have benefited from ignoring it in the past and its suddenly CHEATING AND POWER GAMING AND ABUSE.

I was recently sent a message out of character from a player, whom I never really had the much regard for, and continue to not have much regard for them saying "they should take away all of your fun medals because you killed our fun!"

If your fun relies on an institution in this game, you are playing it WRONG. Institutions are fine. They rise, the fall. Even the Roman Empire fell, and if an institution that stretched from Spain and Great Britian, through North Africa and in the Middle East can fall, then so can Sanguis Astroism. Europe survived. The Middle East survived. North Africa survived. Dwilight will survive too.

It saddens me that it will be because some players weren't happy about not being in charge. Pettiness laying low the largest religion Dwilight has ever seen, pretty sad.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eduardo Almighty on February 04, 2014, 01:36:04 AM
You can all enjoy the Bloodmoon Fruit now...  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 04, 2014, 01:46:20 AM
Seriously? My last post was moderated out? On what basis is it offensive or violates the forum rules? Some of my other posts, sure, but THAT one?

Vellos paused. Rabisu left. I'm probably gonna leave, though I'm giving the titans a chance to react, though they always fail to. A number of newbies have expressed disgust with what they've just witnessed. None of the "establishment" of yesterday-SA really wants to play along in any way with this minigame he so graciously offers.

NONE of this is surprising. Is stating what's going on against the rules? People are LEAVING. Old and new. Why are you deleting my post that said so? Why is it so offensive to state fact?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 04, 2014, 01:51:22 AM
Seriously? My last post was moderated out? On what basis is it offensive or violates the forum rules? Some of my other posts, sure, but THAT one?

Vellos paused. Rabisu left. I'm probably gonna leave, though I'm giving the titans a chance to react, though they always fail to. A number of newbies have expressed disgust with what they've just witnessed. None of the "establishment" of yesterday-SA really wants to play along in any way with this minigame he so graciously offers.

NONE of this is surprising. Is stating what's going on against the rules? People are LEAVING. Old and new. Why are you deleting my post that said so? Why is it so offensive to state fact?

I am tracking this thread very carefully. I never saw a recent post from you on this one. Moderators almost never delete a post, preferring to put the red text of moderation all over it. Are you sure it was correctly submitted?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 04, 2014, 01:54:24 AM
I am tracking this thread very carefully. I never saw a recent post from you on this one. Moderators almost never delete a post, preferring to put the red text of moderation all over it. Are you sure it was correctly submitted?

Yes, I got a private warning about it. It was probably one of my most civil messages lately, given the mood this all puts me in.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bronnen on February 04, 2014, 01:55:05 AM
Seriously? My last post was moderated out? On what basis is it offensive or violates the forum rules? Some of my other posts, sure, but THAT one?

Vellos paused. Rabisu left. I'm probably gonna leave, though I'm giving the titans a chance to react, though they always fail to. A number of newbies have expressed disgust with what they've just witnessed. None of the "establishment" of yesterday-SA really wants to play along in any way with this minigame he so graciously offers.

NONE of this is surprising. Is stating what's going on against the rules? People are LEAVING. Old and new. Why are you deleting my post that said so? Why is it so offensive to state fact?

I do kind of agree, it does seem as if the current methods of overseeing player abuse aren't very quick and could use some work. Perhaps more people are needed to oversee these sorts of things?
And De-Legro, I did see his post. He did post it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 04, 2014, 01:57:16 AM
Yes, I got a private warning about it. It was probably one of my most civil messages lately, given the mood this all puts me in.

Then no doubt a message to the one that moderated would be the best bet for yielding a reply.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 04, 2014, 01:57:43 AM
Fine then. Change class from Priest, and I will remove you from the religion. It was abuse a few days ago when Fulco was a Priest, and he was decent enough to change class to be removed (thereby circumnavigating game mechanics as you now condemn me for trying to do IN YOUR FAVOR). Maybe I'll just destroy the organization, if thats going to be the attitude.

I was planning to become a priest for months. Fulco did it the day after he was threatened with excommunication. If you're going to use the cheapest trick in the book to WIN we'll use whatever tricks we want to fight back. (By the way no matter how much you deny it "winning" is what you call it when you usurp the most powerful position in the game). So have fun re-excommunicating fifteen people a day.

I just find it funny that for ages the attitude of some of the very people crying "I'm taking my ball and going home" was "The Elders are the Elders, and that is it." and now suddenly that is proven wrong, and they decide to quit because they're not "winning". I don't give a !@#$ about "winning" because you can't win BM.

If you'd actually played a decent charismatic character you could have put real pressure on the elders by attracting the favor of the rest of the members. The elders actually weren't willing to sacrifice the whole religion if they didn't get their way so with enough pressure they might have caved. Unfortunately for you you were an utter failure at that because you made it blatantly clear you just wanted power and would say anything to get it.

The problem was the whole premise of your protest, that the elders were an impenetrable monolith no one could ever hope to sway was a total lie and everyone knew it. If you had a legitimate point about anything you might have actually risen through the ranks in the elder council.

You failed to achieve your goal playing in good faith so you chose to find an exploitable mechanical flaw.

I've heard "but thats not provided for in the charter!" from some people who have no right to reference Sanguis Astroism's charter. That Charter is a joke, and for ages its been ignored when politically convenient (read Niselur) or even completely replaced to achieve purely political purposes. Now someone else is ignoring it, successfully, and not in the favor of those who have benefited from ignoring it in the past and its suddenly CHEATING AND POWER GAMING AND ABUSE.

Yes because the charter is a construct of the players rather then a crap game mechanic. A construct mind you that YOU helped create. You were on the elder council once, you made charter revisions, but you overplayed your hand and got burned. You seriously wonder why we're made you chose the cheap exploit after you failed your attempts to play in good faith?

I was recently sent a message out of character from a player, whom I never really had the much regard for, and continue to not have much regard for them saying "they should take away all of your fun medals because you killed our fun!"

If your fun relies on an institution in this game, you are playing it WRONG. Institutions are fine. They rise, the fall. Even the Roman Empire fell, and if an institution that stretched from Spain and Great Britian, through North Africa and in the Middle East can fall, then so can Sanguis Astroism. Europe survived. The Middle East survived. North Africa survived. Dwilight will survive too.

It saddens me that it will be because some players weren't happy about not being in charge. Pettiness laying low the largest religion Dwilight has ever seen, pretty sad.

You're right. The problem is all of us. All the dozens of people telling you you exploited a faulty game mechanic to achieve excessive gains are just jealous. How great it must feel for you to be right and every single other player wrong (except the ones you've bribed with in game goodies). How petty of us not to play along with you even when you were nice enough to threaten to destroy our favorite part of the game.


Enough sarcasm. Here are the only conceivable ways this goes down.

1. You mull around with Jonsu as Regent and stay in the safest place possible until you get bored with it. If you actually follow through on your campaign promises SA will be more boring and stagnant then it ever was. I think you'll find an impregnable seat of power is the most boring thing you could possible have. This outcome is also what will happen if you try for the crap mini game. It was a bad idea, a non starter. Don't waste your time or anyone else's with it.

2. You play this out in a fun way and take risks now and then so there's a chance you'll actually die. A real struggle ensues and we might actually have some fun.

3. If neither of those options sound appealing you accept there's no fun to be had with what you've just done. You step down and found a real schism or do whatever else you want to do.

4. You tank the religion out of shear childish spite.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 04, 2014, 01:59:02 AM
Then no doubt a message to the one that moderated would be the best bet for yielding a reply.

The forums neither lets you know who deleted the post, nor does it offer a means to reply to said person.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2014, 02:09:50 AM
It does, however, send you the text of the warning the moderator sent to you.

If you review that, I strongly suspect you'll find therein an explanation for why that particular post was removed.

If you're going to leave the game, I'll be sad to see you go—but if you're going to try to make everyone still here more upset and our lives more miserable, then I think you need to just leave now, rather than griefing on your way out.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bronnen on February 04, 2014, 02:16:34 AM
I've (hopefully) started a chain of events that will lead to the SA returning to normal.

People should roleplay electing a leader and supporting him and ignoring Jonsu and Alaster.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 04, 2014, 02:17:33 AM
I've (hopefully) started a chain of events that will lead to the SA returning to normal.

People should roleplay electing a leader and supporting him and ignoring Jonsu and Alaster.

Yes, game mechanics might not let you actually enforce the results of a vote, but it would be interesting to see what would happen following this path.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 04, 2014, 02:18:03 AM
It does, however, send you the text of the warning the moderator sent to you.

If you review that, I strongly suspect you'll find therein an explanation for why that particular post was removed.

If you're going to leave the game, I'll be sad to see you go—but if you're going to try to make everyone still here more upset and our lives more miserable, then I think you need to just leave now, rather than griefing on your way out.

You mean this:

Quote
Chénier,

You have received a warning for posting offensive material in regards to the message:
Re: Sanguis Astroism.

A lot of your posts in this thread lately have been borderline, but accusing Justin of deriving fun from causing other players to leave the game crosses that line. Keep things civil.

Please cease these activities and abide by the forum rules otherwise we will take further action.

Regards,
The BattleMaster Forum Team.

I was never aware that stating someone's action drains others' fun, and then simply stating the quitting that all in SA can see, was somehow against any rules or in any way rude.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Qyasogk on February 04, 2014, 02:18:10 AM
The only thing the devs seem to do is moderate the forums. They could care less that two people just ruined a huge chunk of Dwilight. I feel stupid for having spent any time in BM at all now, if this is how this is going to be resolved.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2014, 02:19:53 AM
I was never aware that stating someone's action drains others' fun, and then simply stating the quitting that all in SA can see, was somehow against any rules or in any way rude.

You need to work on your reading comprehension, Dominic. The problem was that you accused him of finding it fun taking away others' fun.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 04, 2014, 02:21:37 AM
Quote
GM Warning   (6 minutes ago)
We recognize that there have been some controversial events over the last few days in Sanguis Astroism. We wish to first of all remind every player that in-character events must be handled in-character.

There has been an excessive number of out-of-character messages sent within the religion recently, and it is becoming detrimental to the Serious Medieval Atmosphere on this continent, which we do take very seriously.

Finally, we wish to make quite clear that the actions taken by Jonsu and Enoch, while very controversial and upsetting, were, to the best of our knowledge and understanding, conducted entirely in-character and according to all the rules of BattleMaster. It would not be at all appropriate for us to intervene in this case, as it would open the door to similar complaints for a wide variety of other unpopular actions.

There are still a wide variety of ways this can be handled without any drastic or out-of-character measures. Please do your best to work through this crisis in-character.

OOC messages are anti-Serious Medieval Atmosphere, but Pope Silent giving total power of a church to Miss Heretic is totally Serious Medieval Atmosphere-legit, right?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2014, 02:22:05 AM
The only thing the devs seem to do is moderate the forums. They could care less that two people just ruined a huge chunk of Dwilight. I feel stupid for having spent any time in BM at all now, if this is how this is going to be resolved.

And you need to chill out.

The devs are not EVER going to intervene to reverse actions that were taken entirely in-character without breaking any rules.

Just because you don't like what happened doesn't make it cheating. Even if we took a poll and a majority of the entire game voted that they thought it was cheating, that still wouldn't make it so.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2014, 02:23:02 AM
OOC messages are anti-Serious Medieval Atmosphere, but Pope Silent giving total power of a church to Miss Heretic is totally Serious Medieval Atmosphere-legit, right?

Those are all in-character actions with (from what I understand) entirely in-character justifications behind them.

Just because the justifications happened due to backroom dealings that you didn't have access to doesn't make them non-SMA or cheating.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on February 04, 2014, 02:24:49 AM
OOC messages are anti-Serious Medieval Atmosphere, but Pope Silent giving total power of a church to Miss Heretic is totally Serious Medieval Atmosphere-legit, right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marozia

Check out this whole rotten family tree.

Edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_IX

This guy literally sold the papacy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 04, 2014, 02:25:55 AM
The only thing the devs seem to do is moderate the forums. They could care less that two people just ruined a huge chunk of Dwilight. I feel stupid for having spent any time in BM at all now, if this is how this is going to be resolved.

You know what, I have a nice little Dev tag next to my name. You know what I can do to affect the outcome of this, supposing I thought there was an action required. Nothing.

I have access to a offline code repository and test server in order to test bug fixes and new features. I don't have access to the live system, nor do most Devs. If a rule has been broken then there is a process in place to address it, and it is not appealing to the Dev team to make some sort of retroactive change. The processes exist so that everyone and every case hopefully gets the same deliberation and treatment.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 04, 2014, 02:28:15 AM
I've finally gotten a good callous to my skin after all the chaffing I have been getting over this whole issue.   


I allowed myself to get angry and now I can move past that.   


I am here as a player to make sure there is some sort of fair transition.  Fair to EVERYONE.   Which is fairly generous from Justin's part considering he schooled everyone.  Yes yes Charter blah blah.   Did roman laws stop Caesar crossing the rubicon and taking power? 

As a player I am here to be fair to everyone.  Considering the commitment I have as a player to SA I believe that the nay sayers and the whiners got a better deal than they probably deserved. 

Yes yes  Kabrinski's suck.  At least the ones on Dwilight do.   I know this.   Work with me as a player and will figure this out.    Alaster is a raving lunatic  or at least many perceive him to be that way.   


Once you accept that Jonsu won't simply give up power and that you have to take it back you will realize that I'm here as a Judge more so than as "Alaster Kabrinski"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 04, 2014, 02:29:25 AM
The GMs seem to have forgotten was SMA was long ago, for some reason thinking "SMA"="no OOC messages". The SMA page doesn't even MENTION ooc messages at all. It is ALL about roleplay.

No wonder Dwilight has long been SMA in name only, when even the ones enforcing it don't even seem to understand what it means anymore.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ohzen on February 04, 2014, 02:30:05 AM
    Finally, we wish to make quite clear that the actions taken by Jonsu and Enoch, while very controversial and upsetting, were, to the best of our knowledge and understanding, conducted entirely in-character and according to all the rules of BattleMaster. It would not be at all appropriate for us to intervene in this case, as it would open the door to similar complaints for a wide variety of other unpopular actions.

    There are still a wide variety of ways this can be handled without any drastic or out-of-character measures. Please do your best to work through this crisis in-character.


they try to ferret their way out of beeing unable to say: "Hey... we cant think about EVERYTHING!"

Jonsu and Enoch found a hole in the cheesy game mechanics and used it! Nothing compared to the few clicks they needed to destroy something others took years to build. To restore the former balance will take MONTHS!

I tried to RP my way out of this mess... but this is too much powerplay... they win by abusing game mechanics and we have to RP it back?

Edited to remove offensive material.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2014, 02:30:57 AM
The GMs seem to have forgotten was SMA was long ago, for some reason thinking "SMA"="no OOC messages". The SMA page doesn't even MENTION ooc messages at all. It is ALL about roleplay.

No wonder Dwilight has long been SMA in name only, when even the ones enforcing it don't even seem to understand what it means anymore.

I understand it better than you seem to, Chénier.

It's about reacting like people, not players. It's about having in-character justifications for what you do.

It's NOT about demanding OOC fixes to IC problems.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ohzen on February 04, 2014, 02:34:10 AM
It all started with a GREAT RP! I must admit... but than it turned into powergaming from one day to another.

A handful of people mangaed it to destroy the gameplay for over 100 people without proper RP. I started to play this BECAUSE of the RP and even lured my GF into playing this as well because she also loves fantasy novel. Her leaving the game because of this is too much for me as well. And I know that many many others are very discouraged by this actions compared to those who want to play along.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bronnen on February 04, 2014, 02:39:52 AM
Chenier, I know you're angry about this, so am I.

I've been on BM for over 8 years now, and this is by far the most despicable, OOC mechanics abuse I have ever seen.

I really don't care how it is dressed up, it was an abuse of the Game Mechanics. I would honestly be fine with it if Jonsu had just dissolved the church or kicked out absolutely everyone that her character didn't like.

The way it's being done now however is an abuse of Mechanics and absolutely not close to what the characters would do, which is a breach of the SMA.

If anything else, Jonsu appointing Alaster though they hate each other and she would have no reason to do so, is a breach of SMA.

However, having said all that. I will still play, though I now refuse to play with those people, I will play with everyone else.

If everyone in the SA places those two people on Ignore lists, the church will return to normal and everyone can just forget t his ever happened.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 04, 2014, 02:42:56 AM
    Finally, we wish to make quite clear that the actions taken by Jonsu and Enoch, while very controversial and upsetting, were, to the best of our knowledge and understanding, conducted entirely in-character and according to all the rules of BattleMaster. It would not be at all appropriate for us to intervene in this case, as it would open the door to similar complaints for a wide variety of other unpopular actions.

    There are still a wide variety of ways this can be handled without any drastic or out-of-character measures. Please do your best to work through this crisis in-character.


they try to ferret their way out of beeing unable to say: "Hey... we cant think about EVERYTHING!"

Jonsu and Enoch found a hole in the cheesy game mechanics and used it! Nothing compared to the few clicks they needed to destroy something others took years to build. To restore the former balance will take MONTHS!

I tried to RP my way out of this mess... but this is too much powerplay... they win by abusing game mechanics and we have to RP it back?

Edited to remove offensive material.

The charter tried to establish a game system counter to how the game mechanics operate. Religions and Guilds are designed such that the current holder of the top rank is basically a dictator. Part of that power is to decide on their successor. SA sought to and had agreed to a different system, obviously that only works so long as everyone continues to play by the rules. As has been pointed out some of the greatest take overs in history were due to someone deciding the rules didn't apply to them, and setting up the situation to reflect that.

Would it have been nice if the religion system had more flexibility. No doubt, it would be nice to have many of the feature and additions that people have been plugging away on for years. Does the mechanic working in exactly the way that Tom designed it to make it cheesy, no. It just runs counter to the way SA wanted to run, and unfortunately when you try and force a system to operate counter to the supported game mechanics, there are going to be ways for others to take advantage.

Chenier, I know you're angry about this, so am I.

I've been on BM for over 8 years now, and this is by far the most despicable, OOC mechanics abuse I have ever seen.

I really don't care how it is dressed up, it was an abuse of the Game Mechanics. I would honestly be fine with it if Jonsu had just dissolved the church or kicked out absolutely everyone that her character didn't like.

The way it's being done now however is an abuse of Mechanics and absolutely not close to what the characters would do, which is a breach of the SMA.

If anything else, Jonsu appointing Alaster though they hate each other and she would have no reason to do so, is a breach of SMA.

However, having said all that. I will still play, though I now refuse to play with those people, I will play with everyone else.

If everyone in the SA places those two people on Ignore lists, the church will return to normal and everyone can just forget t his ever happened.

Because enemies, even hated ones have NEVER worked together when it benefits them both. Nope never, could never happen. Just as turning on a long time ally when it proves beneficial never happens.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 04, 2014, 02:43:38 AM
I understand it better than you seem to, Chénier.

It's about reacting like people, not players. It's about having in-character justifications for what you do.

It's NOT about demanding OOC fixes to IC problems.

It's not an IC problem. It's an OOC problem with IC results. Just because a mechanic was long known to be flawed, doesn't mean abusing it is okay. Why does suddenly the fact that people pushed buttons IG automatically legitimize the act? All abuses, prior and future, are the result of IG buttons being clicked on.

The fix isn't even complicated. Remove Jonsu from the game and the situation fixes itself. The seditioners will still be able to form their schism without having recourse to a lame loophole that autoomatically grants them total authority over the temples, treasuries, and followers of most of the continent.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 04, 2014, 02:44:31 AM
I've left the game, but I'd just like to point something out regarding "things were done in-character and are okay".

There were many, many issues with Thulsoma, one of which was that-one-game-feature-that-allowed-Thulsoma-to-raise-a-huge-army-despite-being-a-one-region-realm (I forgot, long time ago now). That mechanic was changed because, while it was a valid game mechanic at that time, it was deemed to have been used in a manner that was detrimental to the game.

Precedent, therefore, exists, for changing mechanics when it's shown that they are too troublesome. Of course, Thulsoma wasn't deleted and Morek still had to war with it for a few weeks, but at least the mechanics were changed for the betterment of the game. In the same manner, I do hope the dev team looks into the 'game-able' mechanics that came into play here, so that in the future, Battlemaster players would not be unduly punished by a handful of people who are good at powergaming (especially in an SMA island).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2014, 02:47:13 AM
There were many, many issues with Thulsoma, one of which was that-one-game-feature-that-allowed-Thulsoma-to-raise-a-huge-army-despite-being-a-one-region-realm (I forgot, long time ago now). That mechanic was changed because, while it was a valid game mechanic at that time, it was deemed to have been used in a manner that was detrimental to the game.

It was being abused in an obviously exploitative manner that was never what was intended that gained a group of people a clear advantage over everyone else by essentially gaining free gold.

The mechanics in this case were used in exactly the manner they were designed for.

No matter what anyone says here, there was no OOC abuse.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bronnen on February 04, 2014, 02:47:53 AM
enemies, even hated ones have NEVER worked together when it benefits them both. Nope never, could never happen. Just as turning on a long time ally when it proves beneficial never happens.

The thing is, they both stated in OOC messages that it was agreed upon OOC, without any IC reasoning whatsoever.

Even if we ignore everything else, that itself is an OOC abuse and a breach of SMA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 04, 2014, 02:48:33 AM
I got kicked before I could start RP about how/why. Now that I see the fallout, I'm not sure if it would make people feel better or fan the flames. It all boils down to the peasants, who actually run the church (mechanics).


Edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_IX

This guy literally sold the papacy.

Truth is stranger than fiction. It's funny how religions kind of work from the bottom up, isn't it? Belief is so malleable, and people get away with some ugly stuff if they abuse it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 04, 2014, 02:49:14 AM
This act is so blatantly anti-SMA and anti-social contract that I am dismayed anyone can think otherwise.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2014, 02:49:24 AM
Just because a mechanic was long known to be flawed, doesn't mean abusing it is okay.

The only religion mechanic that's been talked about lately that's been "long known to be flawed" is the priest immunity. I think you're getting them mixed up.

All that allowed this to happen was the fundamental mechanics of how all guild and religion ranks have worked since the day they were implemented back in about 2005.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ohzen on February 04, 2014, 02:49:59 AM
Villains are needed in this game... it is the spice! But some individuals are only about destroying the fun of others. Griefers. The yhav a right to exist and we even need them in gams like this!

But giving some of them the possibility to be the leader of a community that counts over 100 nobles is simply impossible. In real life changes like this would be made illegitime within seconds.

BM should not be ruled by game mechanics.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2014, 02:50:24 AM
This act is so blatantly anti-SMA and anti-social contract that I am dismayed anyone can think otherwise.

This is just simply untrue.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 04, 2014, 02:52:14 AM
The thing is, they both stated in OOC messages that it was agreed upon OOC, without any IC reasoning whatsoever.

Even if we ignore everything else, that itself is an OOC abuse and a breach of SMA.

And then it was followed with IC actions.   Alaster announced himself as opposed to the heretic Jonsu.     It was talked about OOC because we knew the characters wouldn't buddy up out of the blue like that. 

I wanted assurances that SA wasn't going to be abused.  He gave them to me by making me a Prophet as well.   Neither of us can demote the other one.   I can prevent any tampering Jonsu might wish to do.  Any more button pushing I can undo.   

This is not an OOC abuse or a breach of SMA.   


As far as Enoch and Jonsu.  It peeved me off for sure, but that is all the more I will say on the matter.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 04, 2014, 02:52:41 AM
The only religion mechanic that's been talked about lately that's been "long known to be flawed" is the priest immunity. I think you're getting them mixed up.

All that allowed this to happen was the fundamental mechanics of how all guild and religion ranks have worked since the day they were implemented back in about 2005.

Everything about religion is long known to be flawed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ohzen on February 04, 2014, 02:53:14 AM
This is just simply untrue.

DEV Team is not always right...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 04, 2014, 02:53:54 AM
It's not an IC problem. It's an OOC problem with IC results. Just because a mechanic was long known to be flawed, doesn't mean abusing it is okay. Why does suddenly the fact that people pushed buttons IG automatically legitimize the act? All abuses, prior and future, are the result of IG buttons being clicked on.

The fix isn't even complicated. Remove Jonsu from the game and the situation fixes itself. The seditioners will still be able to form their schism without having recourse to a lame loophole that autoomatically grants them total authority over the temples, treasuries, and followers of most of the continent.

The mechanic is not flawed in that it works in the manner the designer wanted it to. The mechanic is only "flawed" because SA tried to create a structure counter to how the system worked. If they had used a mechanic counter to it intention, then now as before action will be taken by the appropriate team, which is not the Dev's. We don't make decisions about cheating, exploitations or social contract violations. There is group with the Tools needed to investigate and take action.

I've left the game, but I'd just like to point something out regarding "things were done in-character and are okay".

There were many, many issues with Thulsoma, one of which was that-one-game-feature-that-allowed-Thulsoma-to-raise-a-huge-army-despite-being-a-one-region-realm (I forgot, long time ago now). That mechanic was changed because, while it was a valid game mechanic at that time, it was deemed to have been used in a manner that was detrimental to the game.

Precedent, therefore, exists, for changing mechanics when it's shown that they are too troublesome. Of course, Thulsoma wasn't deleted and Morek still had to war with it for a few weeks, but at least the mechanics were changed for the betterment of the game. In the same manner, I do hope the dev team looks into the 'game-able' mechanics that came into play here, so that in the future, Battlemaster players would not be unduly punished by a handful of people who are good at powergaming (especially in an SMA island).

It was changed because it was used in a way that was never intended. The system allowed it, but it was not within the design parameters or the intent of the feature. That is different from deciding the feature was simply detrimental, it is more akin to a bug. But with that said of course we look to refine the mechanics and if something is problem change it. However even if things are changed we don't go back and erase the results that were previously yielded.

No doubt there is scope for discussion in changing the way religions work in order to allow for different forms to be supported by game mechanics.

DEV Team is not always right...

Nor is the mob oddly enough
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bronnen on February 04, 2014, 02:56:18 AM
But the simple fact that Jonsu did give Alaster the prophet rank is counter to SMA, as it is completely unthinkable that her character would have done so.

I would have been fine if Jonsu took power and acted like her character. The thing is though that neither Alaster nor Jonsu are acting as their characters which bothers me.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 04, 2014, 02:56:33 AM
The mechanics in this case were used in exactly the manner they were designed for.

Tim, I have a lot of respect for you and the work you put into BM.

But I think we both know this isn't true.

The mechanics were done that way to make the implementation of religion easier to code and to build off existing guild code, at least in some part inspired by the fact that pre-religion-code religions had operated as guilds. The mechanics were not "designed" IN ORDER TO ensure that the person at the top could have this kind of power. Indeed, the religion organizational features attached in addition to existing guild features (priest and treasury balance based immunities) mostly LIMIT elder power, rather than enhance it.

There is, to my knowledge, no Titan or Magistrate precedent establishing exact rules on this case. But the community reaction is prima facie evidence of a problem with the system. If you designed mechanics intended to have this kind of function (which I really don't think you did; I think you feel you're defending the game community from baseless briefers), then you designed them poorly. But, again, when you say you INTENDED the feature to work this way, I just don't believe you. I don't believe you built a mechanic designed to empower people who choose to play as if they are not playing with friends.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ohzen on February 04, 2014, 02:58:07 AM
In real life changes like this would be made illegitime within seconds.

BM should not be ruled by game mechanics.

I thought this game is more about real live and the flaws in the mechanics are due to the programmers who cant think about EVERYTHING. Well, now I found out that this is but a GAME and you have to stick to the mechanics... I am going to leave.

I very much enjoyed this game and I hope to find something like this in the near future.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2014, 02:58:35 AM
The thing is, they both stated in OOC messages that it was agreed upon OOC, without any IC reasoning whatsoever.

Even if we ignore everything else, that itself is an OOC abuse and a breach of SMA.

That wasn't the original action by Jonsu and Enoch that gained Jonsu undisputed power over SA. That was the action by Jonsu and Alaster make sure that Jonsu's power over SA was not undisputed.

So…are you asking me to punish the people who were trying to make the situation less bad?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 04, 2014, 02:58:49 AM
I would also note that if, "Used for a function not intended" is the measure of abuse, then the current pseudo-schism is abuse. That's a poor standard. The standard for abuse should be "Used in a way to unreasonably injure the ability of other players to enjoy the game." Yes, that means we have to define "unreasonably." But I think this community reaction probably fits the bill.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 04, 2014, 02:59:37 AM
That wasn't the original action by Jonsu and Enoch that gained Jonsu undisputed power over SA. That was the action by Jonsu and Alaster make sure that Jonsu's power over SA was not undisputed.

So…are you asking me to punish the people who were trying to make the situation less bad?

No, I believe Dishman said he contacted Justin.

But as to the second, see my above message: if intended functionality is your standard, then yes, punish them both. It's a ridiculous standard, but you should be consistent.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2014, 03:01:22 AM
The mechanics were done that way to make the implementation of religion easier to code and to build off existing guild code, at least in some part inspired by the fact that pre-religion-code religions had operated as guilds. The mechanics were not "designed" IN ORDER TO ensure that the person at the top could have this kind of power. Indeed, the religion organizational features attached in addition to existing guild features (priest and treasury balance based immunities) mostly LIMIT elder power, rather than enhance it.

Tom has stated multiple times that it is fully intentional that the person with the top rank in a guild essentially owns that guild. If you really want, I can probably dig you up some instances, but it'll probably take a while.

Quote
There is, to my knowledge, no Titan or Magistrate precedent establishing exact rules on this case.

Despite your clear opinion to the contrary, we don't need a Titan or Magistrate case to establish precedent for things that Tom has explicitly stated himself.

Quote
But the community reaction is prima facie evidence of a problem with the system.

I disagree.

Quote
If you designed mechanics intended to have this kind of function (which I really don't think you did; I think you feel you're defending the game community from baseless briefers), then you designed them poorly. But, again, when you say you INTENDED the feature to work this way, I just don't believe you. I don't believe you built a mechanic designed to empower people who choose to play as if they are not playing with friends.

I didn't design it at all. Religions were implemented years before I became a dev.

Tom, however, did design it that way, whether you like it or not.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Ohzen on February 04, 2014, 03:05:42 AM
Tom, however, did design it that way, whether you like it or not.

This is a game with crude mechanics that hope everyyone who play this got a code of honour. We got abused and the DEV Team is as helpless as we are cause Jonsu and Alaster found a nice lil hole....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 04, 2014, 03:07:24 AM
Tim,

The point of game mechanics is not to create an idealized form of a game. It's to create a structure in which people are enabled to have fun.

I could change one vowel in the name of who I'm addressing this two, and it would be something I've heard you say a dozen times.

Don't chain yourself to a set of mechanics that's destroying a community.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on February 04, 2014, 03:09:31 AM
GM warning to all SA and no action taken? This is insane. Vellos is right, the outrage and 3 quit players are proof that this is a problem. Letting this 'just blow over' and let a couple griefers control the situation is the opposite of a solution.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 04, 2014, 03:09:59 AM
Play along or get out. Is anyone surprised that BM is losing players?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bronnen on February 04, 2014, 03:11:14 AM
unlike more of the people who are angry about Enoch and Jonsu's actions, I don't care about that. That was done (to the best of my knowledge completely IC) and fits her character. It might be unpopular and power hungry but I don't care about that because she is playing her character.

The whole thing with Jonsu and Alaster is what I have issues with as neither of them are playing their characters. They aren't, and that's my issue.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2014, 03:13:00 AM
Lyman,
BattleMaster is a game that is competitive by nature, and because of that nature, very often, a group will find itself gaining an advantage at another group's expense. That may even cause the other group to feel like they are being deprived of fun.

This is normal, and expected. It happens every time a realm is destroyed. It happens every time a religion is destroyed.

This case is unusual in that a religion was taken over by someone who is seen as anathema by most of its members. However, that does not in any way negate the fact that it is still fundamentally the same kind of situation.

You don't like it. I get that. You're trying to find reasons that it's got to be Wrong, and ways that everyone who disagrees with you has to be Wrong, too. But I'm afraid things aren't that simple.

People get their fun ruined in BattleMaster all the time, and if we were going to intervene every time that happened, it would ruin everyone's fun, because nothing interesting would ever be allowed to happen again.

You need to deal with this IC.

For now, I'm done with this, as I have RL obligations to deal with. However, if this thread continues in the dev-blaming vein it's been going in, or otherwise continues its flamewar trend, it's going to be locked, and any attempts to open a new thread on the same topic will be deleted and their authors muted.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 04, 2014, 03:14:25 AM
.....people who choose to play as if they are not playing with friends.

I think this is where a lot of bad feelings are coming from. I did this as a friend. I thought that most people would enjoy something new. If Stabbity is going out of character to make an offer to reconcile the church, that is playing with friends. The entirety of OOC chatter was 'hey, lets try not to upset everyone who built this but create a real crisis for the church'.

You have a picturesque villain dropped in front of you and rather than fight...people are giving up because I clicked the wrong button. I spent all of 2013 building toward destroying the church, and when Enoch was HANDED THE REGENCY, I stalled to allow what fun people were having to run it's course. Then I gave it to someone I thought could start a new age.

You may not like the decision, but try to remember we are trying to play as friends. Sometimes it is an unfriendly game, but efforts are made.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 04, 2014, 03:17:06 AM
Tom has stated multiple times that it is fully intentional that the person with the top rank in a guild essentially owns that guild. If you really want, I can probably dig you up some instances, but it'll probably take a while.

Despite your clear opinion to the contrary, we don't need a Titan or Magistrate case to establish precedent for things that Tom has explicitly stated himself.

I disagree.

I didn't design it at all. Religions were implemented years before I became a dev.

Tom, however, did design it that way, whether you like it or not.

Tom has also continuously stated that religion was, for him, meant to be a roleplaying device, not something about game mechanics, which is utterly contrary to what just happened.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 04, 2014, 03:17:26 AM
Mm, it looks like I made the right call by the account deletion. I do hope the thread stays open, though, so I can still keep tabs on what goes on and whether Jonsu gets tired of the ego tripping.

RE @Dishman

It's hard to play with someone who has all the cards, and gives you only the cards he decides to give. Heh, try playing poker like that and you'll quickly lose interest, too.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 04, 2014, 03:19:28 AM
This is a game with crude mechanics that hope everyyone who play this got a code of honour. We got abused and the DEV Team is as helpless as we are cause Jonsu and Alaster found a nice lil hole....

There was NO hole. On of the reason the game mechanic trumps RP rule is for exactly this kind of situation. When players have built a structure that game mechanics don't support, there is always a high chance that they will be toppled or impacted by the game mechanics. If you want to go that route, then fine but it should be with the knowledge that the system and structure is going to be vulnerable. It is not the fault of the game design that people have decided to go counter to the systems in place.

Tim,

The point of game mechanics is not to create an idealized form of a game. It's to create a structure in which people are enabled to have fun.

I could change one vowel in the name of who I'm addressing this two, and it would be something I've heard you say a dozen times.

Don't chain yourself to a set of mechanics that's destroying a community.

We don't. The mechanics change constantly. The fact that there even IS a religious system and priest class is evidence of this. The Dev team is in no way against sitting down and discussing changes to Religion to address this event, that is why we have feature requests. But retroactively punishing characters and players for using the game mechanics as they stand is something else entirely.

unlike more of the people who are angry about Enoch and Jonsu's actions, I don't care about that. That was done (to the best of my knowledge completely IC) and fits her character. It might be unpopular and power hungry but I don't care about that because she is playing her character.

The whole thing with Jonsu and Alaster is what I have issues with as neither of them are playing their characters. They aren't, and that's my issue.

Then please raise the issue with the Titans, who oversee SMA. They very possibly aren't playing to their characters, though it might be more correct to say they aren't playing to the widely perceived nature of their characters, however I do believe that Dustole at least is doing so in order to attempt to salvage something of the situation.

I get the outrage this has caused. I've never been a member of SA and I felt the same outrage when I first learned of it simply from my association with other Dwlight realms. I would certainly be more then upset if I was heavily involved in the group, and have experience similar when realms that I worked hard in fell apart or were usurped to travel a different path. Players/Characters often act in ways that I don't like and really don't personally condone, doesn't mean they have broken faith with the rules of the game though.
 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bronnen on February 04, 2014, 03:23:14 AM
So you're saying I should raise the whole dual prophet things with the titans? I just want to make sure because I've heard of people being banned for false reports to titans.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 04, 2014, 03:23:25 AM
I think this is where a lot of bad feelings are coming from. I did this as a friend. I thought that most people would enjoy something new. If Stabbity is going out of character to make an offer to reconcile the church, that is playing with friends. The entirety of OOC chatter was 'hey, lets try not to upset everyone who built this but create a real crisis for the church'.

You have a picturesque villain dropped in front of you and rather than fight...people are giving up because I clicked the wrong button. I spent all of 2013 building toward destroying the church, and when Enoch was HANDED THE REGENCY, I stalled to allow what fun people were having to run it's course. Then I gave it to someone I thought could start a new age.

You may not like the decision, but try to remember we are trying to play as friends. Sometimes it is an unfriendly game, but efforts are made.

If you had to come up with a plan for how to not treat people in an unfriendly way, you should have stopped. It's exactly like any other Social Contract or IR issue. If you find yourself asking how to do it without breaking the rules, STOP.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2014, 03:26:44 AM
If you had to come up with a plan for how to not treat people in an unfriendly way, you should have stopped. It's exactly like any other Social Contract or IR issue. If you find yourself asking how to do it without breaking the rules, STOP.

As has been stated multiple times, this is NOT a Social Contract violation.

This has gone on long enough. The thread will be locked to allow people to cool off. It will be unlocked again in a day or so. Until then, everyone try to remember that this is still a game, and we players are not each other's enemies.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 05, 2014, 03:45:02 AM
This thread will be unlocked again in around 12 hours. That will be 36 hours from the time of locking (and, not coincidentally, will be when I'm starting my day, rather than when I'm going to bed, and thus I'll be around to make sure it doesn't instantly devolve into a flamewar again).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 05, 2014, 04:43:58 PM
The thread is now unlocked.

Please feel free to resume discussion of recent events, but leave blame, recriminations and angry words out of it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 05, 2014, 06:16:51 PM
My only public comment about this is that I'm glad I deleted my character before it happened.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on February 05, 2014, 06:30:15 PM
So what's happening now? It's going to take a while to completely lose interest even after account deletion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 05, 2014, 07:02:50 PM
Helm stepped forward and declared himself Regent.   Morek gave him their support.   Sergio supports him so I bet Astrum back Helm as well.   
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 05, 2014, 08:26:18 PM
My only public comment about this is that I'm glad I deleted my character before it happened.

Feel free to not follow Tim's advice right after he said not to do exactly this...

Anyways, I'm fine with everything that happened in Sanguis Astroism. The whole religion had been stagnant for a while, and this is just what it needed. In fact, I hadn't been planning on having my character joining SA, but now I think I will.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 05, 2014, 08:31:39 PM
Feel free to not follow Tim's advice right after he said not to do exactly this…

Actually, I don't object to that kind of thing. It's effectively stating "I don't like what's happened," without insulting anyone, casting any blame, or in any way trying to demean, belittle, or hurt any player or dev.

Everyone is always free to say they don't like a situation, and even that they're glad they don't have to get involved in it. Hell, I'm glad my character's not involved in the situation. For one thing, I'd be getting some obscene amount of messages if she was! ;D

Quote
Anyways, I'm fine with everything that happened in Sanguis Astroism. The whole religion had been stagnant for a while, and this is just what it needed. In fact, I hadn't been planning on having my character joining SA, but now I think I will.

Better wear your fireproof underwear.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 05, 2014, 08:44:34 PM
Feel free to not follow Tim's advice right after he said not to do exactly this...

Anyways, I'm fine with everything that happened in Sanguis Astroism. The whole religion had been stagnant for a while, and this is just what it needed. In fact, I hadn't been planning on having my character joining SA, but now I think I will.

This is the kind of thing I hate and which systematically arises in situations like this. "I'm not a part of X, but it really had Y problem, and what it really needed is Z, and I'm really happy it got it".

How can you judge something you weren't even a party to? Stagnant is the last word I'd have used to describe SA. All this did was drive away a bunch of good players and disgust a score of others in the game and in those responsible for upholding the rules.

People who are participating in the inner feud, for the most part, have stated how they only do so reluctantly and do so with a grudge.

There's nothing fun about this. Just frustration for everyone.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Fleugs on February 05, 2014, 10:28:23 PM
It looks like many people are feeling hurt because they got too connected to something of BM. Which is a shame. Sometimes you have to accept that everything you worked for vaporises into thin air. But from ashes a phoenix can rise, so instead of the (OOC-)rage, it might be better to channel all your anger into an ingame counter movement. Heck, I've been there countless times in the many years I played BM, and even though it did sting for a long time in the beginning, after a while I realised that it allowed me to explore other paths in BM which turned out to be so much better.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Galvez on February 05, 2014, 10:42:32 PM
Helm stepped forward and declared himself Regent.   Morek gave him their support.   Sergio supports him so I bet Astrum back Helm as well.
You made the General of the strongest military power of Dwilight the most pious man of your Church, sure that will improve the image we all have about Sanguis Astroim.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 05, 2014, 10:57:25 PM
You made the General of the strongest military power of Dwilight the most pious man of your Church, sure that will improve the image we all have about Sanguis Astroim.

It improves mine, now they at least be to be HONEST about things :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 06, 2014, 12:20:33 AM
Does anyone enjoy the Roland story, or should I stop? Does it need more or less details?

It looks like many people are feeling hurt because they got too connected to something of BM. Which is a shame. Sometimes you have to accept that everything you worked for vaporises into thin air. But from ashes a phoenix can rise, so instead of the (OOC-)rage, it might be better to channel all your anger into an ingame counter movement. Heck, I've been there countless times in the many years I played BM, and even though it did sting for a long time in the beginning, after a while I realised that it allowed me to explore other paths in BM which turned out to be so much better.

A clear enemy, a fire under you, and something to be gained does wonders for getting invested in characters. Dozens of schemes will be made in the "ashes" of SA. The RP of SA will continue on reshaped, even if it is not in the original church.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 06, 2014, 12:23:03 AM
Because many of us invest years into this game, we sometimes are too attached to the game. BM is still only a game. Let's try to enjoy it not get angry over it.

After a year or two, you will probably tell yourself it isn't so bad.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 06, 2014, 01:01:04 AM
It looks like many people are feeling hurt because they got too connected to something of BM. Which is a shame. Sometimes you have to accept that everything you worked for vaporises into thin air. But from ashes a phoenix can rise, so instead of the (OOC-)rage, it might be better to channel all your anger into an ingame counter movement. Heck, I've been there countless times in the many years I played BM, and even though it did sting for a long time in the beginning, after a while I realised that it allowed me to explore other paths in BM which turned out to be so much better.

The counter movement is stupid and relies on us putting faith in the one who pulled the dick move to begin with. The feeling isn't coming from being defeated, it's from how it was done, which we don't consider to be "playing with friends".

Does anyone enjoy the Roland story, or should I stop? Does it need more or less details?

A clear enemy, a fire under you, and something to be gained does wonders for getting invested in characters. Dozens of schemes will be made in the "ashes" of SA. The RP of SA will continue on reshaped, even if it is not in the original church.

We already had clear enemies, internal threats, and things to be gained. People are de-investing themselves in their characters, not the other way around.

Because many of us invest years into this game, we sometimes are too attached to the game. BM is still only a game. Let's try to enjoy it not get angry over it.

After a year or two, you will probably tell yourself it isn't so bad.

No. When people I play with play like dicks, I don't say "oh, it's a game, so it's fine that they act like a dick". I go play with other people.

I've seen a number of dicky things in this game, over the years, and I have not changed my mind about any of them, despite how many years have passed. None have ever been anywhere close to this level.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 06, 2014, 01:44:54 AM
Figured I'd share this with people who paused, deleted, are interested. I'll limit it to this blurb, but it essentially explains most of my character.

Quote
A Mystic's Manifesto

In the promotion of paganism, and the establishment of a more diverse and powerful pantheon, I have given the church to it's enemy. A kind of homage to my mentor. A man who appreciated irony. One who also appreciated belief. It was through belief that I gave the church to Jonsu. I am sure there are many wails about the charter, the sanctity of the 'real' prophet, and such dressings. But those that prepare your food, feed your larders, and run your church's temples do not believe in the church...they believe in the Bloodstars. Charter, politics, beurocracy....these were secondary. The peasants sought the church to guide them to the Bloodstars, little more. It is much the same as we treat them, we use them to our benifit but care little for their affairs.

This helped me greatly in orchestrating such a reform. The prophet gone, the theocracies defeated. Many feared that the church had faltered without the prophet and true guidance was needed. Given the option of denouncing her, they embraced her. They wanted to believe. They wanted to believe these strange omens were the Bloodstars preparing them for their tribulations into harmony. A new prophet was just one of those tribulations. How convenient that the monsters would stir? I had thought the toppling of a theocracy and the surrender of the remaining three would be enough. How strange belief is.

Belief, the core of a religion, is malleable. A few words here, a few there. Anyone can believe anything you want if you know how to approach them. Of course, it didn't hurt to be declared 'closest to the prophet'. It was difficult to believe in a bickering council or a priest army...but a prophet, a god, or a messiah. A singular entity seems to draw people. A focus of faith and guidance, a father to show the way. The irony!

It was not my intent to destroy Sanguis Astroism, as I know that it will persevere. Once a faith has been added to the registry, it is eternal. Yet I expect SA to continue with strength. Perhaps diminished, but that is the point. The stifling of paganism, new religions, or any attempt to deny freedom of belief shall be met with undesirable consequences. Let this be Dwilight's first warning.

-Sub Rosa

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 06, 2014, 02:48:50 AM
I'll limit it to this blurb, but it essentially explains most of my character.
None of that means anything to anyone who was affected by this. If any of that was apparent in your character *before* you had done what you had done, then people would have a valid point about "hoisted on your own petard", or whatever that phrase is. But as it turned out, all your character was to 99.5% of the people in SA, was 1) the perfect sleeper, or 2) went inexplicably insane with no warning.


Damn... I wasn't going to comment on this thread....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 06, 2014, 02:56:03 AM
Figured I'd share this with people who paused, deleted, are interested. I'll limit it to this blurb, but it essentially explains most of my character.

I think the term you want is polytheistic not paganism.

Besides how does one establish a pantheon? Unless the gods are created by our worship surely the Pantheon already exists and either we are ignorant of it, or have consciously decided not to worship it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Graeth on February 06, 2014, 05:30:52 AM

Besides how does one establish a pantheon?


It's a central part of Mysticism.

I wasn't aware Enoch was a mystic until all this...
Is Jonsu?  Cause that would really make a lot of sense of the current situation.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 06, 2014, 05:38:27 AM
It looks like many people are feeling hurt because they got too connected to something of BM. Which is a shame. Sometimes you have to accept that everything you worked for vaporises into thin air. But from ashes a phoenix can rise, so instead of the (OOC-)rage, it might be better to channel all your anger into an ingame counter movement. Heck, I've been there countless times in the many years I played BM, and even though it did sting for a long time in the beginning, after a while I realised that it allowed me to explore other paths in BM which turned out to be so much better.

The problem is how disproportionately difficult it will be to take back power compared to how easily it was taken. This is due entirely to weak game mechanics. The coup to begin with was an abuse of OOC information because Justin's character should not have been aware that there was a functional difference between the validity of the charter and the validity of a decree by the regent. Jonsu would have no reason to think the temple acolytes will take the orders of the regent over those of a dozen people who give the regent his power in the first place.

BM isn't supposed to be about finding game breaking mechanics, its supposed to be about player to player interaction. The loyalties of hundreds of players shouldn't be so easily trumped by an alliance between two.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on February 06, 2014, 06:11:31 AM
The problem is how disproportionately difficult it will be to take back power compared to how easily it was taken. This is due entirely to weak game mechanics. The coup to begin with was an abuse of OOC information because Justin's character should not have been aware that there was a functional difference between the validity of the charter and the validity of a decree by the regent. Jonsu would have no reason to think the temple acolytes will take the orders of the regent over those of a dozen people who give the regent his power in the first place.

BM isn't supposed to be about finding game breaking mechanics, its supposed to be about player to player interaction. The loyalties of hundreds of players shouldn't be so easily trumped by an alliance between two.


1) How many game announcements do you need to believe its not abuse?

2) Are you aware of the workings of the world around you? Yes? So are our characters. They are not dumb, and the workings of game mechanics, i.e. their world, is not unknown to them. Delvin's statements on infiltrators is a really good example.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 06, 2014, 06:19:21 AM
It's a central part of Mysticism.

I wasn't aware Enoch was a mystic until all this...
Is Jonsu?  Cause that would really make a lot of sense of the current situation.

Semantics, but Mysticism doesn't establish a Pantheon it provides mechanics for people to ascend and thus add to a pre-existing Pantheon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 06, 2014, 11:40:50 AM
It's a central part of Mysticism.

I wasn't aware Enoch was a mystic until all this...
Is Jonsu?  Cause that would really make a lot of sense of the current situation.

I can't give too much away, but Enoch is hoping to revive Mysticism. I hadn't heard anything in Mysticism since Bowie left.

But as it turned out, all your character was to 99.5% of the people in SA, was 1) the perfect sleeper, or 2) went inexplicably insane with no warning.

I tried to make it clear Enoch did not have good intentions. He laid it on thick, then never did anything. Why, when the Regency campaign begin he was all "I will serve the stars if that is their wish" and all that...then when Brance asked for candidates with more interest in the Regency he changed his tune immediately to "Gimme, Gimme, Gimme". It might have been subtle, but that was my intent.

Enoch has been Sub Rosa since (at least) Jan of 2013. I've played this character to be pleasant and inviting where people can see, but with unpleasantness underneath it all. I've been giving away details in-game, but I understand that the execution of my plan was poor. I'll be sure to wear kid-gloves more often.

Though, what percentage of self-sabotage would have been appropriate? If only 10% see it coming, is it still unacceptable? How often do you give away your plots for the sake of not hurting feelings?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 06, 2014, 06:39:30 PM
I tried to make it clear Enoch did not have good intentions. He laid it on thick, then never did anything. Why, when the Regency campaign begin he was all "I will serve the stars if that is their wish" and all that...then when Brance asked for candidates with more interest in the Regency he changed his tune immediately to "Gimme, Gimme, Gimme". It might have been subtle, but that was my intent.
So "I want to be Regent" is supposed to equate to "I want to destroy the church"? Especially after Brance repeatedly badgered Enoch about his intentions until Enoch finally admitted that yes, he did want to be Regent.

Quote
Enoch has been Sub Rosa since (at least) Jan of 2013.
I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. Some rank in a secret society of which only 5 people are aware? How is that supposed to be a mitigating factor?

Quote
Though, what percentage of self-sabotage would have been appropriate? If only 10% see it coming, is it still unacceptable? How often do you give away your plots for the sake of not hurting feelings?
That is a very valid point, to which there is no good answer. Secret plots are part of the game. I'm not saying that people shouldn't plot, and seek to overthrow their enemies. Betrayals can be the spice that makes things yummy. But when your character does a Face-Heel Turn, you should expect that there will be a high percentage of players whom you betrayed that will be very angry and hurt by what you did. The greater the magnitude of betrayal, the worse it will be. I don't understand how you could have done this without expecting that you would make a LOT of players very angry.

I'm not saying that you shouldn't have plotted the downfall of SA. That's fine. I'm not saying that you shouldn't have succeeded at destroying SA. That's fine, too. SA was rapidly heading toward the point where a diaspora was inevitable. The religion was headed toward a fracturing. It's been obvious for a couple of years that it was never going to be able to maintain the iron grip it had. The theocracies could not project their power to the south strongly enough to keep them in line. And once Luria united and became a strong, singular entity that had a strong SA presence, the splintering was inevitable.

But it's not about the end result, anyway. It's about the specific manner in which it happened. It's almost like you purposely picked the singularly most humiliating, offensive, and denigrating way in which to do it. How could yo not think that you would really piss off a lot of people?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 06, 2014, 10:02:43 PM

1) How many game announcements do you need to believe its not abuse?

The same number of court decisions it'll take for me to believe OJ Simpson is not a murderer.

2) Are you aware of the workings of the world around you? Yes? So are our characters. They are not dumb, and the workings of game mechanics, i.e. their world, is not unknown to them. Delvin's statements on infiltrators is a really good example.

Total nonsense. There are plenty of things about the world around me I don't have a working knowledge of. I know only the basic details of how most electronics work. I don't know the exact procedures followed by congressional budget committees. I have no idea of the chemical process to refine pure petrolium into gasoline. Everything I do know about how the world works I learned, I wasn't born knowing it.

You're claiming Jonsu should just naturally know that every single temple in all of SA would obey a decree made by the regent that he isn't even supposed to have the authority to make? HOW? How would you know that? Did you visit every last temple and talk to the staff? Did you write them all letters? Are you roleplaying that Jonsu now has severe carpal-tunnel from all that?

Here's a little scene that illustrates how Regent Enoch's decree should have been received in the vast majority of the temples of SA:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=8afaQFLSTH4#t=3m00s


The only logical explanation for why this didn't happen is some sort of witchcraft, which is how most of us are playing it at this point. I'm hoping the players wont abuse OOC information and will treat this witchcraft with the same hatred we did Mendicant's "witch craft".

By the way remember when you said you'd step down when it became obvious which faction won? Is it not obvious yet? right now the vast majority of SA is supporting Helm and no one is in opposition except maybe you. All of the key lands of SA would arrest you on the spot if you tried to come near them, and even Fulco doesn't support you despite your offer to make him regent.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 06, 2014, 10:27:20 PM
The same number of court decisions it'll take for me to believe OJ Simpson is not a murderer.

pcw27, frankly, I find this offensive.

The question of whether OJ Simpson is or is not a murderer rests in the hard facts of the matter: Was he the person who wielded the weapon that slew his wife?

The facts of this matter are not in doubt: we know that Enoch promoted Jonsu, then demoted himself, and that Jonsu had persuaded him to do this.

What you find to be in doubt is whether that is an abuse, and that rests not in some murky unknowable territory where everyone's opinion is as valid as everyone else's, but in a relatively cut-and-dried and logical analysis of the situation.

Did either Enoch or Jonsu exploit a known bug in the game code? No.

Did either Enoch or Jonsu exploit a bug in the game code that was not previously known? No.

Did either Enoch or Jonsu break one or more of the Rules and Policies (http://wiki.battlemaster.org/index.php/Rules_and_Policies) laid down by Tom? No.

Has Jonsu, in fact, done anything since gaining power that would, in and of itself (that is, ignoring the fact that it is Jonsu doing it), ruin the fun of those in SA? I don't have hard evidence on this, but I'm strongly inclined to say "No" again, because if she had, I bet I would have heard about it.

You see, pcw27, the definition of an abuse is not "some action that really upsets me or ruins my fun in the game." You have to actually define what is being abused.

I recognize that the actions taken here upset a great many people, and the dev team is, in fact, discussing what we might be able to do to prevent something like this from happening again without some clear way for the "true" faithful to kick out the pretender and get things back to whatever they consider normal. But that's a long way from saying that this was an abuse that needs to be punished.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 06, 2014, 10:35:34 PM
So "I want to be Regent" is supposed to equate to "I want to destroy the church"? Especially after Brance repeatedly badgered Enoch about his intentions until Enoch finally admitted that yes, he did want to be Regent.
I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. Some rank in a secret society of which only 5 people are aware? How is that supposed to be a mitigating factor?
That is a very valid point, to which there is no good answer. Secret plots are part of the game. I'm not saying that people shouldn't plot, and seek to overthrow their enemies. Betrayals can be the spice that makes things yummy. But when your character does a Face-Heel Turn, you should expect that there will be a high percentage of players whom you betrayed that will be very angry and hurt by what you did. The greater the magnitude of betrayal, the worse it will be. I don't understand how you could have done this without expecting that you would make a LOT of players very angry.

I'm not saying that you shouldn't have plotted the downfall of SA. That's fine. I'm not saying that you shouldn't have succeeded at destroying SA. That's fine, too. SA was rapidly heading toward the point where a diaspora was inevitable. The religion was headed toward a fracturing. It's been obvious for a couple of years that it was never going to be able to maintain the iron grip it had. The theocracies could not project their power to the south strongly enough to keep them in line. And once Luria united and became a strong, singular entity that had a strong SA presence, the splintering was inevitable.

But it's not about the end result, anyway. It's about the specific manner in which it happened. It's almost like you purposely picked the singularly most humiliating, offensive, and denigrating way in which to do it. How could yo not think that you would really piss off a lot of people?

I honestly don't see how everyone is so upset. As has been said before, the SA charter was used in spite of gameplay mechanics that encouraged a more dictatorial hold of religion. It isn't the fault of Jonsu's player that they used the gameplay mechanics as they were intended.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 06, 2014, 10:42:15 PM
pcw27, frankly, I find this offensive.

The question of whether OJ Simpson is or is not a murderer rests in the hard facts of the matter: Was he the person who wielded the weapon that slew his wife?

The facts of this matter are not in doubt: we know that Enoch promoted Jonsu, then demoted himself, and that Jonsu had persuaded him to do this.

What you find to be in doubt is whether that is an abuse, and that rests not in some murky unknowable territory where everyone's opinion is as valid as everyone else's, but in a relatively cut-and-dried and logical analysis of the situation.

Did either Enoch or Jonsu exploit a known bug in the game code? No.

Did either Enoch or Jonsu exploit a bug in the game code that was not previously known? No.

Did either Enoch or Jonsu break one or more of the Rules and Policies (http://wiki.battlemaster.org/index.php/Rules_and_Policies) laid down by Tom? No.

Has Jonsu, in fact, done anything since gaining power that would, in and of itself (that is, ignoring the fact that it is Jonsu doing it), ruin the fun of those in SA? I don't have hard evidence on this, but I'm strongly inclined to say "No" again, because if she had, I bet I would have heard about it.

You see, pcw27, the definition of an abuse is not "some action that really upsets me or ruins my fun in the game." You have to actually define what is being abused.

I recognize that the actions taken here upset a great many people, and the dev team is, in fact, discussing what we might be able to do to prevent something like this from happening again without some clear way for the "true" faithful to kick out the pretender and get things back to whatever they consider normal. But that's a long way from saying that this was an abuse that needs to be punished.

You came to concluded that the action was fine. I suspect that if a magistrate case had been opened, the opposite verdict would have been reached.

I don't care what the GMs say, I've often held their applications and interpretations of the rules to be arbitrary and illogical. The GMs can repeat that this action was fine as many times as they want, it'd still be a social contract violation in my eyes.

You may consider that it was intended that religion leaders have total power, but I do not consider it normal intended behavior that an enemy of a religion can come infiltrate it and replace the whole religion leadership with people bent on its destruction.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 06, 2014, 10:51:10 PM
What about OOC information abuse?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 06, 2014, 10:56:26 PM
You may consider that it was intended that religion leaders have total power, but I do not consider it normal intended behavior that an enemy of a religion can come infiltrate it and replace the whole religion leadership with people bent on its destruction.

Well, guess what? If enemies of a religion are really good at infiltrating, they can do that over and over again, and there's absolutely nothing abusive about it.

The key to all of this was Enoch becoming Regent, despite the fact that he wanted to damage SA. There is absolutely no reason why that couldn't happen again—with a guild, a religion, or a realm. The main difference with a realm is that because realms are the first-class grouping unit in the game, there are a fair number of safeguards against one person being able to tear them down in a short period of time. As I've said, the dev team has begun discussions of what kinds of safeguards would be appropriate to add to guilds and religions.

However, I don't believe any significant "tearing down" has actually taken place. Has it?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 06, 2014, 10:58:19 PM
What about OOC information abuse?

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

If you want to accuse a specific person of a specific infraction, then please do so.

In fact, if you want to accuse a specific person of a specific infraction, then make a Titan report. That's what the Titans are for. Coming on the forums and declaring, "John Smith is an abuser, and I don't care what anyone else says!" is itself a Social Contract violation. Thus, I must firmly instruct you to cease doing so immediately, and take any such accusations to the proper channels.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 06, 2014, 11:00:33 PM

However, I don't believe any significant "tearing down" has actually taken place. Has it?

No but Justin has repeatedly threatened to just tank the whole religion as a response to all the player backlash.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 06, 2014, 11:01:53 PM
I'm not sure what you mean by this.

If you want to accuse a specific person of a specific infraction, then please do so.

In fact, if you want to accuse a specific person of a specific infraction, then make a Titan report. That's what the Titans are for. Coming on the forums and declaring, "John Smith is an abuser, and I don't care what anyone else says!" is itself a Social Contract violation. Thus, I must firmly instruct you to cease doing so immediately, and take any such accusations to the proper channels.

I mentioned it on this thread. I assume the matter had already been considered and there was no point in submitting a titan report.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 06, 2014, 11:04:31 PM
I mentioned it on this thread. I assume the matter had already been considered.

"I mentioned it on this thread" is not a Titan report.

If you want the Titans to take up a case, you need to make a Titan report.

The Titans and Magistrates do not simply take up matters that no one reports. This has been made clear a number of times over the several years they have been in operation.

The best rule of thumb is: If you do not have personal knowledge of a Titan report being filed for a specific incident, and you want that incident to be investigated, file a report yourself.

Furthermore, whether or not a Titan report has been filed, you are still expected to abide by the Social Contract provision banning public accusations of cheating or abuses without evidence.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 06, 2014, 11:07:42 PM
One thing I found a bit odd was how Jonsu re-joined the religion. Well and good. But she had been excommunicated and convicted of heresy, so one of the Elders on at the time kicked her out.

She came back.

A different Elder (me I think) kicked her out again.

She came back again.

Then Enoch promoted her, demoted himself, and that was it. So basically this all hinged on whether players were online at the time to kick her out again, whether she was on again to rejoin again, and who would be exhausted or unlucky enough first. I'm pretty sure none of that is "gameplay mechanics as they were intended."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 06, 2014, 11:12:29 PM
"I mentioned it on this thread" is not a Titan report.

If you want the Titans to take up a case, you need to make a Titan report.

The Titans and Magistrates do not simply take up matters that no one reports. This has been made clear a number of times over the several years they have been in operation.

The best rule of thumb is: If you do not have personal knowledge of a Titan report being filed for a specific incident, and you want that incident to be investigated, file a report yourself.

Furthermore, whether or not a Titan report has been filed, you are still expected to abide by the Social Contract provision banning public accusations of cheating or abuses without evidence.

I am asking was this already considered in the previous case? Are you trying to tell me the answer is no?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 06, 2014, 11:14:52 PM
Well, guess what? If enemies of a religion are really good at infiltrating, they can do that over and over again, and there's absolutely nothing abusive about it.

The key to all of this was Enoch becoming Regent, despite the fact that he wanted to damage SA. There is absolutely no reason why that couldn't happen again—with a guild, a religion, or a realm. The main difference with a realm is that because realms are the first-class grouping unit in the game, there are a fair number of safeguards against one person being able to tear them down in a short period of time. As I've said, the dev team has begun discussions of what kinds of safeguards would be appropriate to add to guilds and religions.

However, I don't believe any significant "tearing down" has actually taken place. Has it?

If someone got himself elected judge and banned the whole realm at once, I'd consider that to be in violation of the social contract as well. Just like rulers, back in the day, using OOC bans to get rid of people they couldn't otherwise deal with.

It's not because someone got an IG power through legitimate means that they can use this power with impunity.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 06, 2014, 11:20:34 PM
If someone got himself elected judge and banned the whole realm at once, I'd consider that to be in violation of the social contract as well. Just like rulers, back in the day, using OOC bans to get rid of people they couldn't otherwise deal with.

It's not because someone got an IG power through legitimate means that they can use this power with impunity.

It wouldn't be though. I happened not that long ago on FEI where a realm was having fraction issues. One of the small factions got a candidate made judge (appointed I think) and they then started banning those opposed to them, which was pretty much everyone.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 06, 2014, 11:25:06 PM
One thing I found a bit odd was how Jonsu re-joined the religion. Well and good. But she had been excommunicated and convicted of heresy, so one of the Elders on at the time kicked her out.

She came back.

A different Elder (me I think) kicked her out again.

She came back again.

Then Enoch promoted her, demoted himself, and that was it. So basically this all hinged on whether players were online at the time to kick her out again, whether she was on again to rejoin again, and who would be exhausted or unlucky enough first. I'm pretty sure none of that is "gameplay mechanics as they were intended."

This is the first time I have heard this stated as more than speculation of a click war (or at least, that's what it sounded like to me on previous mentions).

I think that there may be a legitimate case to be made that this part of the whole thing was an abuse. If you believe that to be the case, then please make a Titan report.

Unfortunately, I do not believe there is any way the code can prevent something like this from happening. If there had been a "guild ban" feature applied to Jonsu, or there were limits in place to prevent her from joining and rejoining within a short period of time, all Justin would have needed to do is make sure that he and Enoch's player were online at the same time, so that Enoch could remove the ban, Jonsu could join, and Enoch could promote her.

Once you have handed over the highest position in a guild to someone with a desire to harm it, not only do I not believe there is anything the game can do to prevent damage entirely, I do not think there is anything it should do. That's what's called "getting outplayed." Yeah, it sucks when it happens. I've been outplayed a time or two myself, and I was really upset. But that doesn't mean that anything the people who outplayed me did was wrong, or against any kind of rule.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 06, 2014, 11:26:19 PM
It wouldn't be though. I happened not that long ago on FEI where a realm was having fraction issues. One of the small factions got a candidate made judge (appointed I think) and they then started banning those opposed to them, which was pretty much everyone.

Didn't Tom have to adjust how the whole judge ban thing works because of that abuse?

Also, why on earth did elders let Enoch become an elder in the first place? You should all have only put people you trust with a such high position.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 06, 2014, 11:29:45 PM
If someone got himself elected judge and banned the whole realm at once, I'd consider that to be in violation of the social contract as well. Just like rulers, back in the day, using OOC bans to get rid of people they couldn't otherwise deal with.

It's not because someone got an IG power through legitimate means that they can use this power with impunity.

And frankly, if Jonsu had immediately gone about dismantling Sanguis Astroism, you and I would be having a very different conversation, and I don't think you'd dislike my side of it nearly so much.

There's a huge difference between "the most hated person in Groupname has, through long-laid plans and dark machinations, taken it over" and "the most hated person in Groupname took it over specifically for the purpose of destroying it, and wrecked everything before anyone had the chance to stop him."

It seems to me like far too many people are acting like the latter has happened, when in actuality, it's the former.

Yes, Jonsu could destroy SA. But she hasn't. Hell, Enoch could have just destroyed SA himself by demoting all the elder priests! But he didn't do that, either.

Taking power, then kicking out the people likely to be a threat to you, is a perfectly sensible IC thing to do.
Taking power, then kicking out everyone and pouring gasoline on the whole thing, then tossing a match behind you as you walk away, is griefing.

But that's not what happened here, now, is it?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 06, 2014, 11:30:22 PM
Didn't Tom have to adjust how the whole judge ban thing works because of that abuse?

I don't believe so. There haven't been any major changes to how bans work (IIRC) in quite a long time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 06, 2014, 11:30:56 PM
Once you have handed over the highest position in a guild to someone with a desire to harm it, not only do I not believe there is anything the game can do to prevent damage entirely, I do not think there is anything it should do. That's what's called "getting outplayed." Yeah, it sucks when it happens. I've been outplayed a time or two myself, and I was really upset. But that doesn't mean that anything the people who outplayed me did was wrong, or against any kind of rule.

But those who have been outplayed should have a recourse shouldn't they? If you make a madman your king and he starts to destroy the realm you can rebel against him.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 06, 2014, 11:32:17 PM
But those who have been outplayed should have a recourse shouldn't they? If you make a madman your king and he starts to destroy the realm you can rebel against him.

Not if he appoints a judge that bans you first. Which is possible, depending on your government type, I believe.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 06, 2014, 11:36:35 PM
This is the first time I have heard this stated as more than speculation of a click war (or at least, that's what it sounded like to me on previous mentions).

I think that there may be a legitimate case to be made that this part of the whole thing was an abuse. If you believe that to be the case, then please make a Titan report.

Unfortunately, I do not believe there is any way the code can prevent something like this from happening. If there had been a "guild ban" feature applied to Jonsu, or there were limits in place to prevent her from joining and rejoining within a short period of time, all Justin would have needed to do is make sure that he and Enoch's player were online at the same time, so that Enoch could remove the ban, Jonsu could join, and Enoch could promote her.

Once you have handed over the highest position in a guild to someone with a desire to harm it, not only do I not believe there is anything the game can do to prevent damage entirely, I do not think there is anything it should do. That's what's called "getting outplayed." Yeah, it sucks when it happens. I've been outplayed a time or two myself, and I was really upset. But that doesn't mean that anything the people who outplayed me did was wrong, or against any kind of rule.

So long as Elders have the power to act indepently there is nothing that can be done. If a religion is able to configure itself so that things like promotions require a vote, or the approval of x number of elders you could prevent it, but we are talking significant changes to the way things operate.

Unless religions are changed from a dictatorship model, the highest rank will probably always override protections, since it is assumed that they are in control of placing those protections.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 06, 2014, 11:38:47 PM
Not if he appoints a judge that bans you first. Which is possible, depending on your government type, I believe.

But then you need a judge that also wants to destroy the realm. Underground membership is secret so he has to ban everyone. It takes three days for the ban to take effect, which potentially gives you enough time to lead a successful rebellion.

On top of that if your realm has multiple duchies dukes can secede and regions can change loyalty to the new realm. Then that realm can declare war on the original, oust the mad king and his judge and rename the realm back to its original name.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 06, 2014, 11:45:18 PM
But then you need a judge that also wants to destroy the realm. Underground membership is secret so he has to ban everyone. It takes three days for the ban to take effect, which potentially gives you enough time to lead a successful rebellion.

On top of that if your realm has multiple duchies dukes can secede and regions can change loyalty to the new realm. Then that realm can declare war on the original, oust the mad king and his judge and rename the realm back to its original name.

Like Tim said, realms tend to have more safeguards because they are viewed as the most important grouping. But they are not immune. What if you are a single duchy realm, the one in question was on FEI. What if nearly every noble is away on a war so Lords and Dukes are too far away to take much action?

Of course once you have banned almost everyone then what, you potentially don't have the nobles to even have a Lord for every region, but if your goal is to destroy or severely hurt the realm what do you care? Even if you have a structure that can split off and fight against the mad King, if you already have conflicts going, and those opponents decide to press the advantage what then?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 06, 2014, 11:53:54 PM
But then you need a judge that also wants to destroy the realm. Underground membership is secret so he has to ban everyone. It takes three days for the ban to take effect, which potentially gives you enough time to lead a successful rebellion.

On top of that if your realm has multiple duchies dukes can secede and regions can change loyalty to the new realm. Then that realm can declare war on the original, oust the mad king and his judge and rename the realm back to its original name.

Now we are just getting into hypotheticals. Please stick to the tangibles.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 06, 2014, 11:55:09 PM
But then you need a judge that also wants to destroy the realm. Underground membership is secret so he has to ban everyone. It takes three days for the ban to take effect, which potentially gives you enough time to lead a successful rebellion.

Except that you can't join the underground when you're banned.

Plus, what Gustav Kuriga said.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on February 07, 2014, 12:05:32 AM
So long as Elders have the power to act indepently there is nothing that can be done. If a religion is able to configure itself so that things like promotions require a vote, or the approval of x number of elders you could prevent it, but we are talking significant changes to the way things operate.

Unless religions are changed from a dictatorship model, the highest rank will probably always override protections, since it is assumed that they are in control of placing those protections.

Would it be difficult to add a "cast time" (since I'm blanking on a better phrase) to rank changes, or a protest feature to religions/guilds?  If promotions/demotions/ejections happened at (for instance) turn change the turn *after* they're performed (or X changes, whatever you wanted for the delay) and elders could be protested out of their positions I feel like that would at least give some sort of recourse if someone were to hijack your guild/religion.  Jonsu takes over, starts kicking and demoting people, 80% of SA protests and she loses her eldership, the ejections take effect and then everyone comes back and the religion restoration mechanic kicks in (I have no idea, by the way, what that entails or if it would be in any way beneficial).

In SA news, so far very few people have voiced open support of Jonsu (even her Regent IIRC declined the offer) so I don't really know what's going to happen.  Is she getting backroom support?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 07, 2014, 12:08:05 AM
One thing I found a bit odd was how Jonsu re-joined the religion. Well and good. But she had been excommunicated and convicted of heresy, so one of the Elders on at the time kicked her out.

She came back.

A different Elder (me I think) kicked her out again.

She came back again.

Then Enoch promoted her, demoted himself, and that was it. So basically this all hinged on whether players were online at the time to kick her out again, whether she was on again to rejoin again, and who would be exhausted or unlucky enough first. I'm pretty sure none of that is "gameplay mechanics as they were intended."






2014-02-02 21:41:42   Hireshmont II Vellos, Coffermaster of Phantaria, Baron of Mistight has enlarged the temple in Mistight. It is now a small temple.
2014-02-02 23:57:25   Luminary Machiavel has removed Jonsu from the order and revoked her membership in the order.
2014-02-03 00:22:29   Regent of the Faith Enoch has promoted Jonsu to the rank of Guardian of the Temple. Jonsu is now a full member of the order.
2014-02-03 00:27:33   Regent of the Faith Enoch has demoted Turin to the rank of Knight Penitent. Turin is no longer a senior member of the order.
2014-02-03 00:27:50   Regent of the Faith Enoch has promoted Jonsu to the rank of Regent of the Faith. Jonsu is now a senior member of the order.
2014-02-03 00:28:58   Regent of the Faith Enoch has demoted Enoch to the rank of Special Regent Representative.
2014-02-03 00:29:53   Light of the Austere Star Rabisu has removed Enoch from the order and revoked his membership in the order.
2014-02-03 00:32:02   Regent of the Faith Jonsu has demoted Rabisu to the rank of Knight Penitent. Rabisu is no longer a senior member of the order.




She wasn't kicked out of the church  during her attempt to take control.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 07, 2014, 12:14:01 AM
But those who have been outplayed should have a recourse shouldn't they? If you make a madman your king and he starts to destroy the realm you can rebel against him.




Recourse you say...   I think we have already discussed it.   You didn't like it.   At this point I'm willing to say:   Tough.         


Jonsu took control and beat us all.  I was taken completely off guard as was virtually everyone else.   Jonsu won... the church is hers.    Justin was gracious enough to give you guys a chance to fight back and defeat Jonsu.    I'm not sure I would have done the same if one of my characters took control of the church.   
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 07, 2014, 12:18:00 AM
Unless religions are changed from a dictatorship model, the highest rank will probably always override protections, since it is assumed that they are in control of placing those protections.

I don't understand the emphasis on mechanics over RP. The mechanics aid to give us guidelines and rules to play agreeably with, but RP is the GAME. If the game cannot give us a schism, why not create one ourselves? Didn't Jonsu offer to promote factions for a schism? If we continue to play as friends, then we can get all the good stuff we want the devs to do (while they are busy with more important work). Did Jonsu threaten to destroy the church, or did Justin? Either way, it was likely a bluff. We made an OOC agreements on how this would go. Jonsu may be a bitch, but Justin has been around a while. If he wasn't 'playing with friends' he would likely have been deleted by now.

Does everyone really dislike and distrust Stabbity that much? Or are their characters so butt-hurt by Jonsu that it has become OOC? Is there a better indication for "who seems like a player worth trusting" than all those damned trust medals?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 07, 2014, 12:45:37 AM
This is the first time I have heard this stated as more than speculation of a click war (or at least, that's what it sounded like to me on previous mentions).

I think that there may be a legitimate case to be made that this part of the whole thing was an abuse. If you believe that to be the case, then please make a Titan report.

Unfortunately, I do not believe there is any way the code can prevent something like this from happening. If there had been a "guild ban" feature applied to Jonsu, or there were limits in place to prevent her from joining and rejoining within a short period of time, all Justin would have needed to do is make sure that he and Enoch's player were online at the same time, so that Enoch could remove the ban, Jonsu could join, and Enoch could promote her.

Once you have handed over the highest position in a guild to someone with a desire to harm it, not only do I not believe there is anything the game can do to prevent damage entirely, I do not think there is anything it should do. That's what's called "getting outplayed." Yeah, it sucks when it happens. I've been outplayed a time or two myself, and I was really upset. But that doesn't mean that anything the people who outplayed me did was wrong, or against any kind of rule.

I'm not interested in appealing to Titans or Magistrates or anything else at this point, personally.

As for the latter point, fine enough, it's not against a rule, never said it was - but - "Outplayed?"  Seems to me playing well should create fun in the game. Roleplaying should happen. I mean in the one RP Enoch sent out mentioned him being all kinds of corrupt, and if that had actually happened - roleplays previously indicating that - then it wouldn't seem like a cheap play. It would have been an interesting story. People could have gotten into it. Players could have been involved. Things would have turned out the same but it would have been less "controversial" and a lot more interesting for a lot more people. I mean what we coulda had there is basically a Mad King scenario, but it wound up being utterly wasted. Referenced after the fact.  I don't consider that how the game should be played, let alone an example of the game being played so well that everyone else just, I guess, sucks in comparison?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 07, 2014, 12:51:13 AM
I don't understand the emphasis on mechanics over RP. The mechanics aid to give us guidelines and rules to play agreeably with, but RP is the GAME. If the game cannot give us a schism, why not create one ourselves? Didn't Jonsu offer to promote factions for a schism? If we continue to play as friends, then we can get all the good stuff we want the devs to do (while they are busy with more important work). Did Jonsu threaten to destroy the church, or did Justin? Either way, it was likely a bluff. We made an OOC agreements on how this would go. Jonsu may be a bitch, but Justin has been around a while. If he wasn't 'playing with friends' he would likely have been deleted by now.

Does everyone really dislike and distrust Stabbity that much? Or are their characters so butt-hurt by Jonsu that it has become OOC? Is there a better indication for "who seems like a player worth trusting" than all those damned trust medals?

I think it is obvious that Justin is a polarising player. As is obvious he has many Fun and Trust medals, yet there is definitely a large group of players that don't trust him.

In terms of mechanics trumping RP, so far as I know the rule exist for exactly issues like this. It simplifies things for those that need to make ruling since they can just refer to the mechanics and not have to try and access masses of RP's, many of which may no longer be accessible in order to determine if someone's actions run counter to established RP. Then try and decide did that player have access to the RP or would be aware of the systems etc.

It is not a rule that says you can't use RP to achieve things that the mechanics don't specifically support. It exists to allow disagreements to be resolved in those cases. As soon as you move into RP structures, you open the system to risk from people that will use the mechanics to upset it, as we have seen with the charter.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 07, 2014, 12:58:28 AM
I'm not interested in appealing to Titans or Magistrates or anything else at this point, personally.

As for the latter point, fine enough, it's not against a rule, never said it was - but - "Outplayed?"  Seems to me playing well should create fun in the game. Roleplaying should happen. I mean in the one RP Enoch sent out mentioned him being all kinds of corrupt, and if that had actually happened - roleplays previously indicating that - then it wouldn't seem like a cheap play. It would have been an interesting story. People could have gotten into it. Players could have been involved. Things would have turned out the same but it would have been less "controversial" and a lot more interesting for a lot more people. I mean what we coulda had there is basically a Mad King scenario, but it wound up being utterly wasted. Referenced after the fact.  I don't consider that how the game should be played, let alone an example of the game being played so well that everyone else just, I guess, sucks in comparison?

Fun is subjective. If my realm kills yours, it is fair to say they we are probably having fun, and you are likely not. RP's are subjective, we do not force everyone to write them, we do not force people that do choose to write them to share them in specific message groups. I myself hardly ever RP any more, I prefer the RP of my characters to be evident in their interactions with others. That obviously means that those I interact with more have a greater handle on the personality of the character.

I have mentioned previously that when I plot, I try to set things up so people can counter it. I can guarantee I don't always get it right. It is so difficult to guess what clues people have picked up on and I do not intend to make it so obvious I never succeed. It is clear that Dishman intended the same. Perhaps he was too subtle and too many people missed the clues, like I said it is not a easy balance to strike.

I can't see us punishing people for not writing RP messages. It is not a compulsory part of the game. I can't see us making a rule that says if 90% of the players affected don't find it fun we should step in either.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 07, 2014, 01:10:29 AM
Roleplaying should happen. I mean in the one RP Enoch sent out mentioned him being all kinds of corrupt, and if that had actually happened - roleplays previously indicating that - then it wouldn't seem like a cheap play. It would have been an interesting story. People could have gotten into it. Players could have been involved. Things would have turned out the same but it would have been less "controversial" and a lot more interesting for a lot more people. I mean what we coulda had there is basically a Mad King scenario, but it wound up being utterly wasted. Referenced after the fact.  I don't consider that how the game should be played, let alone an example of the game being played so well that everyone else just, I guess, sucks in comparison?

I did this. I got booted, took a day or two to prepare some RP, then RP'd how/why and gave secrets and details. Did you quit the church immediately after booting me?

It is not a rule that says you can't use RP to achieve things that the mechanics don't specifically support. It exists to allow disagreements to be resolved in those cases. As soon as you move into RP structures, you open the system to risk from people that will use the mechanics to upset it, as we have seen with the charter.

The charter itself was a RP work around for unimplemented mechanics. The charter was condoned by the Prophet. Mathurin could have kicked you all out, and it would have been mechanic and RP sensible. Everyone damn near worshiped the prophet, the Regent was his second, Regent primes the flock during it's defeat for a new leader to fill that hole....does that not make sense? The prophet gone, there is a power vacuum. The top-down structure of the church was built for this.

I admit, some forewarning would have eased a lot of tempers. I expected mad, but not the degree I've seen. Though, if I had came forward with this to people....wouldn't we be in the same position? I'm not sure if I would gave my character's plots away, returned the church, and dumped future plans because people would get mad I disrupted the charter?




Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 07, 2014, 01:52:18 AM
I did this. I got booted, took a day or two to prepare some RP, then RP'd how/why and gave secrets and details. Did you quit the church immediately after booting me?

The charter itself was a RP work around for unimplemented mechanics. The charter was condoned by the Prophet. Mathurin could have kicked you all out, and it would have been mechanic and RP sensible. Everyone damn near worshiped the prophet, the Regent was his second, Regent primes the flock during it's defeat for a new leader to fill that hole....does that not make sense? The prophet gone, there is a power vacuum. The top-down structure of the church was built for this.

I admit, some forewarning would have eased a lot of tempers. I expected mad, but not the degree I've seen. Though, if I had came forward with this to people....wouldn't we be in the same position? I'm not sure if I would gave my character's plots away, returned the church, and dumped future plans because people would get mad I disrupted the charter?

That is my point. People made a RP structure with the charter. If we let RP trump mechanics likely your action would have to be ruled invalid since you used a game mechanic to trump a pre-existing and agreed upon RP structure.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 07, 2014, 02:42:36 AM
Like Tim said, realms tend to have more safeguards because they are viewed as the most important grouping. But they are not immune. What if you are a single duchy realm, the one in question was on FEI. What if nearly every noble is away on a war so Lords and Dukes are too far away to take much action?

Of course once you have banned almost everyone then what, you potentially don't have the nobles to even have a Lord for every region, but if your goal is to destroy or severely hurt the realm what do you care? Even if you have a structure that can split off and fight against the mad King, if you already have conflicts going, and those opponents decide to press the advantage what then?

Even in that scenario there's still a recourse. The lords who are in realm can change allegiance to an allied realm or even an enemy. The lords who are away can also defect and join a realm willing to help them take back their lands from the mad king. The enemy realm will probably like the idea of backing the exiles in order to turn their enemy into an ally.

The biggest difference here is the land itself is still there and can be recovered. A few realms on Dwilight have been completely destroyed but then players conquered the previous lands and restored the old name.

The religion takeover has no such recourse. We can't march armies into the temples to take them back. In real life this would be possible but the game has no such mechanic.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 07, 2014, 02:50:34 AM
Even in that scenario there's still a recourse. The lords who are in realm can change allegiance to an allied realm or even an enemy. The lords who are away can also defect and join a realm willing to help them take back their lands from the mad king. The enemy realm will probably like the idea of backing the exiles in order to turn their enemy into an ally.

The biggest difference here is the land itself is still there and can be recovered. A few realms on Dwilight have been completely destroyed but then players conquered the previous lands and restored the old name.

The religion takeover has no such recourse. We can't march armies into the temples to take them back. In real life this would be possible but the game has no such mechanic.

You seem to equate recourse with restoring the status quo. You are not really asking for a way to strike back, what you are asking for is a way to rid yourself of the regent, preferably with no damage or easily repairable damage to the religion. While that is a recourse, it is certainly only a single option.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 07, 2014, 03:08:07 AM
You seem to equate recourse with restoring the status quo. You are not really asking for a way to strike back, what you are asking for is a way to rid yourself of the regent, preferably with no damage or easily repairable damage to the religion. While that is a recourse, it is certainly only a single option.

No a way to strike back is precisely what I'm asking for, nice try though. Right now we have literally none short of convincing every realm on the continent to ban Jonsu so we can eventually catch and execute her.

The damage to the religion should be proportionate to the number of people working in opposition to the new regent verses the number supporting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 07, 2014, 03:11:01 AM
Medals mean nothing. The game has gone for very large periods of time between new medal handouts. As such, they are concentrated in a few hands, and one's number of medals has more to do with playing where people have medals than one's worth or contributions.

Also, I'd like to add another example  of how having power does not mean we can use it in any way: bans. You can't just ban people at random. It's against the rules. Not sure where it can be found anymore, I think it was on the ban help page.

The thing is, the rules and policies are incomplete by nature. They weren't all there when the game first opened. People had to rely a lot more on the social contract. Then people did stuff that was commonly agreed to be abusive, and rules were made ad hoc. With the years, the rules and policies grew lengthier.

Just because something was never done before doesn't make it okay. You are right that there would be no way to make game mechanics to prevent the kind of thing that happened. But that doesn't make it okay either. There is no way we can do game mechanics to prevent strategic secessions either, or to prevent realms from organizing infil attacks to harvest their own bounties, or to duel for sport. "Do not attempt to take over a religion with the sole intention of harming it" could very much be one of them too.

'cause I'm fine with people infiltrating religions and attempting to undermine it from within. Putting public enemies in the top rank and getting all of the elders and their supporters demoted and/or kicked out and reforming the whole structure and theology of a religion in a matter of an hour, however, I am not fine with.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 07, 2014, 03:47:24 AM
No a way to strike back is precisely what I'm asking for, nice try though. Right now we have literally none short of convincing every realm on the continent to ban Jonsu so we can eventually catch and execute her.

The damage to the religion should be proportionate to the number of people working in opposition to the new regent verses the number supporting.

Of course you do, all leave the religion at the very simplest. At the more complex you refound it. Palatable options, perhaps not. Options for recourse yes indeed they are.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 07, 2014, 03:58:11 AM
Hell, Enoch could have just destroyed SA himself by demoting all the elder priests!
Umm... that wouldn't have had any effect on anything.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 07, 2014, 04:00:28 AM
Not if he appoints a judge that bans you first. Which is possible, depending on your government type, I believe.
There is a cool-down period for new judges. There is a two-or-three day waiting period before a newly appointed judge can ban/unban nobles.

There is no such limit with guilds/religions. Newly appointed elders have immediate access to all of their powers.

Also, guild actions do not require you to use time-pool hours to perform actions, unlike realm bans which take an hour each.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 07, 2014, 04:17:54 AM
Umm... that wouldn't have had any effect on anything.

A religion with no elder priests will begin to collapse. It wouldn't take long, either.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on February 07, 2014, 04:19:52 AM
A religion with no elder priests will begin to collapse. It wouldn't take long, either.

Except a priest will get auto-promoted, won't they? There's only collapse if no priest can be auto-promoted I thought.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 07, 2014, 04:27:35 AM
I thought auto promotion was if there were no Elders.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 07, 2014, 04:30:15 AM
I thought auto promotion was if there were no Elders.

Same, but I haven't checked.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 07, 2014, 04:51:29 AM
I thought auto promotion was if there were no Elders.

That is correct.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 07, 2014, 06:14:20 AM
Fun is subjective. If my realm kills yours, it is fair to say they we are probably having fun, and you are likely not.

I never thought that way. I guess I'm in a minority.

Quote from: Dishman
I did this. I got booted, took a day or two to prepare some RP, then RP'd how/why and gave secrets and details. Did you quit the church immediately after booting me?

I did delete Rabisu not too long after.  But the RP should have come before is what I'm saying, not afterward.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bronnen on February 07, 2014, 06:18:18 AM

I did delete Rabisu not too long after.  But the RP should have come before is what I'm saying, not afterward.

Agreed!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 07, 2014, 06:55:22 AM
pcw27, I have two questions for you:

Why do you keep arguing about this? What do you want to have happen as a result of your arguing?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 07, 2014, 07:46:29 AM
pcw27, I have two questions for you:

Why do you keep arguing about this? What do you want to have happen as a result of your arguing?

Why are you singling me out? Other people are still arguing too.

I suppose the most important thing is I want the dev team to acknowledge that the mechanics for religions need work so this sort of takeover is more difficult and the other members of the religion have some way to fight back. Some have agreed to this point and claim they're working on it but others don't seem convinced.


Of course you do, all leave the religion at the very simplest. At the more complex you refound it. Palatable options, perhaps not. Options for recourse yes indeed they are.

That's not much of a recourse and it shouldn't be necessary. There's no reason one person should be able to control all the temples of the religion if every single other noble of the church is in opposition to them.

Realms have a bunch of safe guards against this sort of mad ruler scenario and many ways to fight back. SA has become a larger institution then any realm the game's ever had. If religions have that kind of potential they need more checks and balances in their mechanics.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 07, 2014, 02:23:09 PM
Doesn't it say somewhere on the sign up page that BM is in beta testing? 

Pat,  the devs have already said that.  You must have missed it..


There are changes on the board for religions, but we all know things get changed slowly.  That is just how it it's and little can be done to change it.    It's probably gonna be quite a while before the changed you want to take place.  Long enough that it will have no meaning whatsoever on these current events. 

If you want recourse in game you are going to have to find it yourself.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 07, 2014, 05:58:54 PM
A religion with no elder priests will begin to collapse. It wouldn't take long, either.
I thought that was just "A religion with no priests", and that the elder priest thing just determined whether or not more non-priests could be made elders.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on February 07, 2014, 06:04:30 PM
I thought that was just "A religion with no priests", and that the elder priest thing just determined whether or not more non-priests could be made elders.

Nope. A religion must at all times have at least one elder priest, and if there are fewer priests than non-priests in the elder ranks, non-priests cannot be promoted to elders.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 07, 2014, 06:08:29 PM
I suppose the most important thing is I want the dev team to acknowledge that the mechanics for religions need work so this sort of takeover is more difficult and the other members of the religion have some way to fight back. Some have agreed to this point and claim they're working on it but others don't seem convinced.
I'll say it: The game mechanics for religions need work. Religions are guilds, as far as game mechanics are concerned. Guild structures were never intended to hold the kind of power that large religions can amass. Large religions concentrate large amounts of power. Large amounts of power make for lots of fun. If we want large religions, and the concentrations of power and fun that they enable, then religious structures will have to be modified to account for the kind of power that can be amassed in them.

My personal opinion: what happened in this case was not an abuse or cheating. It was a legal use of the game mechanics. However, I think that the game mechanics need to be adjusted to prevent something similar from re-occurring in the future.

Quote
SA has become a larger institution then any realm the game's ever had.
This is not correct. I can think of three realms off-hand that have been larger than SA ever was.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bael on February 07, 2014, 06:59:00 PM
My personal opinion: what happened in this case was not an abuse or cheating. It was a legal use of the game mechanics. However, I think that the game mechanics need to be adjusted to prevent something similar from re-occurring in the future.

Yep. To my mind, a legal loophole.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Charles on February 07, 2014, 08:43:10 PM
Just out of curiosity, would it be cheating for someone to contact the player of the founder of the religion to get him to restart that character for the purpose booting Jonsu?  Or has that been covered already?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 07, 2014, 09:34:47 PM
Just out of curiosity, would it be cheating for someone to contact the player of the founder of the religion to get him to restart that character for the purpose booting Jonsu?  Or has that been covered already?

I think his account auto deleted.   If someone could get ahold.of him it would simplify things
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Qyasogk on February 07, 2014, 09:59:26 PM
Reading all this, it occurs to me that the simplest way of addressing the situation with the minimal amount of code change would be adding a requirement that a person who has achieved a senior rank or higher cannot be removed/demoted from their office without a vote of the elders. At which point the accused would have an opportunity to plead their case.

If a vote is required to excommunicate someone from a religion, then a vote should also be required to reinstate them.

I would also suggest that a regent should not be able to make someone a prophet (or another regent) by themselves, that should be voted on by the elders as well.

This seems like simple common sense stuff to me. Comments?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 07, 2014, 11:23:44 PM
Reading all this, it occurs to me that the simplest way of addressing the situation with the minimal amount of code change would be adding a requirement that a person who has achieved a senior rank or higher cannot be removed/demoted from their office without a vote of the elders. At which point the accused would have an opportunity to plead their case.

If a vote is required to excommunicate someone from a religion, then a vote should also be required to reinstate them.

I would also suggest that a regent should not be able to make someone a prophet (or another regent) by themselves, that should be voted on by the elders as well.

This seems like simple common sense stuff to me. Comments?
All of this stuff is dependent on the religion in question, and how they want to run things. Hardcoding this stuff is needlessly restrictive on those that don't want it. But for those that do want it, some of this stuff should be available.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 07, 2014, 11:25:24 PM
I think his account auto deleted.
Rick Cronan, of the Hossenfeffer family, right? No such account exists anymore. :(
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 08, 2014, 04:44:20 AM
Nope. A religion must at all times have at least one elder priest, and if there are fewer priests than non-priests in the elder ranks, non-priests cannot be promoted to elders.

What would happen if there was a single elder who was a non priest?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 08, 2014, 05:18:13 AM
What would happen if there was a single elder who was a non priest?


If my memory is good,  then every temple would drop 1 level every day until there were no more temples and the religion would then cease to exist.   In Sanguis Astroism's case Springdale is the largest temple in the world.   Level 11.    At the point that SA had zero elder priests there would be an 11 day countdown to the destruction of SA.   1 Temple level every day until there are no more temples and then its game over. 

That could be stopped at any point that there is a priest promoted to the Elders. 

Can anyone confirm that?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 08, 2014, 05:42:02 AM

If my memory is good,  then every temple would drop 1 level every day until there were no more temples and the religion would then cease to exist.   In Sanguis Astroism's case Springdale is the largest temple in the world.   Level 11.    At the point that SA had zero elder priests there would be an 11 day countdown to the destruction of SA.   1 Temple level every day until there are no more temples and then its game over. 

That could be stopped at any point that there is a priest promoted to the Elders. 

Can anyone confirm that?

Sounds like an easy way to prevent griefing would be to make a single elder who's not a priest auto demote out of the elder rank forcing the promotion of a priest.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 08, 2014, 05:47:46 AM
Sounds like an easy way to prevent griefing would be to make a single elder who's not a priest auto demote out of the elder rank forcing the promotion of a priest.


I'm not a coder.  I have no idea how easy or hard that is to code.   What I do know is that there is already at least a few things on the list to do.  Already on that list is a revamp to religions.  I feel confident to say that when religions are revamped that things of this nature will get looked into. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 08, 2014, 06:32:25 AM

If my memory is good,  then every temple would drop 1 level every day until there were no more temples and the religion would then cease to exist.   In Sanguis Astroism's case Springdale is the largest temple in the world.   Level 11.    At the point that SA had zero elder priests there would be an 11 day countdown to the destruction of SA.   1 Temple level every day until there are no more temples and then its game over. 

That could be stopped at any point that there is a priest promoted to the Elders. 

Can anyone confirm that?
I can confirm it as I went through the process on Atamara, barely saving Evgenism.


I'm not a coder.  I have no idea how easy or hard that is to code.   What I do know is that there is already at least a few things on the list to do.  Already on that list is a revamp to religions.  I feel confident to say that when religions are revamped that things of this nature will get looked into. 
Thank you for positive attitude. Dev work is becoming more structured in working on a topic and improving that, thus it is likely that when any religious features are worked on there will be a variety of things looked at and implemented, although after the current event is over there is already something planned afterwards to be working on. It is possible for small features for religion to be coded before all of religion is worked on as small features are occasionally done by Vita when time allows and he is motivated.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 10, 2014, 07:24:53 PM
Well I don't know about anyone else, but I'm having quite a lot of fun in all this. In fact, it's been a while since Battlemaster has been this fun for me. Thanks Stabbity!

Also, three guesses as to which character is mine.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 11, 2014, 12:07:20 AM
Well I don't know about anyone else, but I'm having quite a lot of fun in all this. In fact, it's been a while since Battlemaster has been this fun for me. Thanks Stabbity!

Also, three guesses as to which character is mine.

I'm not. It's a stupid game and I don't care to follow it. The rare Jonsu supporters spout the same kind of crap that Jonsu does and which I have never enjoyed reading because of how exagerated it all is. However, it seems clear that hardly anyone supports Jonsu, and I await to see if Justin will act on his word of stepping down if he loses at his own minigame or if it was all just a lie to make the dick move pass better among a certain category of players and devs ("well it's not that bad, look, he's giving you a chance to regain control!").
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 11, 2014, 12:25:10 AM
Really? The same sort of crap? I like to believe that I have made it clear that my character is only supporting Jonsu because it happens to suit him, rather than any personal belief. Give him a reason to support someone else. Besides, a one sided dialogue in all of this would be rather boring.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 11, 2014, 12:39:44 AM
Really? The same sort of crap? I like to believe that I have made it clear that my character is only supporting Jonsu because it happens to suit him, rather than any personal belief. Give him a reason to support someone else. Besides, a one sided dialogue in all of this would be rather boring.

I skim through most of the stuff, especially when pro-Jonsu, but everyone else's as well. I have had absolutely no fun interacting with Jonsu in the past. I find Jonsu to be a distasteful character that procures me no enjoyment whatsoever. The character is more of a griefer than a villain.

Who are you, Amyclas's player? The last letter basically reads as "Salvation! Repent! Glory!" Is that supposed to convince anyone? There's no conversation to be had. That's a monologue without content. It's pure extremism. There's no point in trying to argue with people that will never be swayed and that will never yield a rational or otherwise interesting response. It just encourages them to repeat the same hollow things they already said.

Some people may enjoy it, I do not. I enjoy most of my character's enemies, but characters like Jonsu provide me no amusement of any kind.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 11, 2014, 12:55:31 AM
I skim through most of the stuff, especially when pro-Jonsu, but everyone else's as well. I have had absolutely no fun interacting with Jonsu in the past. I find Jonsu to be a distasteful character that procures me no enjoyment whatsoever. The character is more of a griefer than a villain.

Who are you, Amyclas's player? The last letter basically reads as "Salvation! Repent! Glory!" Is that supposed to convince anyone? There's no conversation to be had. That's a monologue without content. It's pure extremism. There's no point in trying to argue with people that will never be swayed and that will never yield a rational or otherwise interesting response. It just encourages them to repeat the same hollow things they already said.

Some people may enjoy it, I do not. I enjoy most of my character's enemies, but characters like Jonsu provide me no amusement of any kind.

Uhm... no. My character is Dusolf.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 11, 2014, 01:01:55 AM
I expected more Jonsu supporters and claimants of 'second prophet'. If no characters take the opportunity, I'll have to rethink my playstyle a bit. What will happen if Helm is unanimously supported as Regent to reinstate the charter?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 11, 2014, 01:21:10 AM
I expected more Jonsu supporters and claimants of 'second prophet'. If no characters take the opportunity, I'll have to rethink my playstyle a bit. What will happen if Helm is unanimously supported as Regent to reinstate the charter?

He isn't. My character isn't supporting him and has been outspoken about it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 11, 2014, 01:54:46 AM
What will happen if Helm is unanimously supported as Regent to reinstate the charter?
Then people will get back to playing the way they want to play. The fact that it should surprise you that no one wants Jonsu is, frankly, astonishing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 11, 2014, 02:13:00 AM
Then people will get back to playing the way they want to play. The fact that it should surprise you that no one wants Jonsu is, frankly, astonishing.

With Niselur and Farronite/Asylon (not to mention a waning Astrum) in the West, I figured some would look to reshape the church. If even those who actively fought against the theocracies aren't interested in a coup, then I've misunderstood this game. Hell, we already have 4 figures posturing for power.  Jonsu, Alaster, Seoras, and Helm are all trying to gain traction....so far under 40% have voiced their decision.

I'm sure many are waiting to see what happens (as casual interest seemed the dominant trait in SA), but I do admit that early Helm/Charter support indicates many things.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 11, 2014, 02:14:14 AM
Alaster isn't trying to gain support.   He wanted Helm as Regent and he is supporting his candidate.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 11, 2014, 02:35:31 AM
I think you completely missed the boat on what a lot of the fighting was about. Even those fighting against the theocracies realize that Jonsu wad a nutcase, and would be absolutely horrible to have in power. They didn't want to destroy the church, they wanted to assert their individual rights sovereign realms. That is a huge difference from destroying the church.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eduardo Almighty on February 11, 2014, 02:49:25 AM
Henrich certainly don't want to see Jonsu in Asylon again. He was against when Jonsu was there, but the King asked him to forget about it. Now, a traitor is a traitor. Nobody likes usurpers.

Indeed, Asylon don't want to see SA destroyed. We just want to keep our sovereignty. But now that SA is a circus, let the clowns play until everything explodes into flames.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 11, 2014, 03:08:20 AM
I honestly have no clue what your beef with this is, Indirik. It isn't Stabbity's fault that A) religions are dictatorial in nature, and B) the elders put someone into power that they had no background info on and shafted themselves in the process. Just because SA tried to roleplay over what the game mechanics actually were doesn't mean they were somehow exempt, so man up and stop insinuating at how wrong the situation is with every post.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on February 11, 2014, 03:09:52 AM
So how long does this "internal conflict" go on for? I remember someone (Stabbity maybe?) mentioned it was going to be a month before a "winner" is declared but is that the confirmed time frame, or is this a kind of "whenever I get bored" kinda thing?

I have to say the whole thing is pretty tiresome- you essentially have half the Church moaning at Jonsu to get out, while she and her two supporters write a couple of letters every now and then completely ignoring the fact that they have no hope of regaining the allegiance of any significant portion of the Church.

Dwilight is just entering monster invasion mode, and instead of coordinating anti-monster attacks and/or coming up with apocalyptic religious rp, SA is stuck in this ridiculous limbo that only about 3 players seem in favor of, and a significant portion of players/characters have all openly stated their opposition to.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 11, 2014, 04:31:17 AM
My "beef" with this should be obvious to anyone who has read my posts. If you don't agree with it, that's fine. It takes all kinds to make the world go around. It doesn't make you any more right, especially in light of the fact that you weren't even in SA for any of the events that lead up to this, and mostly have no clue what happened inside it. But, hey, post on.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 11, 2014, 05:41:05 AM
Considering the evidence provided by other devs that the religious structure as it is currently is meant to be dictatorial, and the Elders gave power to what many people considered an unknown, I'm not at all surprised at the outcome. I will however end this conversation, as I can see where it's going to lead to and don't want this thread locked again.

By the way, in the same way that it doesn't make me any more right, it doesn't make you any more right as well. While you are entitled to your opinion, I would rather you voice any concerns or "beefs" you have regarding this incident outside this thread, as I and many others don't want it locked again.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 11, 2014, 06:00:13 AM
And this is where people should stop. When the word 'right' starts to come out, it never ends in a pretty fashion.

If you are trying to voice your opinion, please do emphasis on the fact you are trying to voice your opinion instead of trying to 'win' over someone else.

It would help this thread more if people just discuss about facts as there are many people who aren't in the church wondering how the whole situation is being developed since that fateful day.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 11, 2014, 01:18:48 PM
The game won't even let me fine someone who already has a fine.

Quote
Your victim already has fines that are not yet paid.
Give him a break! We are very serious about this, repeated finings destroy the fun of playing the game because the player doesn't have gold for a long time.

Just because the game didn't  predict checks for power in religions doesn't mean that restrictions wouldn't be in line with the philosophy of the game, it just means that we have !@#$ religion mechanics that only really make some sense when you consider they are copy-pasted from guilds.

Because hey, somehow fining a royal that already has a small fine is considered too unfun by the game, but holding hundreds of players hostage by a couple of clicks is perfectly legitimate?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 11, 2014, 06:39:21 PM
Considering the evidence provided by other devs that the religious structure as it is currently is meant to be dictatorial,
This is quite true, so far as it goes. Religions are essentially guilds with the added restriction that you can only belong to one. Guilds are intended to be dictatorial, in that those at the top have complete control over what transpires inside the guild. Given the limited scope and power of guilds, this is acceptable.

However, when religion was added, and for quite some time afterward, no consideration was given to the possibility of the sheer amount of power and influence that a religion can amass. If a guild falls or is taken over, does it really matter? You can easily start a new one. It can be a bit of a pain to rebuild your guildhouses and regain your membership, but nothing substantial is lost. (Maybe some gold, but the peasants will quickly replenish that for you.) Besides, guilds really don't inspire the kind of the ambition and power struggles that religions do.

Religions are a different matter. The concentration of power and wealth, expensive infrastructure, extensive character RPs, not to mention the peasant following, represents a significant investment on the part of many, many players. As the organization gets larger, the investment can increase by orders of magnitude. The concentration of wealth/power/influence makes religions an unprecedented target far beyond the scale that was ever envisioned for the simplistic guild-based system. This calls for a stronger coding infrastructure to support the system. Frankly, I consider the failure to provide this to be a failing on the part of the dev team (myself included).

The dev team considers the feasibility of having larger religions to be a desirable thing. Not only larger, but more varied, as well. Large religions allow for large concentrations of power, which allow for many opportunities to create fun situations for the players. The dev team needs to provide the players the tools to do this. We are discussing various proposals to add checks and balances to the system, similar to the way that the realm power structures have checks and balances to the system. Several proposals have been made, but no final decisions have been reached.

If we can find a way to provide systems for religions to be as widely varied as realm governments currently are, that would be of great benefit to the game overall, and the religion game in particular. It should be possible to provide for all types of systems, from the current tyranny style all the way to republican styles, and everything in between. However, the Prophet/Founder rank will always remain at the top of the religion, with full control over everything.

Quote
and the Elders gave power to what many people considered an unknown
This is so untrue as to be laughable. You know nothing of the events and circumstances that lead to the current situation. Your characters haven't been a member of the religion for quite a long time. And for a significant portion of that time, you didn't even have a game account.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 11, 2014, 06:56:16 PM
This is so untrue as to be laughable. You know nothing of the events and circumstances that lead to the current situation. Your characters haven't been a member of the religion for quite a long time. And for a significant portion of that time, you didn't even have a game account.

Then tell me Indirik, how did he get power then? Only the Elders have the power to promote.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 11, 2014, 09:16:19 PM
So Rabisu wrote a bunch of stuff which was posthumously delivered to his son. Some (http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Daycryn_Family/Rabisu/Epistles) of it concerning SA is here. (This particular bit was written RL 6 months ago.)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 11, 2014, 10:49:47 PM
Then tell me Indirik, how did he get power then? Only the Elders have the power to promote.
Enoch was far from an unknown quantity. As I stated elsewhere, he gave every sign of being a faithful and loyal follower of both the church and the Stars. For example:

Enoch gave every sign of being a faithful member of the church, with absolutely no signs of being any kind of disruptive presence. Everything was going along just swimmingly. And then suddenly one day "HAH AHA! JONSU IS REGENT!!!!!!11!"

Why do you think so many people got so angry about this? Did you think everyone was mad because they're not the ones in power anymore?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 11, 2014, 11:55:06 PM
Enoch was far from an unknown quantity. As I stated elsewhere, he gave every sign of being a faithful and loyal follower of both the church and the Stars. For example:
  • Vocal support of the church
  • Undertaking far-traveling religious pilgrimages
  • Fighting in the Crusade against Niselur as a noble of Astrum
  • No known past association with Jonsu
  • Never spoke out negatively/adversely about the church or the Elder council
  • Frequently spoke quite rationally and effectively as a full member of the church
  • Successfully campaigned and won a Consul position
  • Gave several good explanations when running for Regent. Wasn't over-eager, and showed no signs of wanting to do any kind of major overhaul or upheaval

Enoch gave every sign of being a faithful member of the church, with absolutely no signs of being any kind of disruptive presence. Everything was going along just swimmingly. And then suddenly one day "HAH AHA! JONSU IS REGENT!!!!!!11!"

Why do you think so many people got so angry about this? Did you think everyone was mad because they're not the ones in power anymore?

I wouldn't argue with that list. Enoch wasn't as active as many to the general assembly, but he did smooze the elders. That list does leave out some important things. How and why can spin most of that list into a reason never to give them power and to boot them immediately. One example: Enoch's 'pilgrimage' was a joy-rid through theocracies. He took fat rurals, sold the food to the highest bidder, fought a few battles at his leisure, then moved on when bored (not to mention looting Darfix and fomenting heresies in the theocracy). It seemed obvious at the time, but those on the top were busy and over-eager for cannon-fodder. I was going to openly recruit for Mysticism, but I thought it would be a sure give-away. I messaged a few advys and some nobles and tried to probe them to see if they would expose me, but probably not enough.

I would argue, however, that "Everything was going along just swimmingly". Terran failed, Niselur failed, the defense of Astrum failed, and the Inquisition failed. Along with monsters sprouting up and a heretic in supreme power....I'd say SA got off lucky so far.

To be honest, I'm not even sure why Jonsu was originally booted from SA. I know she tried to start her own religions, but the only salient memory of when she was in the church was when SHE WAS HUNTING FOR MYSTICS AS AN ELDER OF THE CHURCH. Even if you hate me and my character, you have to admit that it is fitting to hand the church to the only person who even got a sniff of what was going on. Jonsu did (and will) do things more in the church's favor than anything Enoch did.

Enoch had three initiatives as his Regency campaign. A kind of food bank (which I planned to pilfer), revise the charter (distraction if I ever needed it), and retake Terran (to war against the daimons). None of those plans got any traction from those who were in the position to further them. The biggest hindrance to all of my schemes and plans was the apathy and resignation in SA. You wouldn't think from how people talk. I don't know how much bait I threw out for how many other schemes. Too distracted by their own affairs to deal with the prophet's second, I suppose.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 12, 2014, 12:18:07 AM
I wouldn't argue with that list. Enoch wasn't as active as many to the general assembly, but he did smooze the elders. That list does leave out some important things. How and why can spin most of that list into a reason never to give them power and to boot them immediately. One example: Enoch's 'pilgrimage' was a joy-rid through theocracies. He took fat rurals, sold the food to the highest bidder, fought a few battles at his leisure, then moved on when bored (not to mention looting Darfix and fomenting heresies in the theocracy). It seemed obvious at the time, but those on the top were busy and over-eager for cannon-fodder.

Every bit of this is news to me, and not because I was busy and over-eager, but because if this happened at all, it happened in secret.

Quote
I would argue, however, that "Everything was going along just swimmingly". Terran failed, Niselur failed, the defense of Astrum failed, and the Inquisition failed. Along with monsters sprouting up and a heretic in supreme power....I'd say SA got off lucky so far.

Terran, Niselur, Astrum, and the Inquisition were however all roleplayed big events which everyone could participate in because none of them happened in secret. The Inquisition itself was barely getting started when Jonsu became Prophet and declared the Inquisition was over. From a RP perspective things were going great. Now? Well, maybe everyone is having secret roleplays with themselves. How fun.

Quote
To be honest, I'm not even sure why Jonsu was originally booted from SA. I know she tried to start her own religions, but the only salient memory of when she was in the church was when SHE WAS HUNTING FOR MYSTICS AS AN ELDER OF THE CHURCH. Even if you hate me and my character, you have to admit that it is fitting to hand the church to the only person who even got a sniff of what was going on. Jonsu did (and will) do things more in the church's favor than anything Enoch did.

Sigh. She was booted (http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Sanguis_Astroism/The_Magistratum/Jonsu) from the Church for attempting to do exactly everything she is now doing.

There is nothing "fitting" about a convicted heretic becoming the equivalent of the Pope. The word for that is "ridiculous." "Contrived" and "implausible" and "game-breaking" also work.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 12, 2014, 12:48:56 AM
Every bit of this is news to me, and not because I was busy and over-eager, but because if this happened at all, it happened in secret.

Well...yeah, from you. Rabisu got the friendliest and most helpful face Enoch had. How many failed projects did he try to work with Rabisu on? Weekly sermons, diplomacy efforts, general priest nonesense. How many actually got anywhere? The only one that I recall, was your Inquisition addition to the charter, which Enoch didn't help a bit with. All he said was "lets not be cautious using this".

Terran, Niselur, Astrum, and the Inquisition were however all roleplayed big events which everyone could participate in because none of them happened in secret. The Inquisition itself was barely getting started when Jonsu became Prophet and declared the Inquisition was over. From a RP perspective things were going great. Now? Well, maybe everyone is having secret roleplays with themselves. How fun.

Touche'. I had expected more people to engage the schism RP. I do hope there are some secret roleplays in tight circles of trust.

Though, How many people had their hands in the Inquisition amendment? How many in the surrender of Astrum or Niselur's sudden change to monarchy? If you think I undid the church (which I didn't) all by myself then you misunderstand.

There is nothing "fitting" about a convicted heretic becoming the equivalent of the Pope. The word for that is "ridiculous." "Contrived" and "implausible" and "game-breaking" also work.

Yeah, but I didn't say she was Pope, now did I. She was the prophet. A second coming of a religious figure (basically) worshiped. It might seem contrived, but there was this one time a jewish carpenter ran afoul with his church and then some crazy stuff happened. I don't think he ever even helped run it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 12, 2014, 03:00:06 AM
Well since you're the first person in history to find inconsistency with religious teachings, I guess that makes you either a heretic or a prophet. But whether he gave himself the title or others bestowed it on him doesn't matter. He was a heretic who became the figurehead of a DIFFERENT religious order.

Therein lies the important distinction.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Buffalkill on February 12, 2014, 03:26:38 AM
Therein lies the important distinction.
It's only an important distinction if SA is supposed to mirror Christianity exactly. Somebody else said that basically it was unimaginable that an obscure heretic could become the equivalent of the pope, and I was simply pointing out that that's a bollocks argument. It's perfectly believable in the context of a medieval religion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 12, 2014, 04:19:20 AM
My bible study's a little rusty but isn't that supposedly why they crucified him, for calling himself King of the Jews?

Did you seriously ask this and not realize it proves how absurd the current situation is? If we accept the story, Jesus was executed for challenging the authority of the Roman state and the Jewish religeon. Believe me if the game mechanics supported executing Jonsu it would have been done the day after this all started.

The rise of Christianity is a terrible analogy. Notice how there are still synagogs in the world? Christianity is a religion that branched off from Judaism and eventually grew larger and more influential. It did not usurped and replaced Judaism.

What happened in SA is the equivalent of the ranking Pharasee declaring Peter the new head of the Jewish Faith and every single temple and synagog going along with it in spite of protests from every single other Pharasee and Rabbi in the entire religion.

If Jonsu had gone out and founded a new sect and it gained traction that would be perfectly legitimate but she didn't. She tried and failed twice because no one wanted to follow her because it was obvious to just about everyone she was a sociopath who only wanted power and would say or do anything to get it.

It's patently absurd to think she would have any authority in the church when the entire clergy and noble membership is dead set against her.

Pope Honorius I was declared Anathema after his death, does that count?

Well that depends, first was he already a convicted heretic? Second did the previous pope just declare him pope or was he elected by the Cardinals?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Buffalkill on February 12, 2014, 04:53:44 AM
Did you seriously ask this and not realize it proves how absurd the current situation is?
I think you're taking my comment out of context, so I'll try to put it back in context:


It might seem contrived, but there was this one time a jewish carpenter ran afoul with his church and then some crazy stuff happened. I don't think he ever even helped run it.


Yea, and did he go declare himself head of judaism?


My bible study's a little rusty but isn't that supposedly why they crucified him, for calling himself King of the Jews?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 13, 2014, 12:23:29 AM
I didn't mean to derail the thread into a Christianity thread . I just meant that people are followed even if a group of old rich men don't like it. Religion is full of unlikely circumstances that led to crazy outcomes. Everyone seems intent on applying logic to the situation....but is that appropriate with religion? SA seemed more rational than a lot of real and BM religions, but it is still a faith-framework built on belief.

That is part of why I RP'd the peasants following the church regardless of 50 or 60 nobles. How many worshippers does SA have? If you imagine a percentage of total worshippers (character and peasant), how much do you think would give a fig about the charter? Is there one mention of the peasantry in there? Why would they care? The church treated them as cattle....do the cattle really notice shift-change at the slaughter house?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on February 13, 2014, 10:31:22 AM
Moderator note: All the RL church posts have been split off and moved here (http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,5465.0.html).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 14, 2014, 04:11:52 AM
Moderator note: All the RL church posts have been split off and moved here (http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,5465.0.html).

Thank god  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 14, 2014, 07:13:53 AM
I didn't mean to derail the thread into a Christianity thread . I just meant that people are followed even if a group of old rich men don't like it. Religion is full of unlikely circumstances that led to crazy outcomes. Everyone seems intent on applying logic to the situation....but is that appropriate with religion? SA seemed more rational than a lot of real and BM religions, but it is still a faith-framework built on belief.

That is part of why I RP'd the peasants following the church regardless of 50 or 60 nobles. How many worshippers does SA have? If you imagine a percentage of total worshippers (character and peasant), how much do you think would give a fig about the charter? Is there one mention of the peasantry in there? Why would they care? The church treated them as cattle....do the cattle really notice shift-change at the slaughter house?


The lay worshipers aren't the ones supposedly implementing Jonsu's decrees it would be the lower level pastors who do study the religion and most likely really care about it. Who are they going to listen to, the nobles they know and have a working relationship with, or a total stranger living thousands of miles away who's sending them letters?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on February 14, 2014, 08:14:35 AM

The lay worshipers aren't the ones supposedly implementing Jonsu's decrees it would be the lower level pastors who do study the religion and most likely really care about it. Who are they going to listen to, the nobles they know and have a working relationship with, or a total stranger living thousands of miles away who's sending them letters?
Most of the elder council would be complete strangers to the lower level pastors, yet I don't recall a complaint when other orders were made by the previous elder council. Battlemaster is not a simulator.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 14, 2014, 12:53:41 PM
Most of the elder council would be complete strangers to the lower level pastors, yet I don't recall a complaint when other orders were made by the previous elder council. Battlemaster is not a simulator.

The other Elders would likely have a network of hierarchy, each level familiar and comfortable with with those in their immediately close ranks. The sort of movement people are describing happens (never on this scale in history but that isn't entirely relevant), but not from an isolated power figure who can not rely on their own immediate subordinates to pass things down the Hierarchy. I'm not well versed in all the lore written for SA, I would think the break to immersion would occur if these lower tiered High Ranks and middle ranks of the clergy do not answer directly to the regent, but take their orders through say a geo-graphically decided elder. No doubt Jonsu could lay claim to having inherited whatever network Enoch commanded.

That said even the Pope would have (and did have) trouble if he didn't have the support of a goodly amount of Cardinals. If they managed to lose the support that first earned them the position they could easily lose it. This is the rub, Elders are important, perhaps not as important as the Regent, but they should still be able to exert influence over the faithful at all levels and if enough of them work in concert they should be able to undermine a Regent.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Velax on February 15, 2014, 04:39:25 AM
You seriously kept going with the off-topic RL church posts after they were split off elsewhere? I've deleted the posts - I'm going to be pretty annoyed if it happens a third time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: pcw27 on February 15, 2014, 07:51:59 AM
Most of the elder council would be complete strangers to the lower level pastors, yet I don't recall a complaint when other orders were made by the previous elder council. Battlemaster is not a simulator.

Just about all of them will have a relationship with one of the noble members of the faith be they priests or just lords of regions that have temples. If all of these are in open opposition to the decision of the Regent it would serve to reason that the regent would have extreme difficulty controlling the faith.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 15, 2014, 07:16:30 PM
I always pictured it more regionally influenced. Swordfell was 90% SA, but Enoch was the head proponent...so most of Swordfell would be at his whims. Morek's peasantry would probably be under Eviera and Helm, but they recently took over old Libero so their north might be in question. Corsanctum and Astrum would probably be hardliners as well, but Niselur, Farronite, and Asylon might take to a new prophet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 15, 2014, 07:32:42 PM
I always pictured it more regionally influenced. Swordfell was 90% SA, but Enoch was the head proponent...so most of Swordfell would be at his whims. Morek's peasantry would probably be under Eviera and Helm, but they recently took over old Libero so their north might be in question. Corsanctum and Astrum would probably be hardliners as well, but Niselur, Farronite, and Asylon might take to a new prophet.

Even those who don't like traditional SA don't care any more for Jonsu. Nobody would follow Jonsu.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 16, 2014, 01:49:25 AM
If swordfell was mostly converted/administered by Enoch then I can see an argument that the faithful there might follow Jonsu.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 16, 2014, 02:08:37 AM
If swordfell was mostly converted/administered by Enoch then I can see an argument that the faithful there might follow Jonsu.

Not me. If someone brings you to a guild/religion/organization/whatever by preaching whatever, it's because the content that was shared meant for something. If said person then turns 180° and turns crazy by spitting on everything he told you, odds are you won't be happy with him.

IF he had been open about his dissent this whole time, or IF he was trying to push for a variant of SA as opposed to dedicated to undermining it, then yea, perhaps he could have had sway among those who converted. But that wasn't the case.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on February 16, 2014, 02:16:29 AM
Not me. If someone brings you to a guild/religion/organization/whatever by preaching whatever, it's because the content that was shared meant for something. If said person then turns 180° and turns crazy by spitting on everything he told you, odds are you won't be happy with him.

IF he had been open about his dissent this whole time, or IF he was trying to push for a variant of SA as opposed to dedicated to undermining it, then yea, perhaps he could have had sway among those who converted. But that wasn't the case.

That would assume perfect knowledge of what was being disseminated to the faithful of Swordfell. Arguments could be made either way regarding this. Personally I would put it down to who else from SA was either in Swordfell or what other members of SA were regularly travelling through SA. I say this since it is my understanding that Enoch would be unlikely to have written RP's either way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 16, 2014, 03:48:00 AM
IF he had been open about his dissent this whole time, or IF he was trying to push for a variant of SA as opposed to dedicated to undermining it, then yea, perhaps he could have had sway among those who converted. But that wasn't the case.

I had Enoch work from Mimer to Flowrestown, exploring the priest-class and the temple treasuries. I think I left SA debt even, but some treasuries may be more full than others. More relevant, he preached up and down the area with diligence.

I recall some other priests in the area, a few from Corsanctum and one other from Swordfell I think. Most people were focused on the northwest, though, far far away. Enoch had been a priest/diplomat for a while (which built on nicely with some previous oratory training), mixed with the Regency and focus on the region, I figured he'd have some pull.

It was funny, I tried to persecute heretics in Shyussei not long ago (where there were no Torenists), and it whipped up a mob that killed dozens of my own followers. I'd like to think that Enoch can spin a good yarn. He even admitted doing it to the other priests, cautioning 'further use'. Enoch didn't voice dissent, or question the elder council. He announced the new prophet. It all still looks perfectly pious, if you ignore who he announced.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 16, 2014, 04:19:16 PM
It was funny, I tried to persecute heretics in Shyussei not long ago (where there were no Torenists), and it whipped up a mob that killed dozens of my own followers. I'd like to think that Enoch can spin a good yarn. He even admitted doing it to the other priests, cautioning 'further use'. Enoch didn't voice dissent, or question the elder council. He announced the new prophet. It all still looks perfectly pious, if you ignore who he announced.

Yea, well, it's kind of hard to ignore, isn't it?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eduardo Almighty on February 22, 2014, 04:47:19 AM
Quote
and Asylon might take to a new prophet.

A traitor? We don't care with the SA as you think. We are more worried with realms and armies, not with a crazy religion fighting for power in its own failed hierarchy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on February 22, 2014, 08:55:15 AM
A traitor? We don't care with the SA as you think. We are more worried with realms and armies, not with a crazy religion fighting for power in its own failed hierarchy.

Truth.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 22, 2014, 06:06:23 PM
Yeah, I don't really buy it. You may be on the sidelines, but you cheer and shake your pompoms one way or the other.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 22, 2014, 06:38:15 PM
Yeah, I don't really buy it. You may be on the sidelines, but you cheer and shake your pompoms one way or the other.

Typical SA person believes every realm revolves around that religion...

Barca could really care less.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 22, 2014, 07:16:10 PM
SA hasn't had a presence or even priests in Asylon for ages even after Asylon repeatedly called for SA priests to come preach to their flock. I think what we have here is SA actually thinking they are important when really years of corruption and stagnation of ideas and a prophet who can't even be bothered to play has brought the whole rotten carcass down around it and even then you have these kind of delusional golden robed bejewelled nobles wandering around the smoking hulk tittering and oblivious to the fact that their entire world has changed and will continue to change.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Galvez on February 22, 2014, 08:38:16 PM
Typical SA person believes every realm revolves around that religion...

Barca could really care less.
Can we. We already don't care.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 22, 2014, 08:56:43 PM
..stagnation of ideas and a prophet who can't even be bothered to play..

..these kind of delusional golden robed bejewelled nobles wandering around the smoking hulk tittering and oblivious to the fact that their entire world has changed and will continue to change.

I saw this too. I think it was hard for people not invested to see how much of an empty puppet it was. No real power struggles, no cohesive coordination, just a shuffling of seats and a forum to bitch at.

Now I hear there are two schism churchs on either end of Dwilight and the main hall is still picking sides. SA had to be somewhat more interesting, or else you wouldn't be posting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 22, 2014, 09:16:44 PM
If you really had a flock that needed preached at, then grow your own priests. Why keep hollering for someone to come do it for you, when you could just do it yourself? If you can't be bothered to do it, then why should someone else up-end their entire life and come do it for you?

As for the prophet being quiet, it actually worked for us most of the time. It made him mysterious, and kept him above the petty politics of the church. It kept his reputation clean. Then when he spoke, his opinion actually meant something. You knew he wasn't one of the people talking just to hear themselves talk. In this way, Mathurin was one of the most respected and powerful men on the island. Also, he usually answered private letters, and even initiated important conversations on his own. I found his play style to be both appropriate and brilliant. He played the holy prophet of the world's largest religion perfectly.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on February 23, 2014, 01:30:04 AM
I saw this too. I think it was hard for people not invested to see how much of an empty puppet it was. No real power struggles, no cohesive coordination, just a shuffling of seats and a forum to bitch at.

Now I hear there are two schism churchs on either end of Dwilight and the main hall is still picking sides. SA had to be somewhat more interesting, or else you wouldn't be posting.

The main hall has already picked sides- apart from Gustav's character and Jonsu's initial follower everyone who has taken sides has done so in favour of Helm and for the past few days most discussion as ceased as everyone waiting for Jonsu to "finish her rp" and step down like she said she would. So hopefully within the next week the whole situation in the main church should return to normal and , as per the will of the majority of active SA players, things will return to the old system with some minor adjustments. Clearly for many players the old system seem far more appealing and interesting than anything that has happened since, so I think the generalisations that it was somehow objectively "stagnant" and "boring" doesn't fit into the player reaction, which is overwhelmingly in support of it and in opposition to your supposed "fun-making" which most people want over as quickly and painlessly as possible.

As for the "schisms", I'll grant that the Lurian one has the potential for conflict- though I think if it does end in conflict then the temples in Luria will merely be destroyed, while the north sends some angry letters but doesn't do much else. But I guess that counts as "interesting". The supposed "schism" in Niselur is really nothing of the sort- we've heard next to nothing about it within SA; its basically just like a random new religion with no contact with us has sprung up and to be honest no one seems to care.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Galvez on February 24, 2014, 12:15:40 AM
SA should attack the schisms and manifest their dominance.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on February 24, 2014, 07:54:02 PM
I tried making SA illegal in Barca a long time ago.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on February 24, 2014, 07:55:55 PM
I tried making SA illegal in Barca a long time ago.
I thought it still was.  Barca's beyond SA's reach anyway, though.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on February 24, 2014, 07:57:59 PM
It requires approval of the senate to enter Barca, but I wanted it to be completely illegal  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 24, 2014, 09:00:57 PM
If we had more players I think SA would have reached farther south but with 150 people they could only cover half the continent. It was fun while SA was expanding. But like the Roman Empire, once you reach a certain size, you realize you can't expand anymore and from that point on it is an endless battle to keep what you already have.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 24, 2014, 11:07:12 PM
I think you're pretty much right. Everyone that was going to join had already joined. They only way to continue the expansion was through force of arms. And that was impractical, beyond a limited extent. We did get a bit more expansion by allowing the southerners to gain more influence within the church.

We squashed every other religion on the continent. The only ones that remained for quite some time were ineffectual, and nearly extinct, remnants and scraps. In that sense, SA did achieve a form of world domination. It may not have converted the entirety of the nobility, or replaced all realms with theocracies (neither of which were truly core goals of the religion anyway), but it did achieve religious domination of the island. Now it will live to carry on the legacy, and to form various splinter factions and related variants.

From an OOC perspective, the splinter/derivative faiths are the next obvious step in the story of SA, even though the IC/IG faith itself will not appreciate their existence.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 25, 2014, 12:21:07 AM
SA hasn't had a presence or even priests in Asylon for ages even after Asylon repeatedly called for SA priests to come preach to their flock. I think what we have here is SA actually thinking they are important when really years of corruption and stagnation of ideas and a prophet who can't even be bothered to play has brought the whole rotten carcass down around it and even then you have these kind of delusional golden robed bejewelled nobles wandering around the smoking hulk tittering and oblivious to the fact that their entire world has changed and will continue to change.

Yes, your indifference towards SA is notorious. That's why you're posting here so frequently. Because of how unimportant it all is to you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 25, 2014, 12:58:14 AM
...Everyone that was going to join had already joined. They only way to continue the expansion was through force of arms. And that was impractical, beyond a limited extent...

It may have reached its peak as it was, but now the church might attract more interest. I half expect to see SA rise like a phoenix after the loss of the prophet. Already more people have shown interest in being their own prophet than there were people interested in being at the head of SA last election.

There will certainly be people who think they can gain something in the chaos. Most folk may agree with the charter and the old rank and file system, but now the floodgate has opened. First a realm rejects theocracy, now we have schismatic religions headed by influential members of their realm. It's better to fall quick cause atrophy makes it much harder to get back up.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 25, 2014, 01:59:37 AM
So what happened at the end? Who won? Jonsu or one of those self-nominated prophets?

As for splinter religions, I doubt any of them will become big enough to be significant. At most they will have around 30-40. That is nothing more than a local religion level.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 25, 2014, 04:15:28 AM
So what happened at the end? Who won? Jonsu or one of those self-nominated prophets?



Helm gained the majority of the support from SA.   Jonsu and Alaster have yet to do their RP battle.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on February 25, 2014, 06:03:42 AM

Helm gained the majority of the support from SA.   Jonsu and Alaster have yet to do their RP battle.

I'm pretty sure Alaster can get back into at least some semblance of good graces with the rest of the Church by denying that he was ever a Prophet and that he only claimed such to rally support against Jonsu.  Of course, such a claim would be up to you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 25, 2014, 02:22:23 PM
I'm pretty sure Alaster can get back into at least some semblance of good graces with the rest of the Church by denying that he was ever a Prophet and that he only claimed such to rally support against Jonsu.  Of course, such a claim would be up to you.

Alaster is a Kabrinski.  There are a handful of nobles on Dwilight that would oppose a Kabrinski if they said the sky was blue.   Very vocal opposition.   So I'm not sure how this will all go down.  I can tell you that some people won't be very happy when this is all over.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 25, 2014, 08:40:31 PM
Yes, your indifference towards SA is notorious. That's why you're posting here so frequently. Because of how unimportant it all is to you.

Well, I used to actually run a theocracy and then ran a kingdom as an SA king, was an SA consul etc so yeah im indifferent. I didnt actually leave until the prophet supported Kabrinskia. Asylon was a very SA pro realm with a small group of Elementalists in our group. SA could have very easily made massive support with Asylon but in stead chose to antagonize us. Yet, through it all we still maintain our SA temples and allow SA the same rights as nonSA. Its not that we didnt extend our hand its that SA needed a boogy man where none was in the first place and it cane back to bite them.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on February 26, 2014, 12:06:31 AM
I actually doubt that a great splintering is what is in store for SA; rather I see it becoming even more of a silent flavour religion. Recent events such as the defeat of Astrum, Jonsu's rise to power, and the loss of many of our most active players, seems to me to indicate that the days of a strong and assertive Elders Council are long gone, at least until the memories of the recent disasters have passed. No one I think wants another disastrous war, or another maniacal Regent. Indeed, if the recent weeks of having no Elders have proven anything its that an active Elders Council is by no means required for the vast majority of SA in the North-east to continue as normal.

I agree that we're likely to see (or indeed already have seen) splits from the peripheries of SA, as ambitious nobles realise that with the threat of any retribution gone its far better to be  a prophet of a small local faith than a lowly follower of a large one based half a continent away. But the heartland of SA, the theocracies, will likely remain as they are considering that at least nominal adherence to SA is a large part of the political system.

Call me a pessimist but I think the days of a religion of Dwilight commanding multiple realms to act according to its will are a thing of the past. SA will likely just become the bland and inactive flavour religion of the North-east (and possibly D'Hara).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on February 26, 2014, 04:07:12 AM
SA could have very easily made massive support with Asylon but in stead chose to antagonize us. Yet, through it all we still maintain our SA temples and allow SA the same rights as nonSA. Its not that we didnt extend our hand its that SA needed a boogy man where none was in the first place and it cane back to bite them.

/me yawns....

"Asylon could have very easily made massive support with SA but in stead chose to antagonize us. Its not that we didn't extend our hand its that Asylon suffered from delusional paranoid fantasies."

I'm going to put that one in the autocorrect dictionary, so that when this entire train of discussion rolls around for the 433rd time, I can just type "paranoid" and it autocorrects to that quote.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 26, 2014, 01:25:15 PM
Yea, this will not help anything or make anything more fun.

It only pissed off the active players, some of who outright deleted their characters (maybe even account?), others who couldn't care for anything anymore. Why invest yourself in anything when such dick moves will be tolerated?

The splinter religions will be bland. They always are. They won't have the critical mass needed to spark any interest, and even if their founder really really wants to do something interesting, it'll just wear them off. They'll also never become meaningful. Just got a report myself of Fulco getting beaten up by preaching unitary astroism in his own realm... how does he expect to convert regions with temples and so many followers to SA? If it's gonna happen, it's going to take forever.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 26, 2014, 07:37:27 PM
It only pissed off the active players, some of who outright deleted their characters (maybe even account?), others who couldn't care for anything anymore. Why invest yourself in anything when such dick moves will be tolerated?

I'm still surprised by the rage-quits. You can't turn around in most continents without seeing someone make a dick move that will inevitably destroy a realm. A gang-bang here, unreasonable diplomacy changes there, backstabs/betrayals/secessions and allegiance changes scattered throughout. Everyone seems willing to fight in the most Machiavellian ways they can muster to make sure their team turns out on top.

I have seen lamentations and gnashing of teeth on the forum from dick moves. People usually carry on, though. I'm starting to think that some of the quits/deletions were just looking for a reason. I think it was Vellos who said he had been waning on the game for quite some time.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on February 26, 2014, 08:33:15 PM
The splinter religions will be bland. They always are. They won't have the critical mass needed to spark any interest, and even if their founder really really wants to do something interesting, it'll just wear them off. They'll also never become meaningful. Just got a report myself of Fulco getting beaten up by preaching unitary astroism in his own realm... how does he expect to convert regions with temples and so many followers to SA? If it's gonna happen, it's going to take forever.

Whoa there guy, shots fired. Kidding. Whether or not a splinter religion is bland depends on who's judging it. I know several people who find the current SA splinter religions incredibly interesting, while others most certainly do not. So long as the number of people interested exceeds 0, interest has been sparked, despite how insignificant one might find that in the grand scheme of things. A collection of small events eventually culminate into larger events, so who knows what lies waiting for us in the future? If this game was solely about invoking large, widespread events (stating that said events were the only interesting ones,) I would have abandoned it within the first week of playing. For me personally, the gigantic, seemingly impossible, uphill battle against SA is what makes the splinter religions fun and interesting; the massive potential they garner cannot be ignored, even in the face of insurmountable odds. I believe this because challenge, struggle and adversity are the primary sources of entertainment in this game, thus the "Battle" in "BattleMaster."

If it takes forever to develop and spread splinter religions, that's fine. If the splinter religions are crushed, that's also fine. Both of these situations inevitably involve some sort of roleplay and effort. It's about the journey, not the destination. Come on, Chénier, try to be more positive once in a while. ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 27, 2014, 03:59:12 AM
Whoa there guy, shots fired. Kidding. Whether or not a splinter religion is bland depends on who's judging it. I know several people who find the current SA splinter religions incredibly interesting, while others most certainly do not. So long as the number of people interested exceeds 0, interest has been sparked, despite how insignificant one might find that in the grand scheme of things. A collection of small events eventually culminate into larger events, so who knows what lies waiting for us in the future? If this game was solely about invoking large, widespread events (stating that said events were the only interesting ones,) I would have abandoned it within the first week of playing. For me personally, the gigantic, seemingly impossible, uphill battle against SA is what makes the splinter religions fun and interesting; the massive potential they garner cannot be ignored, even in the face of insurmountable odds. I believe this because challenge, struggle and adversity are the primary sources of entertainment in this game, thus the "Battle" in "BattleMaster."

If it takes forever to develop and spread splinter religions, that's fine. If the splinter religions are crushed, that's also fine. Both of these situations inevitably involve some sort of roleplay and effort. It's about the journey, not the destination. Come on, Chénier, try to be more positive once in a while. ;)

They may be fun to a few people now, that I will concede, but I still do not believe they hold any potential on the long term.

Religions suck. Rare are the religions that managed to attract any significant player investment. And this just went to prove to everyone that investing yourselves in religions is simply a dumb thing to do.

I'm still surprised by the rage-quits. You can't turn around in most continents without seeing someone make a dick move that will inevitably destroy a realm. A gang-bang here, unreasonable diplomacy changes there, backstabs/betrayals/secessions and allegiance changes scattered throughout. Everyone seems willing to fight in the most Machiavellian ways they can muster to make sure their team turns out on top.

I have seen lamentations and gnashing of teeth on the forum from dick moves. People usually carry on, though. I'm starting to think that some of the quits/deletions were just looking for a reason. I think it was Vellos who said he had been waning on the game for quite some time.



I'm still dismayed about your short-sightedness.

It was a dick move on an OOC level, because it makes absolutely no sense IC. A guild leader that suddenly turns on all of his investors and claims all of their investments for himself is fine, a religion leader that turns on his hundreds of noble followers and hundreds of thousands of peasant followers, to appoint the most hated person in the group as head of the faith (and who has the support of a number of people that one can count with a single hand) is not. And on the SMA continent on top of it.

You exploited the poor mechanics religions were implemented with to create a situation so surreal it is ridiculous. That the mechanics allowed you to do this doesn't mean that the mechanics were right to allow it and that you were right to do so.

It also shines the weakness of the player control mechanics. Titans don't seem to ever really treat cases, magistrate cases are lingering as many of us are just too pissed with the game to bother taking any initiative with treating the cases, and the SMA police, which are the titans I believe, have over the years reduced their vision of SMA as what could basically be described as an over-glorified vulgarity report system.

We are supposed to be playing together as friends around a table. A lot of us here would never have pulled off a move like you did. And the people we trust to keep this player-to-player atmosphere true have failed to inspired any confidence or provide any satisfaction.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 27, 2014, 05:49:32 AM
I'm still surprised by the rage-quits. You can't turn around in most continents without seeing someone make a dick move that will inevitably destroy a realm. A gang-bang here, unreasonable diplomacy changes there, backstabs/betrayals/secessions and allegiance changes scattered throughout. Everyone seems willing to fight in the most Machiavellian ways they can muster to make sure their team turns out on top.

I have seen lamentations and gnashing of teeth on the forum from dick moves. People usually carry on, though. I'm starting to think that some of the quits/deletions were just looking for a reason. I think it was Vellos who said he had been waning on the game for quite some time.

Even now I don't regret the decision to delete the character because it was much better than trying to muddle through an incomplete game system made broken by what I still consider a rather crummy attitude on the part of some people. The "winning" attitude, which has in this thread reared its head whenever the "winners" talk about the "losers;" in your case, painting them as rage-quitters gnashing their teeth who were just looking for excuses to stop playing; it's been described by someone else as "getting outplayed," and so forth. This is just not how I see the game, and I would rather 'quit' by deleting the character than go along with situations that, if the religion game had been completed (to the extend that the dev team would consider complete, taking into account the unprecedented size and scope of a religion like SA), or if certain mechanics hadn't been played to the near total exclusion of role playing, wouldn't have happened because they are unrealistic, implausible, and frankly kind of stupid. But I've tried explaining this before and it's just not sunk in with anybody so, eh, whatever.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 27, 2014, 06:13:52 AM
Even now I don't regret the decision to delete the character because it was much better than trying to muddle through an incomplete game system made broken by what I still consider a rather crummy attitude on the part of some people. The "winning" attitude, which has in this thread reared its head whenever the "winners" talk about the "losers;" in your case, painting them as rage-quitters gnashing their teeth who were just looking for excuses to stop playing; it's been described by someone else as "getting outplayed," and so forth. This is just not how I see the game, and I would rather 'quit' by deleting the character than go along with situations that, if the religion game had been completed (to the extend that the dev team would consider complete, taking into account the unprecedented size and scope of a religion like SA), or if certain mechanics hadn't been played to the near total exclusion of role playing, wouldn't have happened because they are unrealistic, implausible, and frankly kind of stupid. But I've tried explaining this before and it's just not sunk in with anybody so, eh, whatever.

Dude, I'm not a winner and I find the whole situation the "losers" have made this out to be as stupid. He did roleplay, and if he didn't do it to the degree where he would have no chance of pulling it off, well !@#$ing tough. Stop whinging about the whole thing and move on. It's you people who are making this to be much bigger than it really is, and won't treat this like the free game it is.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Arundel on February 27, 2014, 07:09:17 AM
And this just went to prove to everyone that investing yourselves in religions is simply a dumb thing to do.

You might be right in certain cases. Personally, I don't play the game to feel intelligent, or make responsible and logical choices - those are the pressures of real life. Instead, I play the game to have fun, and dumb decisions are often a part of that pursuit. For instance, when Alice was still live, she decided to go to war with Morek because of her ego. Extremely stupid, considering the ramifications (religious and secular,) yet so incredibly fun. Or when my character Caspius arbitrarily 'slaughtered' his own peasants because they were of a different religion. It later got him excommunicated, and subsequently killed. Still, incredibly fun, and the religion he was a part of seemed to really enjoy that entire situation, from what I can gather.

May all the characters who've made dumb decisions in Battlemaster never be forgotten!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 27, 2014, 11:22:45 AM
Didn't Jonsu and Alaster give the reigns of the church to Helm? Is everything reverting back?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on February 27, 2014, 12:11:26 PM
Didn't Jonsu and Alaster give the reigns of the church to Helm? Is everything reverting back?

No. Stalling as always.

Am I surprised? I'll let you guess that one.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on February 27, 2014, 02:21:01 PM
No. Stalling as always.

Am I surprised? I'll let you guess that one.


Jonsu stepped down and is no longer an Elder.   Prophet rank was changed and there are no more prophets
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 27, 2014, 06:33:42 PM
You might be right in certain cases. Personally, I don't play the game to feel intelligent, or make responsible and logical choices - those are the pressures of real life. Instead, I play the game to have fun, and dumb decisions are often a part of that pursuit. For instance, when Alice was still live, she decided to go to war with Morek because of her ego. Extremely stupid, considering the ramifications (religious and secular,) yet so incredibly fun. Or when my character Caspius arbitrarily 'slaughtered' his own peasants because they were of a different religion. It later got him excommunicated, and subsequently killed. Still, incredibly fun, and the religion he was a part of seemed to really enjoy that entire situation, from what I can gather.

May all the characters who've made dumb decisions in Battlemaster never be forgotten!

Good to see there are other players out there feeling the same. The people who rage-quit recently are the powergamers of BM, only happy when they are winning or on top. When real hardship comes they all leave with poor excuses. BM is an awesome game for all its faults and no matter what happens some of us will roll with the punches and use that to develop our characters.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on February 27, 2014, 09:56:56 PM
Dude, I'm not a winner and I find the whole situation the "losers" have made this out to be as stupid. He did roleplay, and if he didn't do it to the degree where he would have no chance of pulling it off, well !@#$ing tough. Stop whinging about the whole thing and move on. It's you people who are making this to be much bigger than it really is, and won't treat this like the free game it is.

You're only making my point. I wasn't even talking to you.

Same with you, Glaumring.

What are you even posting in this thread for? You're not part of SA, and by your own words you don't think SA is important or means anything either. You just want to tell me what a whinging powergamer I am. Gee thanks! It's awesome that you're here to insert your unwanted opinions constantly into other discussions!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on February 27, 2014, 10:39:49 PM
Glaumring,

If I were you, I would avoid directly criticizing other players. You may criticize their characters however.

People seem to lack the ability to think in the receiving end of this incident. Some people take things more seriously than others and you should respect that as well if you want your play style to be respected in return.

I swear you people will get this thread locked up again very soon.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on February 28, 2014, 02:22:24 AM
Good to see there are other players out there feeling the same. The people who rage-quit recently are the powergamers of BM, only happy when they are winning or on top. When real hardship comes they all leave with poor excuses. BM is an awesome game for all its faults and no matter what happens some of us will roll with the punches and use that to develop our characters.

It's funny, all this talk of winning...like there is a tangible scale to the game. I had Enoch at the top of the church, the good graces and open embrace of almost all of SA. You know what I sold it for? New contacts to smooze and SA's enemies good graces. Do you think Jonsu could offer more than the theocracies? My win was a restart. A dramatic restart, yes, but I felt like that was my due.

The quest for power is where it's at. Jonsu's player appreciated it, quite a few I've seen appreciate it. Enoch could have spent several more years shifting through Consul and Luminary and whatnot, but the game had run it's course. Someone with malicious intent had control. I still wish there were more of a struggle to regain legitimacy, but the church looks like it is back to its own volition (at least the main hall). Enoch gets to start over, Jonsu got a chance at supreme power, Helm gets to patch the 'loony regent' hole, heathens get to laugh at the debacle, and everyone wins..except the people who got their feelings hurt, I suppose.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on March 01, 2014, 09:01:45 PM
Moderator note: I have removed the last several messages on this board. Keep it civil, or keep it to yourself.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 04, 2014, 02:39:04 AM
So if I get this right, and the West becomes monster party land, Jonsu will be able to remain there physically forever while being free to harass everyone else in Sanguis Astroism as much as she likes?

There's never been any such refuge for rogue nobles on any continent before.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on March 04, 2014, 02:59:51 AM
Ooh, I'd love to see her try it...  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 04, 2014, 03:01:17 AM
Ooh, I'd love to see her try it...  ;D

Are monsters gonna arrest priests, now?

Because if I get this right, she'll all the way in Zumaland now, spamming us all with the usual crap, and thus no way anyone can touch her.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 04, 2014, 05:40:30 AM
So if I get this right, and the West becomes monster party land, Jonsu will be able to remain there physically forever while being free to harass everyone else in Sanguis Astroism as much as she likes?

There's never been any such refuge for rogue nobles on any continent before.

Yea, that's exactly what I intend to do.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on March 04, 2014, 03:00:34 PM
Yea, that's exactly what I intend to do.

That's what you've been doing for about a month, now, so I couldn't care less about your "intent".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on March 04, 2014, 03:18:03 PM
Yea, that's exactly what I intend to do.

Jonsu, the Beast Queen.  As long as you're ready for the Catherine the Great jokes; something about a horse...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on March 04, 2014, 11:35:06 PM
That's what you've been doing for about a month, now, so I couldn't care less about your "intent".

Yes I've been hiding out in monster ridden wastelands dodging the inevitable excommunication from the Church.

Oh wait. Its not inevitable.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 08, 2014, 08:16:55 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N3N1MlvVc4
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 08, 2014, 04:26:05 PM
Yep, good song for SA right now.  I can't think of a better one.



The Elder council is close to being in default in Alaster's eyes.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 08, 2014, 08:40:23 PM
Yep, good song for SA right now.  I can't think of a better one.



The Elder council is close to being in default in Alaster's eyes.

Alaster is a genius. Please continue doing what you're doing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 09, 2014, 09:26:25 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lo4cFViNLes&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Also, relevant.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 10, 2014, 02:13:20 AM
Emperor?   Pshaw...


I'm not even close to that tyrannical.   
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 11, 2014, 04:43:22 AM
How do we make Sanguis Astroism more fun?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on April 11, 2014, 04:51:09 AM
How do we make Sanguis Astroism more fun?

Inquisition across Morek and Astrum
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 11, 2014, 05:18:48 AM
Hard line, aggressive expansion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 11, 2014, 09:27:44 AM
More Jonsu.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Deytheur on April 11, 2014, 10:25:29 AM
Less Jonsu
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 11, 2014, 10:30:28 AM
Less Jonsu

Tell me, how many Sermons have been given in SA of late that Jonsu didn't give?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Feylonis on April 11, 2014, 01:00:32 PM
Consider the fact that you drove away a lot of the people who gave sermons.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 11, 2014, 02:39:49 PM
Consider the fact that you drove away a lot of the people who gave sermons.

And took away the motivation to give any from those who remained.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 11, 2014, 03:02:01 PM
 ::) Is everyone still so butthurt about this? Jeeze, get on with it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 11, 2014, 04:02:16 PM
::) Is everyone still so butthurt about this? Jeeze, get on with it.

We are reminded of it every day.

SA was fun, it had active people, it had ambitions, it was going somewhere.

Now it's not. It doesn't have anyone active anymore, and it's not going anywhere.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on April 11, 2014, 04:08:28 PM
We are reminded of it every day.

SA was fun, it had active people, it had ambitions, it was going somewhere.

Now it's not. It doesn't have anyone active anymore, and it's not going anywhere.

SA had active people? I must have been in a separate SA from you.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 11, 2014, 04:24:16 PM
SA had active people? I must have been in a separate SA from you.

Yes. You were in the "I-don't-care-to-get-involved-in-SA-so-SA-doesn't-care-to-involve-me" SA.

It had hundreds of members, most of which couldn't care less for anything. That doesn't mean it wasn't doing things.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 11, 2014, 06:07:15 PM
Hundreds? No. It has not been in the multiple hundreds in the time I've been on dwi.

However, aren't you an Elder Chenier? If nothing is happening, it is YOUR responsibility to make it happen, otherwise hand the church back over and I will make things happen. Hireshmont never gave sermons that i recall. Rabisu did. That makes one. The rest all faded away from inactivity and stagnation long before I took over. There is a very active player base in Sanguis Astroism, but they don't have anyone in the faith to motivate them (thank you for that, my schism is gaining a good deal of traction because of it).

Do not blaim me for your failures Chenier. I know exactly how many sermons have been given since I left. One. I could go on a whole tangent about that, but some of it isn't widely known IC information yet, so I won't.

In short, when the Elder Council starts treating Sanguis Astroism like a religion instead of a political old boy's club, and people don't have to be afraid of being kicked out of the church without due process for speaking up and forming their own opinions, Sanguis Astroism will be fun again. When Light and Luminary positions aren't just shuffled around for people to feel good about themselves, but instead given out for merit to people who have an active interest in pursuing the goals and objectives of their office, then Sanguis Astroism will be interesting again. Hell, the Office of the Maddening should be having a field day right now.

But don't come to me and whine that everyone who gave sermons was driven out by me, because that's bull!@#$. Sanguis Astroism lost two notable followers: Hireshmont (who was all politics, no theology) and Rabisu (regrettable, but still one man). Are you telling me that of the 100 some nobles left in Sanguis Astroism today, only ONE of you can give a goddamn sermon? If you can't, get out of the Elder Council and make room for someone who can. That is the problem with Sanguis Astroism. The sense of self-entitlement. You are not entitled to fun. You have to make things fun, and if you're an elder, that is YOUR responsibility. 
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 11, 2014, 08:26:05 PM
No one will be kicked out of SA permanently from now on.  I won't let it.  I'm sure the Elders won't like that, but I haven't had to enforce that yet.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 11, 2014, 09:35:55 PM
No one will be kicked out of SA permanently from now on.  I won't let it.  I'm sure the Elders won't like that, but I haven't had to enforce that yet.

That's an excellent step in the right direction.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on April 11, 2014, 10:04:57 PM
Indeed. You want crazies in your religion. You need them to keep things going. Once you get rid of them whos going to cause trouble for you. You don't want to do it yourself!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on April 11, 2014, 11:20:55 PM
Indeed. You want crazies in your religion. You need them to keep things going. Once you get rid of them whos going to cause trouble for you. You don't want to do it yourself!

At least not again...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 12, 2014, 12:00:36 AM
Hundreds? No. It has not been in the multiple hundreds in the time I've been on dwi.

However, aren't you an Elder Chenier? If nothing is happening, it is YOUR responsibility to make it happen, otherwise hand the church back over and I will make things happen. Hireshmont never gave sermons that i recall. Rabisu did. That makes one. The rest all faded away from inactivity and stagnation long before I took over. There is a very active player base in Sanguis Astroism, but they don't have anyone in the faith to motivate them (thank you for that, my schism is gaining a good deal of traction because of it).

Do not blaim me for your failures Chenier. I know exactly how many sermons have been given since I left. One. I could go on a whole tangent about that, but some of it isn't widely known IC information yet, so I won't.

In short, when the Elder Council starts treating Sanguis Astroism like a religion instead of a political old boy's club, and people don't have to be afraid of being kicked out of the church without due process for speaking up and forming their own opinions, Sanguis Astroism will be fun again. When Light and Luminary positions aren't just shuffled around for people to feel good about themselves, but instead given out for merit to people who have an active interest in pursuing the goals and objectives of their office, then Sanguis Astroism will be interesting again. Hell, the Office of the Maddening should be having a field day right now.

But don't come to me and whine that everyone who gave sermons was driven out by me, because that's bull!@#$. Sanguis Astroism lost two notable followers: Hireshmont (who was all politics, no theology) and Rabisu (regrettable, but still one man). Are you telling me that of the 100 some nobles left in Sanguis Astroism today, only ONE of you can give a goddamn sermon? If you can't, get out of the Elder Council and make room for someone who can. That is the problem with Sanguis Astroism. The sense of self-entitlement. You are not entitled to fun. You have to make things fun, and if you're an elder, that is YOUR responsibility.

I was doing things for SA before your little circus. So was Hireshmont, Rabisu, and others that left. Sermons? Maybe not. But you seem to assume that reality limits itself to what you see. It's not because we weren't making things public to your agents and yourself that we weren't doing anything. Then you came and had a huge dump on it all.

And we've seen you have your go. You did no better. What you consider "fun" I consider to be among the lamest crap I've seen in BM. You are one of these people that are out to win, and don't care for the consequences their acts have on others.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 12, 2014, 12:27:03 AM
One of the few perks I get as Justiciar is to make whatever ranks I want.  I would like to see some variations within SA.  Allowing sects to form within the church that have their own ranks to identify themselves might help SA grow and gain a little more flavor.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 12, 2014, 12:35:09 AM
And then you went on to give a top rank to Alaster, probably the second-most-hated member of SA.

How generous of Jonsu. Now we don't just have to deal with true faithful and with those who are only there to destroy it, but we can also split the true faithful among those who would never accept a Kabrinski's authority and those who would only do so reluctantly.

A Kabrinski who is now threatening to act as a dictator and is planning to metamorph the Church into something it was never close to being. No offense, dustole.

And you accuse me of not being "active" enough. That Machiavel didn't do enough sermons. Every time Machiavel spoke in the Church, when you were there (and often when you weren't even there anymore), you went about to badmouth Machiavel and discredit him. And now you should be surprised that Machiavel contends himself with private interactions? If it hadn't been for Jonsu and her clique badmouthing him every time he uttered a word, regardless of what it was, maybe he'd be more willing to discuss things publicly.

You play destructive characters, Justin. That's what you find fun. That's what gives you thrills. And you are ready to go to any lengths to win. You don't consider other people's fun. When you make concessions, it's for self-gratification, and your concessions are as destructive as the actions they are supposed to undo.

The damage Enoch and Jonsu did to SA is irreparable. You guys won. Congrats.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on April 12, 2014, 12:48:43 AM
I was doing things for SA before your little circus. So was Hireshmont, Rabisu, and others that left. Sermons? Maybe not. But you seem to assume that reality limits itself to what you see. It's not because we weren't making things public to your agents and yourself that we weren't doing anything. Then you came and had a huge dump on it all.

I probably saw more than most, and even I would still say the backroom efforts were lackluster. Everyone else was doing what I was doing. Using SA as a tool for their character and was content rotating the same leadership around.

Even if you and every other Elder were working behind Enoch's back, SA was still lost. Founder lost, crusade after crusade lost, holy sites and theocracies to go in the future. I'm glad Stabbity stepped down after the majority of people had a chance to draw lines in the sand, but stagnation in the elder council is/wasn't even the beginning of SA's problems. SA was ineffectual.

I'm sure many characters long for the day when SA could bat an eyelash and people would tow the line, but it was all a bluff. SA can't project power. All effort has to go to keeping the status-quot, or it all falls in on itself. For long stretches of time, that status-quot was discouraging conflict so the bluff was never tested.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on April 12, 2014, 01:16:50 AM
SA was either going to die slowly or with a big bang. People obviously chose the former.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 12, 2014, 01:50:19 AM
[quote author=Chénier link=topic=1421.msg127406#msg127406 date=1397255709

A Kabrinski who is now threatening to act as a dictator and is planning to metamorph the Church into something it was never close to being. No offense, dustole.
[/quote]


None taken.  I know I've made enemies. I'm not sure id I trust anyone else to protect SA.  I'm not sure if it can be saved.  Time will tell.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 12, 2014, 06:18:18 AM
And then you went on to give a top rank to Alaster, probably the second-most-hated member of SA.

How generous of Jonsu. Now we don't just have to deal with true faithful and with those who are only there to destroy it, but we can also split the true faithful among those who would never accept a Kabrinski's authority and those who would only do so reluctantly.

A Kabrinski who is now threatening to act as a dictator and is planning to metamorph the Church into something it was never close to being. No offense, dustole.

And you accuse me of not being "active" enough. That Machiavel didn't do enough sermons. Every time Machiavel spoke in the Church, when you were there (and often when you weren't even there anymore), you went about to badmouth Machiavel and discredit him. And now you should be surprised that Machiavel contends himself with private interactions? If it hadn't been for Jonsu and her clique badmouthing him every time he uttered a word, regardless of what it was, maybe he'd be more willing to discuss things publicly.

You play destructive characters, Justin. That's what you find fun. That's what gives you thrills. And you are ready to go to any lengths to win. You don't consider other people's fun. When you make concessions, it's for self-gratification, and your concessions are as destructive as the actions they are supposed to undo.

The damage Enoch and Jonsu did to SA is irreparable. You guys won. Congrats.

I didn't elect to keep him around. Talk to Helm about that. He made a case to aid in mediation. You're damn lucky I'm a nice enough guy to have allowed it. Your judgement of my entire play style off of one interaction, which didn't get to come to any sort of fruition (Jonsu never actually got to govern SA thanks to hissy fits like the ones you throw.) insofar as actual governance.

Now, you should already be PAINFULLY aware there is little that goes on on Dwilight that I don't know about, especially when it comes to you. Your backroom actions maybe created fun for you and a couple others. That's hardly stepping up and making Sanguis Astroism fun, and frankly your ideas were doomed to flop. You want fun in a religion? Get to know the religion.

What is Machaviel's stance on balance? What is his stance on communing with the stars? What is his stance on the Prophet's Vision concerning Daimons? Does he have feelings towards the religion or is he just a political convertee like most everyone believes? Furthermore do you realize that for every noble that hates either Jonsu or Alaster, there is one or more who agrees with them? Why do you think Alaster just hasn't been banned and executed, he hangs around in realms that if Sanguis Astroism truly hated him, it wouldn't be a problem.

Frankly, if SA dies any time soon, the fault lies with the current leadership. Never before have I seen so many full members so active. I've given about a dozen private sermons of late. All I've seen and heard from Machaviel is whining, and asking for people to do things. Things he could be facilitating himself. Alaster is only a dictator if you let him be. Justiciars are not immune to excommunication, and I personally do not believe dustole is a big enough dick to hang onto the rank if the Elder council votes in favor of excommunicating him. Hell, the one guy in the Elder Council trying to do ANYTHING is facing a vote of no confidence for as far as I can tell, purely political reasons, and you wonder why the faith is dying.

The days to come can either be a revival for Sanguis Astroism, or its death. That lies purely in the hands of its leadership. If you cannot hack it, and you truly believe that Sanguis Astroism is lost, then stop whining, step down, and let someone else who will actually do something step up. That is the only way Sanguis Astroism will come around. I don't even know why I'm saying all of this, as it conflicts directly with my IC ambitions. IC, I want SA to die, and making it happen has been too damn easy.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 12, 2014, 07:22:30 AM
Rurik won't be removed from the Elders.  I made that proposal to make a point.   In 2 days time the Regent is required to call a vote.  We don't have one.  Nor do we even have a quorum.

At that point im not sure what will happen.  It's been what 2 months since Jonsu stepped down from the elders?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 12, 2014, 07:28:49 AM
Rurik won't be removed from the Elders.  I made that proposal to make a point.   In 2 days time the Regent is required to call a vote.  We don't have one.  Nor do we even have a quorum.

At that point im not sure what will happen.  It's been what 2 months since Jonsu stepped down from the elders?

Two months, and there is one Consul, Three Lights, No Regent, Two Justiciars, One actual luminary, one mystery Luminary.

Jonsu for Regent.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Thehatter on April 12, 2014, 07:47:40 AM
Moto...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Thehatter on April 12, 2014, 07:49:07 AM
Let's not forget the nice i/ooc threats that just happened in the church. I feel it is doomed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 12, 2014, 08:27:13 AM
Let's not forget the nice i/ooc threats that just happened in the church. I feel it is doomed.


what IC/OOC threats?   Did I miss something?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 13, 2014, 11:44:39 PM
Am I the only one who doesn't find Jonsu an !@#$%^& and in any way annoying? Seriously since Jonsu has been in Asylon there hasn't been anything that I'v found that bad about the character. On the other hand I find Chenier very annoying and I've never even really spoken to him in game at all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on April 13, 2014, 11:53:14 PM
Everyone finds Cheniers annoying.

As for Himouras, as long as you entertain them, you won't see any problems with them but the moment you fail to do so they will find their own entertainments.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on April 13, 2014, 11:56:44 PM
Time to tone down the personal attacks.

I'd really hate to have to lock this thread, after over 250 pages.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 13, 2014, 11:57:11 PM
Good thing Asylon is a realm that promotes underhanded skullduggery and chaos... gee golly whiz we even have a piece of our charter that allows for insurrection and coups if the king is doing a bad job.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: OFaolain on April 14, 2014, 12:45:19 AM
Aaaaaaaaaaanyway, how 'bout them Consul elections?  A fierce race between three great competitors, who knows what the outcome will be!  (cut to shot of snoozefest, no campaigning, no promises, no debates) Find out next time, on Sanguis Astroism Z!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Meneldur on April 14, 2014, 12:47:10 AM
This whole conversation is a tad ridiculous. The notion that Jonsu and only Jonsu talks about SA theologically is just silly; Constantine for example had a number of private sermons and religious discussions concerning balance and prophecy during the power-struggle (though since then I've had little time to play which is why I'm resigning him) and in fact I distinctly remember a public discussion involving Jonsu, Constantine and others regarding the exact nature of balance and embracing one Star over the others.

Furthermore the notion that SA needs more sermons to flourish has been counter to my experience playing there for a number of years. Apart from the discussions on the authority of the Prophet and balance during Allison's heyday theology rarely sparked significant controversy, and when it did it was often just a few players who would dominate. And even then such discussions were rarely based on huge block-text sermons but rather more dynamic discussion.
Of course I'm not saying that we shouldn't have as much theology/religious rp as possible, I'm just saying that attributing SA's decline to "not enough sermons" seems to run counter to my experience of the times when SA was flourishing.

Also can someone please tell me exactly when SA became this "kick-everyone out" machine that Stabbity and dustole are complaining about here? Admittedly I did take a break but both before my pause and since Helm took over casting someone out of SA has been the usual nigh-impossible lengthy process. Did something happen while I was away that changed this? And since SA's decline has really been brewing since long before I paused can it really be said to be the main cause of the problems?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 14, 2014, 12:57:46 AM
Yes, don't get this thread locked!   

IC I've never trusted Jonsu or Machiavel.  I still interact with them because their characters are fun in different ways. 

Hopefully someone else can fill the trouble maker role in the church.  We need a little excitement.



Not many have been kicked out, but there have been enough to cause a perception problem. 

Instead of sects like the blood moon fruit being forced out they should be embraced.  I think that is what will be the key to an SA resurgence.  If nobles know they won't be kicked out for having slightly different beliefs they might get more active.

when I speak about sects within SA they would have to fit into the criteria laid out by the creed.






Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on April 14, 2014, 01:18:08 AM
...HELM WAS PUT IN CHARGE CHENIER. THE RESULTING SYSTEM IS HIS. Alaster remaining a Justiciar- HELM'S CALL....

There was never a more supported person, beyond the prophet himself. Helm claimed half the membership, and even that is astonishing given the apathy prior. SA needed a kick in the ass, and Jonsu was perfect. People actually drew lines, gave a realistic reaction, and cared about the institution.

If Enoch had stepped down, someone in a funny hat would say "change places", and everyone would go back to ignoring the gold-sink. Even if Enoch had declared himself tyrant, I couldn't hope to get the same kind of reaction. Hell, there is a chance no one would bat an eyelash and everything would keep shuffling on. Without a clear enemy, no one ever really seemed to care and had their own things to do. A clear enemy and a implied threat later, half the membership was interested in a Regency that was ignored.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Daycryn on April 14, 2014, 04:16:38 AM
This whole conversation is a tad ridiculous. The notion that Jonsu and only Jonsu talks about SA theologically is just silly; Constantine for example had a number of private sermons and religious discussions concerning balance and prophecy during the power-struggle (though since then I've had little time to play which is why I'm resigning him) and in fact I distinctly remember a public discussion involving Jonsu, Constantine and others regarding the exact nature of balance and embracing one Star over the others.

Furthermore the notion that SA needs more sermons to flourish has been counter to my experience playing there for a number of years. Apart from the discussions on the authority of the Prophet and balance during Allison's heyday theology rarely sparked significant controversy, and when it did it was often just a few players who would dominate. And even then such discussions were rarely based on huge block-text sermons but rather more dynamic discussion.
Of course I'm not saying that we shouldn't have as much theology/religious rp as possible, I'm just saying that attributing SA's decline to "not enough sermons" seems to run counter to my experience of the times when SA was flourishing.

Also can someone please tell me exactly when SA became this "kick-everyone out" machine that Stabbity and dustole are complaining about here? Admittedly I did take a break but both before my pause and since Helm took over casting someone out of SA has been the usual nigh-impossible lengthy process. Did something happen while I was away that changed this? And since SA's decline has really been brewing since long before I paused can it really be said to be the main cause of the problems?

The only time I saw a kick-everyone-out phenomenon going on was when Rabisu started the Inquisition and started going after Niselurians and anyone who sympathized with them. It was a whole Thing, briefly. (Started in an effort to make SA more interesting!)

And you're right about the sermons. Making sermons, or for that matter writing lengthy spiritual texts (cough), doesn't lead to more activity or involvement. I wonder if it might actually have an opposite effect? Who knows.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on April 14, 2014, 06:22:19 AM
The only time I saw a kick-everyone-out phenomenon going on was when Rabisu started the Inquisition and started going after Niselurians and anyone who sympathized with them. It was a whole Thing, briefly. (Started in an effort to make SA more interesting!)

And you're right about the sermons. Making sermons, or for that matter writing lengthy spiritual texts (cough), doesn't lead to more activity or involvement. I wonder if it might actually have an opposite effect? Who knows.
I think its most fun with a good balance of doing things and having flavor. The sermons are a nice read and they make the religion seem much less like its just a place for politicians to argue and spread propaganda.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on April 14, 2014, 06:14:56 PM
There has, in the past, been quite an effort to include different people in the building of the theology. When my character Brance started his second term as Regent, he organized weekly sermons. Several of them were saved and recorded on the Wiki on the Sermons page.

All in all, there is more theology written for SA, and by many more people, than for any other religion in the game. And by quite a wide margin, as well.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Thehatter on April 15, 2014, 06:10:26 PM
dustole:

When the character Katrina Dragul stated there was to much ooc message in game. and that the next person to message would be finned. Taken as both Ic and OOC context.

Moto and others were talking in both ooc and Ic to full members of Sanguis Astroism
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 16, 2014, 02:11:11 AM
Ohh!  I hope you weren't too offended.  In SA you should take any ic/ooc concerns you have to the Justiciars.  Especially if Alaster(me) does something you think is wrong.

I only have so much time to give to BM.  I only skimmed that message.   I missed the fining part.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Quiet One on April 16, 2014, 08:41:19 AM
Aaaaaaaaaaanyway, how 'bout them Consul elections?  A fierce race between three great competitors, who knows what the outcome will be!  (cut to shot of snoozefest, no campaigning, no promises, no debates) Find out next time, on Sanguis Astroism Z!

The results are in with a dramatic twist ending.

Tune in next week for "Consul Elections 2: More nothing!"
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 16, 2014, 01:55:18 PM
I used to be a consul.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on April 16, 2014, 02:09:57 PM
The results are in with a dramatic twist ending.

Tune in next week for "Consul Elections 2: More nothing!"

Hopefully we won't do that again.  New charter reduces # of consuls to two.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 16, 2014, 07:18:39 PM
Hopefully we won't do that again.  New charter reduces # of consuls to two.

Two too many, probably.

Making things more democratic is a poor solution to low voter turnout. Voting is but one method of participation, and if it may be among the more just, it doesn't mean its always, or even usually, the best.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Quiet One on April 16, 2014, 09:59:15 PM
Hopefully we won't do that again.  New charter reduces # of consuls to two.
Two too many, probably.

Making things more democratic is a poor solution to low voter turnout. Voting is but one method of participation, and if it may be among the more just, it doesn't mean its always, or even usually, the best.
Personally, I'm a traditionalist. Three Lights, three Luminaries, and three Consuls. Scrap the Regent and make Archons non-voting unless we just scrap them too.

Enter amazing grew-up-on-a-farm analogy: Sometimes you need to trim a tree to keep it healthy, but cutting away too much can kill it all the faster.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 16, 2014, 10:34:21 PM
Personally, I'm a traditionalist. Three Lights, three Luminaries, and three Consuls. Scrap the Regent and make Archons non-voting unless we just scrap them too.

Enter amazing grew-up-on-a-farm analogy: Sometimes you need to trim a tree to keep it healthy, but cutting away too much can kill it all the faster.

If we had a ton of active people, sure. But we don't. The traditional eldership is too large to go back. As for the status quo, taking some of those select few active nobles, and giving them titles where they aren't supposed to involve themselves too much (justiciars), does the Church no good.

At this point I've pretty much lost faith that there's anything we can do to salvage SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on April 16, 2014, 11:57:20 PM
So what I'm hearing is that SA needs a charismatic new prophet who can break the apathy and restructure the church as needed.

I could try again, if you all would like.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 17, 2014, 12:02:57 AM
So what I'm hearing is that SA needs a charismatic new prophet who can break the apathy and restructure the church as needed.

I could try again, if you all would like.

*Ahem*
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on April 17, 2014, 12:04:28 AM
The man said "charismatic," Stabbity, not "hated with a fiery passion by nearly everyone." ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on April 17, 2014, 12:28:52 AM
Evoking that kind of emotion requires Charisma!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on April 17, 2014, 12:37:49 AM
*Ahem*

No do-overs. If I have to go to the trouble of infiltrating that deep again, someone else gets to take the wheel for a bit.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 17, 2014, 01:09:59 PM
No charisma can mend the damage that was inflicted.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on April 17, 2014, 11:56:57 PM
No charisma can mend the damage that was inflicted.

I think we have fundamental differences in our views of what SA is. You seem to think of SA as a machine, a series of cogs that do their required part and their work creates something more than its parts. When something doesn't work, you fix it and keep the machine running. You always want the machine running, so (in SA's case), you need infinite growth to keep the cogs spinning.

I think of SA as living creature, a hodge-podge of bacteria and tissue that all do their own thing but come together to form something that does its own thing as well. When something doesn't work, the being continues. SA will live on, the relationships that matter will continue relating. There will be scars, pain, and tears...but that is SMA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on April 18, 2014, 01:42:30 AM
I think we have fundamental differences in our views of what SA is. You seem to think of SA as a machine, a series of cogs that do their required part and their work creates something more than its parts. When something doesn't work, you fix it and keep the machine running. You always want the machine running, so (in SA's case), you need infinite growth to keep the cogs spinning.

I think of SA as living creature, a hodge-podge of bacteria and tissue that all do their own thing but come together to form something that does its own thing as well. When something doesn't work, the being continues. SA will live on, the relationships that matter will continue relating. There will be scars, pain, and tears...but that is SMA.

I find it rather ironic that you compare my vision of SA to somethings that, by definition, cannot die, and contrast your vision by comparing it to something that does die to say that SA cannot die.

Cogs can't die, living organisms do. SA precisely isn't like a machine, where you can just make random upgrades, take out unwanted or damaged parts and replace it with spare parts. Like any living entities, too much trauma can and will kill it. You don't cure someone by beheading them. SA is diseased. It's riddled with people whose only purpose is to make it crumble. The safeguards to keep it all together have collapsed. SA is like a person with AIDS contracting flesh-eating bacteria. It's over.

And while the harm dates from a while back, you did a nice job clicking to win to set its fate in stone.

Enjoy yourself. I'm done with BM. I've deleted most of my characters, and Machiavel will follow soon enough. The game's now filled with people who care only for themselves and who play to win. The community is self-destructive, and the rules that kept everything together are no longer upheld in any meaningful way.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on April 18, 2014, 03:42:16 AM
A machine is a non living thing, so the irony revisits itself.

You look at the idle nobles, the peasant numbers, and the elder council bureaucracy as SA. Those mechanics helped, but it was the social interactions that mattered. There was a lack of real dialogue in SA. Except for when someone did something bad, then everyone wanted to do something all of a sudden.

A living thing may die, but its mark and its offspring continue on. Rather than rage-quit because an infinite growth paradigm is impossible, start interacting with people. Hell, you might enjoy a smaller, more fundamentalist SA. Easier to find like-minded people, and less likely to expose yourself to people who piss you off.

Then again, if SA was really the only thing keeping you on, then you may want to step away. If you've lost interest in the game as a whole, but feel invested in SA, then it sounds like it feels like an obligation rather than a fun game. Sometimes you need a break.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on April 18, 2014, 05:20:08 PM
Chenier stop your tantrum don't quit... As much as I despise you IG it would be a shame to lose one of my greatest enemies.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on April 19, 2014, 01:11:53 AM
Good bye Chenier. Although I never got a chance to play with you, you've made this game very interesting.

I hope you will come back one day :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 09, 2014, 04:56:52 AM
So.

Somebody want to fill me in?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on May 09, 2014, 05:06:15 AM
A lot happened :o
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 09, 2014, 05:53:27 AM
Yeah. I can tell. Everything's gone.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on May 09, 2014, 06:42:53 AM
Yeah. I can tell. Everything's gone.

Yep. A lot of interesting stuff happened. Monsters overwhelmed Western Dwillight. Soon Luria will become the most populated realm in the game :o
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: sharkattack on May 09, 2014, 09:05:28 AM
Yep. A lot of interesting stuff happened. Monsters overwhelmed Western Dwillight. Soon Luria will become the most populated realm in the game :o

It already is. :) We are eager to bash some Southern League skulls! :S
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on May 09, 2014, 02:25:23 PM
We have some pretty tough skulls.  :P

Yeah, everything has changed in the game.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Buffalkill on May 10, 2014, 12:38:24 AM
Soon Luria will become the most populated realm in the game :o
It already is by a large margin in terms of nobles. Top 3 are Luria: 58 Morek: 34 Astrum: 32
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on May 10, 2014, 12:47:27 AM
It already is by a large margin in terms of nobles. Top 3 are Luria: 58 Morek: 34 Astrum: 32
In the game, not Dwilight.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Buffalkill on May 10, 2014, 01:08:33 AM
Are there any larger realms on other islands? I can only see Dwilight and Beluaterra.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vita` on May 10, 2014, 04:37:43 AM
Sirion has 66 at the moment.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on May 10, 2014, 06:06:06 AM
Sirion has 66 at the moment.

Sirion shouldn't count. Over half of their nobles are doubles :p. If you ignore all the doubles, Sirion's noble count gets cut in half.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on May 10, 2014, 07:10:45 AM
Luria has a lot of nobles, but it can't support them all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Buffalkill on May 10, 2014, 09:16:29 AM
Luria has a lot of nobles, but it can't support them all.
I think you might be right. Luria has 4.14 nobles for every region, more than double the average. The smart ones will join Asylon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on May 10, 2014, 12:01:19 PM
Barca currently has 4 regions for about 30 nobles if you don't count the last region in the west. Things are quite cramped.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on May 10, 2014, 12:59:55 PM
There isn't an Asylon to join.  Did you mean Swordfell?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on May 10, 2014, 08:08:15 PM
I would love to see one of those territorial change map GIFs for the Icespawn Exodus - mainly for Asylon's creative hopscotching.  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Buffalkill on May 10, 2014, 08:22:20 PM
I would love to see one of those territorial change map GIFs for the Icespawn Exodus - mainly for Asylon's creative hopscotching.  ;)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B85AasBw9ZoxV0RYRmh1S0lWT1U/edit?usp=sharing
http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Asylon#Monster_invasions
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on May 11, 2014, 01:32:05 PM
I would love to see one of those territorial change map GIFs for the Icespawn Exodus - mainly for Asylon's creative hopscotching.  ;)

With this song

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MK6TXMsvgQg
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 11, 2014, 09:59:18 PM
So is SA super dead, or is it just because Hireshmont isn't a full member?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on May 11, 2014, 10:12:44 PM
All the tangents about migration and density was nice, but I am curious what is going on with SA. Did the western schism church die?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on May 11, 2014, 11:26:50 PM
Probably.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 12, 2014, 12:12:06 AM
There's still some Ecclesiastics Astroism or something listed on the other orders page.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on May 12, 2014, 12:21:11 AM
There's still some Ecclesiastics Astroism or something listed on the other orders page.
Seoras has shown no intention to give up on it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 12, 2014, 12:22:21 AM
A few meaningless sects still exist.

Chatter in SA, despite what I've read others say, seems mostly limited to a few complaints about church administration and about members failing to send to full members only. Feels pretty dead to me.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on May 12, 2014, 12:25:37 AM
A few meaningless sects still exist.

Chatter in SA, despite what I've read others say, seems mostly limited to a few complaints about church administration and about members failing to send to full members only. Feels pretty dead to me.
Most of SA chatter has always been arguing about what the administration has done or what has gone on elsewhere. If that's dead to you, then you have never been in SA when it was alive.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vita` on May 12, 2014, 04:26:05 AM
Seoras has shown no intention to give up on it.

Nope; Helm's efforts after I left and Rabisu's death kinda tanked its prospects, but no point in turning back now. Open offer of Lightship for any genuine Light (ie, not during/after Jonsu's madness) still stands. Off the top of my head, that includes Hireshmont and Katrina as last-legitimate Lights, Constantine, Medugnatos as old-school former Lights, and Machiavel and Turin as former Luminaries of the last-legitimate Lights.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on May 12, 2014, 05:07:15 AM
To say SA is "dead" seems like an exaggeration. It's just in a downswing. Helm announced the Justicar's new charter and it erupted a huge argument about the Juisticars abusing emergency powers. Some stuck to their guns in opposition, some say the reforms could have merits. It is progressing for sure though. There the Lights are now elected too. We're in an uncertain period, but I think some new characters could help liven things up in Church life.

However we do try to keep the politics and debates to the full member channel, so you're probably not getting that Vellos.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 12, 2014, 03:17:41 PM
New dictators, yay.

Not.

Same old pointless bickering over stuff nobody has any power over.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Qyasogk on May 12, 2014, 07:54:20 PM
As the only kingdom that successfully escaped the hordes of the west to forge a new realm in the east (RIP Asylon and Niselur), I'd say that more than a couple of us are just a little busy at the moment.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on May 12, 2014, 09:00:01 PM
New dictators, yay.

Not.

Same old pointless bickering over stuff nobody has any power over.
You didn't mind it when you were in power.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 13, 2014, 01:25:57 AM
However we do try to keep the politics and debates to the full member channel, so you're probably not getting that Vellos.

Hm.

Well, once the Emperor of the Occidens has found a scribe, maybe he'll request full membership.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on May 15, 2014, 04:44:15 AM
"The Austere Order working with the forces of the Morek Empire under Ordermarshal Helm, defeated Asylon in their last stronghold of Unterstrom. The Austere Order now works to secure the domain of Astrum's new borders."

From Wiki.

It is quite funny how Astrum lost the war but won at the end. The Blood Stars be praised! Monsters were blessings of the Blood Stars! Should call the event the 'Cleansing' or something  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 15, 2014, 06:50:29 AM
Hurray. Congrats on killing one of the most active and populous realms of Dwilight, a realm that was probably the one thing keeping many of the players interested in the game. Surely something to be celebrated with as much pomp as can be mustered.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on May 15, 2014, 11:28:38 AM
I really don't understand why Astrum/Morek didn't toy with Asylon for a while. They immediately went for the kill. They could have bottled Asylon in Unterstrom and a rural or two and had jolly good war for years to come.

I supposed Asylon whooped them too hard the first time and the theocracies thought it was a fight for their own survival.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 15, 2014, 04:31:26 PM
As someone who's had a few realms destroyed out from under him, it stinks, but you move on. If you were really emotionally invested and you feel too upset about it, take a break and come back later.

The "revenge for a lost nation" plot line can be very fun.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 15, 2014, 05:50:22 PM
As someone who's had a few realms destroyed out from under him, it stinks, but you move on. If you were really emotionally invested and you feel too upset about it, take a break and come back later.

The "revenge for a lost nation" plot line can be very fun.

Well you are an older player with at least 4-5 noble slots. New players, who made up most of Asylon's population, only have 2 noble slots. So most of their experience is of Asylon. The fact that you say this shows how out of touch you are with the newer players of the game.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Qyasogk on May 15, 2014, 07:10:33 PM
Hurray. Congrats on killing one of the most active and populous realms of Dwilight, a realm that was probably the one thing keeping many of the players interested in the game. Surely something to be celebrated with as much pomp as can be mustered.

Well, let's be honest here. Asylon enjoyed beating up on Astrum for quite a long time with relative impunity. Working with your Niselurian comrades, you very nearly destroyed what was once one of the most powerful kingdoms in Dwilight. We all got !@#$ed when the monster hordes invaded, only we had allies in he east we could work with of an exit strategy and Asylon did not.

I really don't understand why Astrum/Morek didn't toy with Asylon for a while. They immediately went for the kill. They could have bottled Asylon in Unterstrom and a rural or two and had jolly good war for years to come.

If you had just been forced to leave your house, and the new house you're moving into already has squatters sitting in it (armed with swords), do you toy with them? Or do you clean house? This was a different kind of war than the others because we were fighting over the same piece of land to make our home, rather than exchanging border regions that were expendable.

As a warrior and a general my duty is to kill the enemy, period. Mission Accomplished.

Also, Asylon still lives on. They've already reclaimed two rurals south of the Desert of Sillouettes. The Bear rises again...

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 15, 2014, 11:15:56 PM
You didn't mind it when you were in power.

When "I was in power", as you say (my top rank was luminary, I believe), all posts had some level of accountability and all ranks were voted in some form or another. There were opportunities when one was discontent with the ones in power to eventually replace them, without being forced to form a whole new religion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 15, 2014, 11:33:07 PM
Well, let's be honest here. Asylon enjoyed beating up on Astrum for quite a long time with relative impunity. Working with your Niselurian comrades, you very nearly destroyed what was once one of the most powerful kingdoms in Dwilight. We all got !@#$ed when the monster hordes invaded, only we had allies in he east we could work with of an exit strategy and Asylon did not.

Yes, but did Asylon ever completely wipe out all the regions that Astrum owned? I think not...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Buffalkill on May 16, 2014, 01:06:42 AM
Yes, but did Asylon ever completely wipe out all the regions that Astrum owned? I think not...
They could have and they decided not to.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on May 16, 2014, 01:26:26 AM
They could have and they decided not to.

The irony is what gets me. The pious theocrats are more barbarous than the druggie warrior kings. Hell, Astrum ate their papal state quicker than Asylon could get to some good bits.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 16, 2014, 02:42:43 AM
This monster invasion has successfully turned dynamic Dwilight into the Far-East continent with an empty mirror on the west coast.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on May 16, 2014, 03:36:19 AM
The irony is what gets me. The pious theocrats are more barbarous than the druggie warrior kings. Hell, Astrum ate their papal state quicker than Asylon could get to some good bits.

Considering how Corsanctum's ruler went nuts, and how the realm turned on itself with constant defections, is anyone really surprised?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 16, 2014, 03:47:47 AM
Well you are an older player with at least 4-5 noble slots. New players, who made up most of Asylon's population, only have 2 noble slots. So most of their experience is of Asylon. The fact that you say this shows how out of touch you are with the newer players of the game.

Woah there.

I haven't played more than 1 character in quite a while.

And I lost realms (like Oligarch) when I was a new player too.

Part of the game. We've all done our fair share of pitching fits (myself quite recently), so I get it: but it's best to just move on, or take a break for a bit if you need to.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on May 16, 2014, 04:34:20 AM
Yes, but did Asylon ever completely wipe out all the regions that Astrum owned? I think not...
Asylon was attacking, whereas Astrum was defending against the Asylon Invasion. It is not barbaric to not let your enemies take your land. As well, Corsanctum ceded its regions to Astrum and thus they were Astrum's regions that Asylon was taking.

Lastly, Asylon is not dead, they have regions in the south.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on May 16, 2014, 02:35:25 PM
This is not the Asylon thread so I will not discuss Asylon here.

So what happens with the Theocracies now? will they allow the old Corsanctum rise again? or is the trinity of Theocracies ruined?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on May 17, 2014, 09:56:53 PM
This is not the Asylon thread so I will not discuss Asylon here.

So what happens with the Theocracies now? will they allow the old Corsanctum rise again? or is the trinity of Theocracies ruined?

Regent Cathan and Vasilif Sergio agreed to unite Astrum and Corsanctum. Realpolitik seems to have won out over the holy-land idea of Corsanctum. Astrum needed lands and had government; Corsanctum had lands and needed proper government.

The result seems to be that pro-union nobles have stuck with Astrum, and anti-union nobles have gone to Swordfell and Asylon; or so it seems to me.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Qyasogk on May 20, 2014, 12:11:09 AM
Yes, but did Asylon ever completely wipe out all the regions that Astrum owned? I think not...

You made an enemy, an enemy you thought you could safely declare war on and relentlessly attack because your regions were safely out of our reach.

Times changed and then we all found ourselves fighting over the same scrap of land. A stronger Astrum that hadn't been relentlessly attacked by three enemy realms might have been more comfortable negotiating some kind of peace with Asylon. But a weakened and vulnerable Astrum did not have the luxury of sparing their enemies lives. Sorry, that's the cold hard truth.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 20, 2014, 01:49:35 AM
You made an enemy, an enemy you thought you could safely declare war on and relentlessly attack because your regions were safely out of our reach.

Times changed and then we all found ourselves fighting over the same scrap of land. A stronger Astrum that hadn't been relentlessly attacked by three enemy realms might have been more comfortable negotiating some kind of peace with Asylon. But a weakened and vulnerable Astrum did not have the luxury of sparing their enemies lives. Sorry, that's the cold hard truth.

You say you, like I'm a part of Asylon. I wasn't. I was part of Barca. And the cold hard truth is a lot of players have left Dwilight out of frustration. So while yes, IC, it might have made sense, you should have made an effort to not completely eliminate your enemies. Because you want to know what happens when you do that? You get Atamara v2.0. Boring gang-bang wars, where no one can have a one-on-one fight without a realm like CE getting involved.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Disturbedyang on May 20, 2014, 02:26:15 AM
You say you, like I'm a part of Asylon. I wasn't. I was part of Barca. And the cold hard truth is a lot of players have left Dwilight out of frustration. So while yes, IC, it might have made sense, you should have made an effort to not completely eliminate your enemies. Because you want to know what happens when you do that? You get Atamara v2.0. Boring gang-bang wars, where no one can have a one-on-one fight without a realm like CE getting involved.

That's one thing some players just don't understand. This game is not about winning. It's about making it interesting for everyone. Something Astrum and Morek players will never ever understand.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on May 20, 2014, 02:37:58 AM
That's one thing some players just don't understand. This game is not about winning. It's about making it interesting for everyone. Something Astrum and Morek players will never ever understand.

You will never make it fun for everyone.  There will always be winners and losers.  Astrum lost a lot of players when thru started losing regions and were fighting a 2 front war.    I haven't seen many stats so I don't know if that is a fair comparison.  I don't believe we've lost too many players from the Dwilight reduction.  We may have lost some characters, but I've seen a few emigrations. 

In any case you can't blame the monster invasion on Astrum/Morek.  I would also like to point out that those two realms have generated a lot of fun and have evenhad a war if sorts between themselves in the past.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 20, 2014, 07:03:36 PM
That's one thing some players just don't understand. This game is not about winning. It's about making it interesting for everyone. Something Astrum and Morek players will never ever understand.

"You play in Astrum/Morek, therefore you don't understand the game. You should all just quit so the rest of us can have fun."

Huh... wow. Not even a broad brush can apply all that paint all at once. You'd need, like, a 480VAC power sprayer to deliver that much.

Look, you were doing great in your first few sentences. At least in part. Then you tossed in that last zinger, and lost all credibility.

BattleMaster is a quite complicated game. It's about a lot of things. In a way, it is about winning. And it is also about losing. And also about that squishy, vague area between these two extremes. You can win all kinds of things. It's the triumphs and the losses that give the game so much meaning. without the consequences to your actions, the game would be bland and boring. It would take the grandstanding and soapboxing commonly seen on the ruler's channel, and spread it out across the entire game. We'd all be marching back and forth across the same tired  landscape screaming about how your father smelt of elderberries, knowing that no matter what happens, we can't really lose anything of importance,our enemies will always forgive us.

One of the key facets of BattleMaster is the fact that your actions have consequences. The butcher will present the bill. You can lose everything. Make the wrong choice, and your entire realm can be wiped out. This is the spice that makes the stew worth eating. Would you really want to play a game where no matter what you did, your adversary always stopped just a hair from wiping you out, and let you recover your strength so you could just do it all over again next week?

That brings us to one of the other key facets of the game: The actions that you take now will come back to bite your ass in the future. The game has a persistent history. Little insults and minor struggles can blow up to be major conflicts. Each little poke of the stick may be small. Put them together and they add up to a whole lot of pissed off. This goes both ways. In this war, Astrum did take the shot, and wiped out Asylon. Now you have a lot of pissed off ex-Asylonians who will probably spread out, and take those grudges with them. I wouldn't be surprised if several of them eventually lead a push that slams Astrum hard at some time in the future, possibly wiping them out, too.

No matter how it plays out, whether your realm wins or loses, you need to take it in stride. Ride the event for all its worth. When it's done, move on somewhere else. Regroup. Rebuild. Bring the fight back under a new banner. Or raise your old banner again, and show them bastards that they made a mistake.

But don't come here onto the forums complaining about how the players on the other side are mean puppy-kickers who steal candy from babies. Keep all that acrimony in-character.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Logar on May 20, 2014, 08:17:07 PM
Those Astrum dogs will pay for what they have done! Stealing away my cosy life. Come may the day they shalt feel my wrath once again!, mwahaha...  ;)

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Graeth on May 20, 2014, 08:32:10 PM

That brings us to one of the other key facets of the game: The actions that you take now will come back to bite your ass in the future. The game has a persistent history. Little insults and minor struggles can blow up to be major conflicts. Each little poke of the stick may be small. Put them together and they add up to a whole lot of pissed off. This goes both ways. In this war, Astrum did take the shot, and wiped out Asylon. Now you have a lot of pissed off ex-Asylonians who will probably spread out, and take those grudges with them. I wouldn't be surprised if several of them eventually lead a push that slams Astrum hard at some time in the future, possibly wiping them out, too.

I'm not so sure Astrum will be the ones the ex-Asylonians are gunning for.  If Aslyon learned anything from the Unterstrom debacle, they will attack those pulling the strings next time, and not those dangling on the ends.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on May 21, 2014, 01:00:58 AM
One of the key facets of BattleMaster is the fact that your actions have consequences. The butcher will present the bill. You can lose everything. Make the wrong choice, and your entire realm can be wiped out. This is the spice that makes the stew worth eating. Would you really want to play a game where no matter what you did, your adversary always stopped just a hair from wiping you out, and let you recover your strength so you could just do it all over again next week?

If I had this mentality when Enoch was Regent, SA would have been dismantled, more than a few people would have quit, and you would have been up in arms that it was 'not playing with friends'.

I agree that it is unwarranted for people to say Astrum/Morek don't know how to play BM, but it is equally unwarranted to say Asylon deserved it. Asylon got dealt an exceptionally !@#$ hand by unusual circumstances. If you think 'the butcher's bill' includes GM interference then one of us really is playing the wrong game and should leave.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vellos on May 21, 2014, 02:05:42 AM
If I had this mentality when Enoch was Regent, SA would have been dismantled, more than a few people would have quit, and you would have been up in arms that it was 'not playing with friends'.

I agree that it is unwarranted for people to say Astrum/Morek don't know how to play BM, but it is equally unwarranted to say Asylon deserved it. Asylon got dealt an exceptionally !@#$ hand by unusual circumstances. If you think 'the butcher's bill' includes GM interference then one of us really is playing the wrong game and should leave.

It is notable that Astrum's lands were also wiped out by the same monsters.

Yes, the circumstances were unusual. They vindicated a particular strategy (wide-ranging alliance networks) over another. But unusual circumstances are normal. There is no one right way to play BM.

All the same, I think there's a middle ground. On the one hand, I sympathize with Indirik that the ability to actually create a vibrant and dynamic history is a key element of what makes BM worthwhile. On the other hand, I've had my share of getting pissy because I lost, and there are many cases I can think of where it seems to me the "Aggregate Fun" of Battlemaster could have been improved if somebody had chosen to let the defeated live to fight another day.

But what that means, that both those argument seem to have some merit and truth to them, is that gettin' all hot and bothered because in one specific instance players chose one play style over the other is wrong. And again, I'm not saying this judgmentally. I've gotten upset over dead realms too.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 21, 2014, 04:06:11 AM
If I had this mentality when Enoch was Regent, SA would have been dismantled, more than a few people would have quit, and you would have been up in arms that it was 'not playing with friends'.
That particular topic has been well-debated in different thread. (Or ten threads...) We will have to agree to disagree on what happened there, and why. Suffice it to say that we disagree. (Which is fine. There's nothing wrong with disagreeing. If we all agreed on everything, this game would be pretty boring.)

Anywho... The statement I made applies to more than just the current Asylon v. Astrum war. I was pretty careful to edit my message to specifically NOT cast blame on anyone. Everything I said applies equally to both Asylon and Astrum. (And quite a few other situations I could start reeling off.) Both realms sniped at each other and pissed each other off. They fought a couple wars. In the end, one realm was almost certainly fated to wipe out the other. It nearly turned out to be both being wiped out. However, Astrum will still have to live with the fact that it wiped out Asylon. (At least according to what I read on the forums. I don't play on Dwilight right now.) That means a bunch pf pissed off Asylon nobles wanting revenge. It just may come back to bite them in the ass some day long in the future. (The name Coimbra is still bandied about on EC despite being dead for over nine years!)

Quote
I agree that it is unwarranted for people to say Astrum/Morek don't know how to play BM, but it is equally unwarranted to say Asylon deserved it. Asylon got dealt an exceptionally !@#$ hand by unusual circumstances. If you think 'the butcher's bill' includes GM interference then one of us really is playing the wrong game and should leave.
I did NOT say that Asylon deserved to die, and especially not at the hands of a developer-induced event. What I said was the your actions have consequences. Astrum spent years making Asylon angry, mostly by ignoring Asylon's attempts to be relevant. This eventually resulted in huge consequences for Astrum when Asylon (who eventually did become relevant) and two other realms decided to take them down. Asylon spent years pissing Astrum off, for many little reasons, and a couple  big ones. This eventually resulted in Astrum taking the opportunity to finally put a bullet in Asylon's head when it got the chance.

Does this mean Asylon "deserved" to die? Nope. At least, not more than any realm deserves to die. But the actions that they took in the past set up the events that led to what happened to them. If they had been friendlier with Astrum, maybe Astrum would have let them keep that city. If Astrum had been friendlier with Asylon, maybe Asylon would have never attacked Astrum in the first place.

Which all goes back to what I was trying to say in the first place: "Hello, Actions. I'd like to introduce you to your progeny: Consequences."
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Bjarnson on May 21, 2014, 11:25:36 AM
Astrum did not whipe out Asylon, Morek did if any realm is to be branded the Asylon-slayer it should be them, it was their armies that crushed ours, Astrum just jumped in at the end to claim land.

And the whole Astrum vs Asylon conflict is a old one, it is something that has been there for years, and it was something that I enjoyed, I enjoyed having them as my nemesis, nothing personal against the players of Astrum but it was a nice flavour that had matured during ages of disagreement and hostility. They did not whipe us out during the first war, we did not whipe them out during the second, I had hoped to see more wars over the contested lands that where our borders, but then the monster spawn happened, so things changed.

I have no bitterness or resentment towards Astrums players for doing what they did, it was the only natural thing that they would wage war on Asylon.

The interesting part on Dwilight now is that every realm exept Luria Nova is allied or federated with Morek... So yea, this will be fun, and by fun I mean that I expect Morek+allies to drop the hammer on any attempt for Asylonians to regain strength and take vengance.
And by fun I do not mean fun...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on May 21, 2014, 04:01:04 PM
Hopefully they do considering you're trying to wipe out Barca  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vita` on May 21, 2014, 04:52:00 PM
Trying? No one had any desire to wipe out Barca cept the monsters (and one could argue they don't exactly have desires). Barca getting wiped out is entirely on them - they practically asked Luria to kill them with a cherry on top.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfang on May 21, 2014, 06:51:40 PM
Put it the way you prefer then, it boils down to the same thing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Qyasogk on May 22, 2014, 07:35:59 PM
That's one thing some players just don't understand. This game is not about winning. It's about making it interesting for everyone. Something Astrum and Morek players will never ever understand.

We actually agree that BM is not about winning! It's about drama and storytelling, and what is more interesting than role playing a great and glorious death?

As a DM it was always frustrating dealing with character deaths. No matter how amazing or heroic the death was and how intense and exciting it was for everyone to play, there was always someone who had this sense of "I messed up" because everyone always wants to win at everything. But that actually makes for some really boring drama.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 23, 2014, 01:35:30 AM
Astrum never defeated Asylon. The GM monster plague has nearly wiped us out. Quite possibly the lamest thing to happen on Dwilight ever. That being said I still intend to play with my full attention and bring back from the grave a realm similiar to the idea of Asylon.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Zakilevo on May 23, 2014, 01:57:02 AM
Astrum never defeated Asylon. The GM monster plague has nearly wiped us out. Quite possibly the lamest thing to happen on Dwilight ever. That being said I still intend to play with my full attention and bring back from the grave a realm similiar to the idea of Asylon.

Astrum didn't beat Asylon. I did  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 23, 2014, 03:22:54 AM
That being said I still intend to play with my full attention and bring back from the grave a realm similiar to the idea of Asylon.
I honestly hope you do.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 23, 2014, 05:59:54 AM
I honestly hope you do.

I have too many enemies to stop playing.  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on May 23, 2014, 07:15:24 PM
I have too many enemies to stop playing.  8)

Huzzah for Dwilight's most wanted! o/
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 28, 2014, 06:50:08 AM
Astrum never defeated Asylon. The GM monster plague has nearly wiped us out. Quite possibly the lamest thing to happen on Dwilight ever. That being said I still intend to play with my full attention and bring back from the grave a realm similiar to the idea of Asylon.

This is pretty much the only reason I haven't outright deleted my Dwilight character.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Qyasogk on May 28, 2014, 07:06:00 PM
Astrum never defeated Asylon. The GM monster plague has nearly wiped us out.

The monster plague nearly wiped us both out. Unfortunately we both chose the same destination to emigrate to, you even got there first. And then Astrum defeated Asylon there, even if that's too painful of for you to admit.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 28, 2014, 07:11:33 PM
And then Astrum defeated Asylon

Hahahahaha you want that to be true so bad.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 28, 2014, 10:17:47 PM
Asylon still survives... We will find you all! 8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on May 28, 2014, 10:39:08 PM
And then Barca decides to do something dumb...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Penchant on May 29, 2014, 12:12:37 AM
And then Barca decides to do something dumb...
Hard to blame them for not wanting enemy priests in their lands. Tact on the other hand is something Barca as a whole has not been overly known for.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 29, 2014, 01:33:02 AM
Hard to blame them for not wanting enemy priests in their lands. Tact on the other hand is something Barca as a whole has not been overly known for.

Yes, as opposed to the complete respect the Sanguis Astroism realms have shown...   ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Qyasogk on May 29, 2014, 01:50:32 AM
Yes, as opposed to the complete respect the Sanguis Astroism realms have shown...   ::)

You just never miss an opportunity to bang on that SA drum of yours, do you?

A wild and trouble making priest went onto foreign soil, on his own behalf without telling anyone or asking anyone's permission, and got himself in trouble. I'm sure he'd like to turn this into an international incident against SA... but unfortunately for him many are still pissed that he's in the religion at all, so the response from the theocracies on Alaster's behalf, I suspect, will be zero.

But by all means, tell us more about how mean and disrespectful SA has been to you lately.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on May 29, 2014, 02:00:27 AM
Oh, to me personally? Not at all. You see, the only character I am playing is the war islands one. So you are mistaken when you say that SA is in any way harming me, you are wrong in that. I just don't like hypocrisy, even if it is accidental.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Qyasogk on May 29, 2014, 02:20:14 AM
So why is it exactly that you are so active in the SA thread bashing on SA every opportunity you get?

SA has changed a great deal since Astrum was attacked by three enemies at once, Jonsu and Enoch took a big dump all over it, and half the continent was wiped clean of any human presence whatsoever, and Corsanctum was run into the ground by an insane person.

Today's SA is far more humble and limited in scope than it was, you're really just kicking the horse.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 29, 2014, 03:49:26 AM
All of you peeps need to just let it go.

Move on to something else.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on May 29, 2014, 05:01:32 AM
Alaster did inform Barca of his coming and had permission from their ruler.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on May 29, 2014, 06:54:47 PM
All of you peeps need to just let it go.

Move on to something else.

Yeah guys move along nothing to see here!  ;)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Qyasogk on May 29, 2014, 10:53:21 PM
Hahahahaha you want that to be true so bad.

You want it NOT to be true... makes no difference. There's no wriggle room for propaganda here, the events were pretty unambiguous.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Marlboro on May 30, 2014, 06:48:42 PM
You want it NOT to be true...

Really makes no difference to me either way, but facts are facts.

Quote
There's no wriggle room for propaganda here, the events were pretty unambiguous.

What events are those? Asylon wasn't destroyed in a single battle; we gave up after Morek locked us into Unterstrom and prevented us from doing anything. That little fight you're hanging your V on was us throwing away the army because we didn't have the gold to ship it overseas. You might've made a better case for yourself if you'd managed to kill Paul or Grimrog (Both of whom at that point actually wanted to die in battle), buuut y'didn't. Big Daddy Morek did all the work for Astrum, just like they always have.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on May 30, 2014, 08:39:41 PM
I am curious to see if Astrum is going to be shoe-horned into the same vassalage as the previous residents of the Mimer peninsula. If the home of the prophet and papal state can't stand up to 'Mother Goose' Morek....what is Astrum gonna do?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on May 30, 2014, 09:50:52 PM
Corsanctum was not the papal state and not the home of Mathurin.  He left that realm long ago and joined terran.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 30, 2014, 10:12:36 PM
Corsanctum  was in no way a vassal state of Morek, or anyone. They were smaller, weaker allies of Morek, but not vassals.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Antonine on May 30, 2014, 11:45:15 PM
I for one am just amazed that a missionary of another faith can just walk into Morek and call them all heathens without being banned or even just being deluged with angry letters from the faithful.

SA really needs to shape up :p
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on May 31, 2014, 12:29:01 AM
SA really needs to shape up :p


I agree.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on May 31, 2014, 03:34:14 PM
Find a new line of conversation or I will find one for you. Some of the recent cruft  has been removed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eldargard on July 17, 2014, 10:13:46 AM
How far has Sanguis Astroism spread at this point? Is the religion still spreading?

What are the relations between Ecclesial Sanguiastroism and Sanguis Astroism? Ecclesial Sanguiastroism's wiki page sounds like they are hostile towards Sanguis Astroism but I did not find mention of Ecclesial Sanguiastroism on Sanguis Astroism's wiki page...

What is this Orthodox Astroism I saw briefly mentioned on the Sanguis Astroism wiki page? Are they even still around? hat is their relation to Ecclesial Sanguiastroism?

I was never in the know regarding Sanguis Astroism a year ago and it seems like a lot has changed since then!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vita` on July 17, 2014, 07:09:15 PM
So here's a refresher course on astroist faiths then...

Sanguis Astroism spread across northeast Dwilight quickly, then across to Darfix in the east. Gained a foothold in Lurias, D'hara, and Terran as well. Niselur rebelled against the northern SA federation followed by the western monster invasion and we obviously only have the east left.

Well before the monster invasion, Occidental Astroism was founded in Aurvandil by Allison Kabrinski (mother of now Alaster Kabrinski) a very prominent/controversial SAer (Old Morek, Kabrinskia and on). This was eventually declared heresy by Prophet Mathurin. Never caught on and fizzled out, ending when Allison claimed it was all a ruse to get into Mendicant's (aurvandil's ruler) good graces and Allison was executed/poisoned/suicided.

So shortly the monster invasion, Jonsu, far more controversial and with less heritage, took control of SA. This caused all sorts of drama (not just ic unfortunately), one of which was Seoras proclaiming Ecclesial Sanguiastroism to follow Mathurin over Jonsu with a Malus Solari/Rabisu Daycryn bent. For context, Jonsu had already been declared an enemy of the lurian empire while Seoras was reigning emperor and Jonsu had profusely written against Mathurin.

The relations between SA and ESA were sour (declared evil) while Jonsu was in SA but after she was kicked out, they went to variant faiths. Alaster Kabrinski joined Luria for a time though and they weren't exactly compatible, so there's probably some underlying tension with how events shook out post-Jonsu, but other elders have been more positive. Basically, SA reformed the Church into more voting positions while ESA stayed more orthodox in its structure, even reverting to some older SA elements. SA involves non-priests in higher level decisions than ESA which puts priests above others, especially in theological discussions, to try and simplify life for the congregants and not deluge them in theological debates.

As far as wiki pages go, when I founded ESA, I mostly copied SA's wiki over and edited it a bit to mark out the key differences. It was done immediately at the time of Jonsu's hold over SA so it probably is more hostile in wording. SA's wiki hasn't been touched much for awhile other than perhaps the ranks updated, some theological bit stuffed into a subpage etc.

Hope that helps. :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on July 17, 2014, 07:20:46 PM
Occidental Astroism was founded in Aurvandil by Allison Kabrinski (mother of now Alaster Kabrinski) a very prominent/controversial SAer (Old Morek, Kabrinskia and on). This was eventually declared heresy by Prophet Mathurin. Never caught on and fizzled out, ending when Allison claimed it was all a ruse to get into Mendicant's (aurvandil's ruler) good graces and Allison was executed/poisoned/suicided.

Actually, that was Orthodox Astroism. Occidental Astroism was a guild that consisted mostly of Niselur/Kabrinskia faithfuls, I have no idea if it still exists.

There was also a branch named Unitary Astroism that seems defunct, did that last long?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 17, 2014, 07:41:51 PM
Jonsu was involved in one. Was that Unitary? I think that one died, too. It was founded in Niselur.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Vita` on July 17, 2014, 07:46:19 PM
Oh yes, you're right. I confuse the terms Occidental/Orthodox for some reason; I didn't even know Occidental Astroism was a thing.

Unitary Astroism was founded in Niselur. Unfortunately for their future, it was a relatively short period of time before the mosnter invasion began. Obviously doomed by the bloodstars for their heresies I say! ;) More seriously, if I recall correctly, it was a synthesis of the bloodstars and the bloodmoon (though the bloodmoon recognizes stars as well as I recall).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on July 17, 2014, 08:01:48 PM
Jonsu was involved in one. Was that Unitary? I think that one died, too. It was founded in Niselur.

That was probably Iconoclastic Astroism.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 17, 2014, 08:02:05 PM
Occidental Astroism was a military coordination guild for the three Astroist realms in the west. It only partially caught on before the GF people went insane.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on July 18, 2014, 04:47:33 AM
Occidental Astroism was a military coordination guild for the three Astroist realms in the west. It only partially caught on before the GF people went insane.

Yes, quite the fun times. Well, except for me getting the city dumped on me when it was starving to death after Allison abandoned the realm. And having to nurse it back to health and constantly look for food rather than take part in any RP and fighting. Other than that, fun times.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eldargard on July 18, 2014, 08:34:15 AM
I was thinking about how often I have heard complaints about how unbalanced it for the SA realms to always team up against opponents. Finally, I think I have discovered the most effective counter attack! The best way to "destroy" the SA block...

Convert! Join SA!

Once all realms are dedicated to SA it makes religion less of a factor when realms decide to pick sides. Right now it is a decisive factor. If a non-SA realm attacks an SA realm then it is easy for other SA realms to pick a side. Support their fellow believers! But if all realms are SA then other factors will have to be considered!

This idea has probably already been considered but it just struck me today... man I can be slow sometimes!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on July 18, 2014, 05:39:04 PM
I was thinking about how often I have heard complaints about how unbalanced it for the SA realms to always team up against opponents. Finally, I think I have discovered the most effective counter attack! The best way to "destroy" the SA block...

Convert! Join SA!

Once all realms are dedicated to SA it makes religion less of a factor when realms decide to pick sides. Right now it is a decisive factor. If a non-SA realm attacks an SA realm then it is easy for other SA realms to pick a side. Support their fellow believers! But if all realms are SA then other factors will have to be considered!

This idea has probably already been considered but it just struck me today... man I can be slow sometimes!

That's not really a good argument. If all the realms are SA, then in all likelihood what would happen is that all the realms would team up against the first realm to attack another SA realm.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 18, 2014, 05:49:48 PM
I'd say that has already been achieved. SA was bloated by so many people who didn't care about SA, that it was made hollow and teethless.

The realms that band together now do so for political reasons, not religious ones. Point in case, Morek just signed a ceasefire with Asylon.

SA is already practically everywhere, that there's no point in trying to spread it further. The more an organization grows big, the costlier it ends up being trying to expand it further. SA has reached that point. There's nothing left to federate SA against anymore. Not with all of the loose elements within that would not care to bring it back together.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 18, 2014, 06:20:33 PM
I'd say that has already been achieved. SA was bloated by so many people who didn't care about SA, that it was made hollow and teethless.
This.

SA was so successful that it was, effectively, the only game around. No other religions could compete. Everyone who was anyone joined. Then you had the problem that *all* the realms on the War Island ran into: Too many alphas trying to run things, and no betas to follow. SA became nothing more than a huge political machine filled with people who couldn't stand each other. Even when it was lead by people that had a genuine interest in running it as a religion with religious interests at the forefront, too many people were in the peanut gallery hollering about all the politics that were running things. It doesn't matter if it was true or imagined, or just blatant fabrication.

When you get any big enough group of people together, someone will be dissatisfied. Even if it's just dissatisfaction that *they* aren't in charge. They start screaming about the tyranny and injustice of the leadership, and they attract fellow conspiracy theorists and troublemakers. Eventually the organization disintegrates. That's pretty much what happened to SA. Success killed it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 18, 2014, 06:55:07 PM
And thats a good thing because now there is competing interests and religions to drive conflict. If Asylon hadnt of been pushed out of the west we were going to go very aggressive on the religion bit. Now that we are smashed to pieces we are focusing on rebuilding. Our religion went from a growing entity to a handful of tepid temples and no direction. The monster invasion ruined all of our plans to be an actual force against SA. I guess we'll build up again for a few years and when we are big enough to threaten SA the devs will smash us again.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 18, 2014, 06:59:21 PM
Indeed. All of those devs who don't even have characters who are part of SA are so heavily invested in propping SA up that we're willing to run game-wide events that disrupt the political situation on every island in the game, completely toss aside the last tatters of our integrity, and SMITE ASYLON TO THE STONE AGES, as part of a personal quest to single out *you* and ruin all your fun.

Srsly...

You have problems.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 18, 2014, 07:23:29 PM
It was a fun jab  8)


That being said, we're still kicking and in 5 real life years will be ready to bring the fight back to you.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 18, 2014, 07:25:22 PM
SA is already defeated. You just didn't get the glory of doing it yourself.

It has no purpose, no direction, no cohesion. Ask 90% of astroists about:

Asylon: meh
Ecclesiastal astroism: meh
Internal reforms: meh

There is no competing religions. And that's not because there's a single overwhelming religion, but because there are none. You can't "compete" with an entity that does not strive to achieve anything.

The forces against Asylon and its cultists are not religious ones.

You keep acting as if you are some underdog out to fight some evil hegemony, but neither of these have been true for a great number of years.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eldargard on July 18, 2014, 08:04:54 PM
That's not really a good argument. If all the realms are SA, then in all likelihood what would happen is that all the realms would team up against the first realm to attack another SA realm.

I disagree. In many cases this may be how things end up but that is also true when huge religious blocks are not a factor at all. At the same time realms will also be thinking about what side would benefit them most politically. Sometimes it pays to be the aggressor or on the aggressor's side.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eldargard on July 18, 2014, 08:07:54 PM
I must say that SA's apparent fall saddens me a bit. Though I never much cared for the religion as a player I have been eagerly awaiting their day of dominance. Now that they are so close it just sucks that things seem to be falling apart.

At the same time I do not really agree that SA managed to be come THE religion of Dwilight. At not from the little I have seen so far. I also am not convinced that SA is done for. New life might find it's way in and SA may yet be revived!

In the mean time, I will just watch and see!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on July 18, 2014, 08:08:08 PM
I disagree. In many cases this may be how things end up but that is also true when huge religious blocks are not a factor at all. At the same time realms will also be thinking about what side would benefit them most politically. Sometimes it pays to be the aggressor or on the aggressor's side.

No, it pretty much just pays to be the biggest gorilla or on the biggest gorilla's side.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eldargard on July 18, 2014, 08:15:00 PM
No, it pretty much just pays to be the biggest gorilla or on the biggest gorilla's side.

That all comes down to what wants to be paid. If it is winning the war, you are probably right but not everyone is looking for payment in that form!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 18, 2014, 08:36:24 PM
SA is already defeated. You just didn't get the glory of doing it yourself.

It has no purpose, no direction, no cohesion. Ask 90% of astroists about:

Asylon: meh
Ecclesiastal astroism: meh
Internal reforms: meh

There is no competing religions. And that's not because there's a single overwhelming religion, but because there are none. You can't "compete" with an entity that does not strive to achieve anything.

The forces against Asylon and its cultists are not religious ones.

You keep acting as if you are some underdog out to fight some evil hegemony, but neither of these have been true for a great number of years.


Ummm... We are the underdogs again btw. Whatever few months of meager dominance we had in our one siccessfullish war against Astrum after innumerable defeats is gone, Asylon is the underdog. If you havent noticed our kingdom is spread out wider than D'Hara, our army was smashed at Unterstrom, our noble count has been way down compared to months ago. Yup sorry nice try but Astrum and Morek , D'Hara, Fissoa and Luria didnt suffer a bit in the invasion. Barca and Asylon are lucky to be alive, but to say that we arent the underdog is silly, we had a military victory against Astrum, a growing faith, we were going to be the next big thing in north western Dwilight with lots of plans and RP and thats smashed to pieces. Our faith doesnt even have a temple large enough for me to reconvert to priest and you talk about SA being dead... lol hilarious way to take the heat off but SA is positively thriving compared to what happened to us so give me a break with your belly aching.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Graeth on July 18, 2014, 08:39:53 PM
Nearly every ruler of Asylon was an Astroist.  It doesn't matter whether you are in the religion or not.  If you don't follow the crowd you either get ignored or dismissed.  IMO it was much more fun developing a new religion and all the freedom that came along with it.  General disinterest in Dwilight post Jonsu/Blight is what is killing SA.  I don't see any messages to full members except when the private election announcements are made (the brief bit about a harem notwithstanding).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 18, 2014, 09:28:41 PM

Ummm... We are the underdogs again btw. Whatever few months of meager dominance we had in our one siccessfullish war against Astrum after innumerable defeats is gone, Asylon is the underdog. If you havent noticed our kingdom is spread out wider than D'Hara, our army was smashed at Unterstrom, our noble count has been way down compared to months ago. Yup sorry nice try but Astrum and Morek , D'Hara, Fissoa and Luria didnt suffer a bit in the invasion. Barca and Asylon are lucky to be alive, but to say that we arent the underdog is silly, we had a military victory against Astrum, a growing faith, we were going to be the next big thing in north western Dwilight with lots of plans and RP and thats smashed to pieces. Our faith doesnt even have a temple large enough for me to reconvert to priest and you talk about SA being dead... lol hilarious way to take the heat off but SA is positively thriving compared to what happened to us so give me a break with your belly aching.

Yea, right. Didn't suffer. Paisly, Paisland, Maeotis, Larur, Chesland, Chesney, Odona... That's all junk regions. D'Hara didn't need them. Obviously didn't give us anything. Never mind that for most of D'Hara's history, more than half of its economy was based on the western continent. That the realm's culture was based on the western continent.

Asylon had not been an underdog for years. The invasion displaced you, sure. So now you don't have much land. And you may not make it. But that's just the hand you were dealt. Asylon lived for a long time as an unstable and unfriendly hegemony.

Almost all of the things you've criticized SA for over the last few years have been way more applicable to Asylon than the SA block. SA has not been imperialistic since the early days of Dwilight. Your cult may have shrunk in territory, but it's looking to expand. SA isn't. It's stale and degenerating. It doesn't care to expand, nor even maintain itself. There would be plenty of reasons to call Asylon and its Cult evil and to try to wipe them out. That's not being done. There would be plenty of reasons to take offense at another church declaring itself to be a more proper form of astroism. That's not being done. There would be the option of seeking to spread the faith to the last corners it has never really reached, Fissoa and Barca, but still no collective interest in doing so.

Anaris talks about a gorilla. If SA is a gorilla, then it's an elderly one. With brittle bones, shortness of breath, and a variety of diseases. Sure, from afar, it's a freaking gorilla, it's imposing. But size doesn't make might on its own. SA is big, but weak.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 18, 2014, 10:48:06 PM
Well if SA is dying its because many of you killed it by driving out anyone who was motivated to cause drama and RP potential. Instead of running with some weird ideas and making the church more maleable as a RP narrative many of you set its trajectory in stone by having the entire RP narrative set im stone since day one and anyone who tried to add to it was driven out with heresy charges or other phobic type ideas that bled everyone out. Thankfully Asylon has welcomed every trouble maker from Dwilight into our kingdom to spice things up.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 18, 2014, 11:53:16 PM
If SA was as exclusive as you describe it, it wouldn't be so big.

On the contrary, it's problem lies with the fact that it is bloated with people who, at best, don't want to see it mingling in their lives and, at worst, actively seeking to bring it down. There's nothing to federate everyone together, because you just can't find enough dedicated people anymore. Enoch and Jonsu, with their crap, succeeded in dissolving what little was left of that cohesion. They dissolved the core that was left. The council used to at least represent the Church, but it is now stuck with a structure and leaders placed by the heretics.

And by being bloated as such, there's no opportunity for zeal or piousness. It's already at the top, there's nowhere else to go but down. And as such, even should there be a few people who truly want to dedicate themselves to the church, they would have a hard time proving any of it to anyone.

Those who stroke the killing blow did not care for "drama and RP". And fun does not limit itself to destroying what others have built.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 19, 2014, 12:03:57 AM
Oh well the sanbox is muddied. Build a new Astroism or something. Eventually another faith or kingdom or man will rise up from the ashes of this time in our history and rekindle the flames in Dwilight. Ding dong SA is dead... Long live the victors so that they will one day die also.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 19, 2014, 12:23:01 AM
Dwilight is now just like any other continent. Do you see a glorious and successful religion on another continent? I don't. And you won't see another again on Dwilight either.

SMA is now just an OOC letter policy, at best. I've seen even the most ridiculous names on characters who had been on the continent for a very long time. Oh and how about that character who is supposed to actually be two characters in one...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on July 19, 2014, 12:48:34 AM
Dwilight is now just like any other continent. Do you see a glorious and successful religion on another continent? I don't. And you won't see another again on Dwilight either.

SMA is now just an OOC letter policy, at best. I've seen even the most ridiculous names on characters who had been on the continent for a very long time. Oh and how about that character who is supposed to actually be two characters in one...

If you see something, say something. The Titans are many things, but psychic isn't among them, and they simply cannot act on things they don't know anything about.

As for the two-characters-in-one, she was told that she'd have to change her character or leave, and she left.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 19, 2014, 01:05:05 AM
If you see something, say something. The Titans are many things, but psychic isn't among them, and they simply cannot act on things they don't know anything about.

As for the two-characters-in-one, she was told that she'd have to change her character or leave, and she left.

The character with the silly name I'm thinking of, which I don't recall well, was a noble of another realm. I only heard of him months after he joined Dwilight. I think he even had gotten promotions within his realm, such as lordships or the like.

Perhaps the titans still would act on it, if reported. But that was kind of the point. It wasn't.

Unfortunately, I don't recall the name. I think he belonged to some northern realm, but I can't say if it was Asylon or Libero, or some other.

In any case, I would be shocked and surprised if anyone at all would come forward and claim that the game culture of Dwilight is the same as in its first years.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on July 19, 2014, 01:13:52 AM
In any case, I would be shocked and surprised if anyone at all would come forward and claim that the game culture of Dwilight is the same as in its first years.

Of course it's not. The culture of all the parts of the game changes and evolves constantly. Sometimes this is for the better, sometimes it is for the worse.

Dwilight's introduction with SMA definitely changed the culture in the rest of the game, too. Again, some of that was for the better, and some of it was for the worse.

But it will keep changing. Our job is just to try and gently guide it towards the "better" side.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 19, 2014, 01:50:38 AM
Chenier makes it sound as if SA is entitled or we are entitled to keep Dwilight with SA because for some reason SA is special or more special than any other religion / kingdom or playstyle. Just because SA was formed by some sort of council OOG before the founding of Dwilight by some collection of nobles over IRC and then had their hands held during the formative years of Dwilight when there wasn't any competition at all doesn't make it special... It makes it 'special' because of its specialness and nothing more and means nothing more to Dwilight than a passing phase in the history of the server, a mere mote , a blip and thing that happened and then faded away. Oh well, and its insulting to say that 'Dwilight' is like any other shard because SA is so special, its insulting to the other players who have worked hard to build their own cultures, religions and realms without any help from the server being fresh and new back in the day or having your entire continent wiped out by a calamity. Its an insult and SA entitled to nothing on Dwilight, the only thing you get is hard work and struggle to build what you have and you fight tooth and claw to survive in Dwilight or you fade away. The death of SA is the fault of every single member of that religion and no one elses fault.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 19, 2014, 03:00:40 AM
There's a reason I stopped replying to you, and thus it will be my last reply.

I never suggested that SA should be "saved". It's gone. It's over.

You also seem, for the sake of the argument, to claim my position is held out of ego. But you very well know that my character did not convert to SA until, relatively speaking, recently in its history. My dwi characters spent their careers, until that moment, to contain SA growth and influence. Maybe not to oppose it as you do, but to seek to contain it nonetheless. My character was one of the most, if not the most influential members of Verdis Elementum, which until, again relatively recently, was the only significant secondary religion. Spread over half a dozen realms or so, multiple dozen nobles, a lot of temples and really big ones, etc. Even your so precious bloodmoon cult never really gained influence in more than one realm at a time. And that was most of my doing. I'm not aware of any other VE member who proselytized as Machiavel did, until he left it. None of SA's success can be attributed to me. Indeed, if it weren't for me, it'd have no doubt grown a lot quicker in certain parts of the world.

And yes, special circumstances made it what it was. But why it got to be what it was changes nothing to what it became: the only truly meaningful religion in the game. Some other religions were fun. Some other religions managed to have an impact. But none of them every became as meaningful as SA did. And by extension, no continent ever really had religion as a meaningful driving force. It's always there for flavor more than anything. It's impacts are secondary to mundane politics.

It was nice to have a continent that had a religion whose importance could be likened to medieval Europe. We will never have that again. I'm sure you love that little club you built, but it'll never compare.

And really, I've been repeating how SA was killed from within. Why are you suggesting I'm saying otherwise?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 19, 2014, 03:14:48 AM
Your story of how SA was created is also completely bogus. The only thing that having to do with the creation of SA that happened happened before the island was created was that Morek was determined by Tom to be a theocracy, and by Jesse Fireisle to be devoted to the three red stars in the west. (If you'll recall, Jesse won the Dwilight banner contest for Morek, and his reward was a free character to be the ruler of Morek. He earned the right and honor to make that determination.) Nearly everything else was determined by the players that started in Morek, and all done IG. This was the prime attraction to SA for many of us. A brand new religion that were helped make, and made meaningful like no other religion ever was.

Was it privileged? In a way,yes. But everyone else on Dwilight had the same  chance. We were the only ones that took it. There were a couple others that tried, even in the north. The Seven and Torenism. We were just more successful.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 19, 2014, 08:52:33 AM
Cult of Bloodmoon never had a chance to be an influence because the devs wiped us out right when Asylon was becoming influential.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 19, 2014, 03:28:33 PM
Damn devs. Always stomping on Asylon's fun.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 19, 2014, 06:34:49 PM
Damn devs. Always stomping on Asylon's fun.

Well at least we don't quit Dwilight because your realm is getting beaten in a war.  :P
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Tandaros on July 19, 2014, 08:06:06 PM
I don't think SA is over yet. It is only dead if people give up on it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 19, 2014, 10:19:04 PM
As far as we outside of the theocracies are concerned its alive and well and worth fighting against... Glad to know we are finally winning  8)

When the last Astroist lands are taken we shall grow the most potent bloodmoon fruit by the light of the stars.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on July 20, 2014, 01:59:48 AM
I'm sad to hear that SA is still dying. I knew entropy and sycophants were already putting SA on the downturn, but I had hoped that Helm and Kabrinski could usher in a grand ol' revival in the face of turmoil. Shame the schisms didn't really take, and no religious war erupted.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 20, 2014, 03:58:57 AM
Well at least we don't quit Dwilight because your realm is getting beaten in a war.  :P
Nice try, but your shot missed by a few miles.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 20, 2014, 07:43:54 AM
Nice try, but your shot missed by a few miles.

Then what was the reason asides from conveniently quitting during a losing war when Astrum was haemorrhaging nobles?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 20, 2014, 03:24:31 PM
Boredom mostly. I couldn't really find anywhere else to go. I was considering getting rid of him for quite some time. I finally made up my mind to move the duchy to Corsanctum, to see if I could drive something interesting. But before I could get somewhere to do it, the region starved itself rogue. Convenient enough. Brance dies of starvation.

Really, the character was done. He'd done everything I wanted him to do, and more. He was at a dead end. Time to move on, and allow some other people to take over and run the story.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 20, 2014, 10:32:27 PM
But... Ok come back to Dwilight now.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Qyasogk on July 20, 2014, 10:58:27 PM
Enoch and Jonsu did immeasurable damage to SA and to Dwlight as a whole, that cannot be overstated. And after all that drama, a little boring quiet suits the vast number of SA faithful just fine. That and half of Dwlight was overrun, so some of us have been a little busy just trying to survive. When our homes are settled and safe, we will return to pursuits of the mind and the soul.

I must say it's interesting how often and regularly Chenier beats the "SA is dead" drum. Doesn't really make any of it true. This thread has way more people who are anti-SA and so the conversation is not really an accurate reflection of reality.

But don't let that stop you banging on your drum.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 21, 2014, 02:45:25 AM
Enoch and Jonsu did immeasurable damage to SA and to Dwlight as a whole, that cannot be overstated. And after all that drama, a little boring quiet suits the vast number of SA faithful just fine. That and half of Dwlight was overrun, so some of us have been a little busy just trying to survive. When our homes are settled and safe, we will return to pursuits of the mind and the soul.

I must say it's interesting how often and regularly Chenier beats the "SA is dead" drum. Doesn't really make any of it true. This thread has way more people who are anti-SA and so the conversation is not really an accurate reflection of reality.

But don't let that stop you banging on your drum.

I'm not anti-SA, I just think it's now a shell of what it used to be. And I'm a pessimist, so I don't think it'll ever come back to what it was. Nor any other religion, for that matter. Especially not the drug cult.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: De-Legro on July 21, 2014, 03:06:54 AM
I'm not anti-SA, I just think it's now a shell of what it used to be. And I'm a pessimist, so I don't think it'll ever come back to what it was. Nor any other religion, for that matter. Especially not the drug cult.

Probably true, but then the same could be said of the realms of old as well. The game has changed, the player base has changed, we move on.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on July 21, 2014, 05:04:57 AM
Enoch and Jonsu did immeasurable damage to SA and to Dwlight as a whole, that cannot be overstated. And after all that drama, a little boring quiet suits the vast number of SA faithful just fine. That and half of Dwlight was overrun, so some of us have been a little busy just trying to survive. When our homes are settled and safe, we will return to pursuits of the mind and the soul.

I must say it's interesting how often and regularly Chenier beats the "SA is dead" drum. Doesn't really make any of it true. This thread has way more people who are anti-SA and so the conversation is not really an accurate reflection of reality.

But don't let that stop you banging on your drum.

That's quite the bull!@#$. SA is boring and has been for a while.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 21, 2014, 05:20:56 AM
I'm not anti-SA, I just think it's now a shell of what it used to be. And I'm a pessimist, so I don't think it'll ever come back to what it was. Nor any other religion, for that matter. Especially not the drug cult.

You are so bloody negative. What do you you want a static replica of an idea that doesn't change or evolve or die? Do you want a town made up of facades while we pretend its a bustling city. Everytime you say 'no kingdom or religion will ever equal SA on Dwilight' its you who are killing the server, that maybe our best days are ahead of us and its you who are already done and over. Some of us plan on playing on BM on Dwilight for the next decade if its up and running.

'Specially not the drug cult' Chenier you are a grade A *#%-Bag
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eldargard on July 21, 2014, 07:18:30 AM
I have to admit that I share Chénier's opinion about the Cult of the Bloodmoon. With such a controversial theme as drug usage at the core of the religion, it is going to rub a lot of people - like myself - the wrong way. I think that it will make it quite difficult for the religion to reach a level anywhere close to what SA has accomplished. Of course, only the future will tell.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eldargard on July 21, 2014, 07:21:21 AM
I have to admit that SA seems to be suffering though. From an outside perspective at least. My character recently sent a message to the church leadership via the temples asking about the religion and he has heard nothing back. It has only been a few days though and I am sure a lot of SA characters are pretty busy. Still, I remember being approached by SA priests without even seeking them early and often back in the time when Barca was new....
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eldargard on July 21, 2014, 07:24:51 AM
Also, I still hope that SA recovers and maintains its dominance in Dwilight. The idea of there being a main religion in Dwilight as there was in medieval Europe is just awesome.  Then it is just a question of of how religious you are, not of what faith you follow. Though I find it hard to identify with the religion, I so want it to continue to succeed!
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Wolfsong on July 21, 2014, 11:49:30 AM
You bastards should actually try to convert a Fissoan or two, so I can join in on this conversation.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 21, 2014, 03:30:01 PM
You bastards should actually try to convert a Fissoan or two, so I can join in on this conversation.

That's just another symptom.

And I'm not just dissing SA, or another other religion, for the fun of dissing. I've involved myself heavily in the religion game for as long as I can remember. I've founded a religion, I've helped others found religions, and I joined a number of religions of various ages, of which I often rose to elder ranks. Most of my characters have been priests for most of their careers. Guillaume, Machiavel, and Louis-Joseph, notably. And that's not counting the number of religions I've interacted with from the outside.

Religions are made to be inconsequential. It's built-in, inherent to their game mechanics. And players, in general, understand this. Some try to make religions matter despite their inherent flaws, but almost invariably fail. Some manage to be more meaningful than others, but very few manage to actually be a driver of change, instead of just a flavor coating on things that would have been done anyways for other reasons.

The argument that "make X (religion/realm/other) fun, and it will succeed" is false. But how do you measure success of a religion, anyways? Number of temples? Number of peasant followers? Number of noble followers? Number of noble followers who would actually listen to their religious elders if tasked with something? Number of noble followers who promote the religion of their own initiatives?

The Cult of Bloodmoon is not a successful religion by any standards. It is not a young religion, it is by now quite old. And yet it has never really spread beyond a single realm, migrating with its core as events dictate. Controversy may have a role in it, but it can't be blamed for it either. The Blood Cult, who openly professed human sacrifice, had, at its peak, followers in 6 or 7 realms, and being the state religion of one and a major religion in a few. Your success is lesser than that of Torenism­.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 21, 2014, 05:29:44 PM
I have to admit that I share Chénier's opinion about the Cult of the Bloodmoon. With such a controversial theme as drug usage at the core of the religion, it is going to rub a lot of people - like myself - the wrong way. I think that it will make it quite difficult for the religion to reach a level anywhere close to what SA has accomplished. Of course, only the future will tell.

Its a roleplaying game, its a great avenue to explore controversial topics. We wouldnt have Game of Thrones or Star Trek of people werent willing to explore controversial topics. Unlike real life you can explore a topic in a role played setting without having to screw up your life. Drugs have always played a huge part in civilization. From the opium wars in China, to Afghanistan and beyond. I think it adds an excellent real world issue to Dwilight that can be explored in the Dwilight context, an element that allows the world to have more depth than being a mere playground for nobles and religious crusades but a real social issue that can be used either to redeem a character or condemm them. So many of the roleplays and ideas never take into account the society in Dwilight and its environment. How we encroach on nature, how we hunt the monsters to exitinction , how we enslave populations and convert them by the sword. Dwilight and BM shouldnt be a kids game, its a low-fantasy hardcore political simulator and if you cannot seperate your distaste for 'drugs' or violence or poltical intrigue from real life it is you who have the problem with roleplay in BM anf the ability to immerse your character in the liquids of autonomy and creation.


And Chenier, we are not looking for your version of success, nor we looking to be the next SA, we are happy being on the fringe doing our thing, surviving day to day and spreading the holy words of the fold.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on July 21, 2014, 05:39:09 PM
Dwilight and BM shouldnt be a kids game, its a low-fantasy hardcore political simulator and if you cannot seperate your distaste for 'drugs' or violence or poltical intrigue from real life it is you who have the problem with roleplay in BM anf the ability to immerse your character in the liquids of autonomy and creation.

I don't think he's suggesting that the CoB should be disallowed because of the drug theme. I think he's suggesting that that theme will simply turn a lot of people off from it. And I think he's right—but I also agree with you, that this is some of the kind of thing that should absolutely exist in BattleMaster.

Just don't ever expect it to become the norm :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eldargard on July 21, 2014, 06:04:39 PM
I am totally fine with the CoB being around. Human sacrifices and drug usage make for a very interesting religion. Such religions exist in many works of fiction. It is my belief, however, that a religion that revolves around any controversial topic or any topic considered negatively by modern mainstream standards is unlikely to achieve the kind of wide spread acceptance SA has.

Also, while I do not suggest that BM be rated G I do think it best to remember that some kids DO play. I have even considered getting my own kids involved one day and I would hate for people to write in a manner only suitable for mature adult audiences (perhaps immature adult audiences would be worse?).

As far as separating the fiction from ones personal views, I doubt anyone can manage this 100%. Besides, some people have had to deal with serious physical/emotional/mental distress/damage and even reading about similar events can really impact them. So in all honesty, should someone object with a particular fictional element I have introduced (I have introduced a few controversial RPs) and am asked to tone it down, I give my fellow player the benefit of the doubt and respect their request and do not suggest that they grow up, accept that BM is not a kids game and that they have problems if they can not immerse themselves in the awesomeness of my RPs.

I am not saying you would do otherwise, but I am saying your comment could be seen as harsh. On with the fun!

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 21, 2014, 06:44:37 PM
Its a roleplaying game, its a great avenue to explore controversial topics.
In a sense, this is true. So long as you can find other players willing to cooperate in that exploration. YOu just have to be aware that when other players object to particular controversial topics, that you don't tell them to pack sand, and continue to ram it in their faces.

Quote
Drugs have always played a huge part in civilization. From the opium wars in China, to Afghanistan and beyond. I think it adds an excellent real world issue to Dwilight that can be explored in the Dwilight context, an element that allows the world to have more depth than being a mere playground for nobles and religious crusades ...
All this is true.

I have toyed with the idea of using drug-induced visions as a source of religious inspiration. Every time I think about it, though, I cringe at the thought of it being done in the manner I've typically seen: Hippies, watery eyes, marijuana euphemisms, and munchies. I have to admit that, from what I have see, the CoB on Dwilight has generally managed to avoid that kind of thing. Perhaps it is because it, so far, has had limited reach? Or perhaps the people involved have managed to set a particular tone and expectation that makes that kid of thing rare or non-existent.

Quote
...  but a real social issue that can be used either to redeem a character or condemm them. So many of the roleplays and ideas never take into account the society in Dwilight and its environment. How we encroach on nature, how we hunt the monsters to exitinction , how we enslave populations and convert them by the sword.
The reason that this kind of stuff rarely gets explored, is because there are no consequences to any of these actions. We can't encroach on nature. We can't hunt monsters to extinction. We can't destroy the world. Our actions have literally no consequences to the game world as a whole. With no consequences to your actions, you can't have real controversy. You can't have social pressure and condemnation when the behavior being exhibited has no negative effects on the society.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 21, 2014, 07:06:41 PM
Reply to all of above,

In regards to the hippy munchy thing, we have no intention of doing that or ever allowing it. In regards to the drugs etc. I used to live in Asia where they chew Betel Nut. When people started saying that the tomb islands was tropical I thought about the flora and fauna of the area and used it in my roleplay. Originally bloodmoon was merely a stimulant. Then I started thinking about DUNE and the mentats and their purple lips and using the 'spice' to transcend reality and strategy to quicken the mind etc. thats where it comes from and bloodmoon essentially based off of the 'spice' of Frank Herberts books. It was also a way to address the fact that if SA gets to worship little red stars in the sky what level of low fantasy are we playing in? Are we allowed certain realistic elements of 'fantasy'? Is it a stretch to think that the islanders of middle Dwilight would use the local flora for cooking? Would they only eat European cuisine? Would their skin be darker?

Originally the idea of Bloodmoon was to be a guild if drug addled strategists that work for the different kingdoms. It wasnt until I figured religion could do the same thing that we founded the cult.

As for becoming 'popular' or the 'norm' we arent really concerned with that. What we want is to influence the culture of Dwilight long term and add 'spice' to the environmrmt to encourage imaginstive roleplay that transcends run of the mill euro-centric knights in shining armour roleplay.


And in rebuttal.. You have issues with drugs in a roleplaying game yet have no issues with graphic accounts of violence in battles?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Qyasogk on July 21, 2014, 07:38:49 PM
That's quite the bull!@#$. SA is boring and has been for a while.

Thank you for illustrating my point about who is participating in this conversation on SA. Your contribution to this conversation continues to be top notch.  ::)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eldargard on July 21, 2014, 08:09:58 PM
And in rebuttal.. You have issues with drugs in a roleplaying game yet have no issues with graphic accounts of violence in battles?

I never said I had issues with drugs in RP. I said that I do not think that having a religion centered around drug usage would have a hard time growing o the degree SA has and that I have not yet been interested in RPing a character who is a par of such a religion and doubt I will ever be so interested. I also said that a religion involving  human sacrifices and drug usage can be a really cool story element.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 21, 2014, 09:02:43 PM
I agree, anyways I dont want to hijack this thread anymore than I have and just wanted to rebuke Cheniers passive aggressiveness towards anything I say about our ig religion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on July 21, 2014, 09:36:36 PM
Always with the persecution complex.

I don't recall the last time I ever reported anyone of the forums, by the way. I'm not even sure I ever have. I think I've only done so once, back in a time I can't remember over something I don't recall.

I don't have any OOC beef with the Bloodmoon Cult. Though it's been a while back, I do believe drugs were used in the Blood Cult for certain special rites. Something special for the initiates about to ritually kill someone in some form or another, or to induce communion with a deity. Pretty much all of our RPs were logged onto the Blood Cult's wiki, if anyone is curious.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 21, 2014, 10:46:21 PM
Yeah we started sacrificing Astrum prisoners during the last war. Suffocated them in the heaps of Vakreno. We were using the 'heaps' to send a ghost army of slaves into the afterlife to fight on our side there...  ;D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Dishman on July 21, 2014, 11:50:38 PM
I have toyed with the idea of using drug-induced visions as a source of religious inspiration. Every time I think about it, though, I cringe at the thought of it being done in the manner I've typically seen: Hippies, watery eyes, marijuana euphemisms, and munchies. I have to admit that, from what I have see, the CoB on Dwilight has generally managed to avoid that kind of thing. Perhaps it is because it, so far, has had limited reach? Or perhaps the people involved have managed to set a particular tone and expectation that makes that kid of thing rare or non-existent.

I haven't really seen any pot-head religious types. I suppose people aren't real familiar with mescaline or DMT, so I can imagine people hedging the 'chemical enlightenment' RP, though. Not that I want a religion that reads like an errowid forum, but religion and drugs have always been good bed-fellows.

I took a different approach with Enoch. RP'd some crazy alchemy potion that let you breach the divine plane and parley with gods. Makes for a good deus ex machina (lol). The trip isn't what is important, its what the trip means.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 22, 2014, 04:40:19 AM
I haven't really seen any pot-head religious types.
Lucky you. "Medicinal herbs" used to be a big thing in Sirion on EC. You still hear mentions of it every now and then. There wee a few references to it in Morek in the early days, though it never really caught on. (Thankfully...)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on July 25, 2014, 03:04:06 PM
There was a weed religion in FEI too if I recall right, down in the south back when Soliferum was still alive and kicking.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on July 25, 2014, 03:49:10 PM
Wasnt that the Ikrif thing?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Sacha on July 26, 2014, 01:57:53 AM
I think so, yeah.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eduardo Almighty on July 27, 2014, 03:12:33 PM
Erik like to smoke a pipe. It's particular from a nice character in Sirion, Uncle Adrian, when the game was more... exotic. It's a way to remember, since I doubt it will shock more than other behaviors.

I'm having a good response with my last RPs in Luria and inside the Cult with Henrich. There will always be people who like and who does not. All opinions and criticisms are welcome, mostly because I need to improve my English.

I can not see how compare the CoB with the SA. They are completely different in structure, culture and objectives and I would like to see more religions in Dwilight -- with different cultures, structures and goals.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on July 28, 2014, 12:34:13 AM
Sanguis Astroism shall rule Dwilight.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on July 28, 2014, 01:04:16 AM
Sanguis Astroism shall rule Dwilight.

Thats the spirit...  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on July 30, 2014, 05:04:43 AM
As of now, random forum shot outs is all we really have.  We need to spice it up.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eduardo Almighty on August 04, 2014, 07:20:27 AM
I'm posting my RPs about the Cult here in the Forum.

And yes, announce it here is like to try to sell a Galaxy in an Apple Store, but hey, go there and enjoy a good reading!!! :)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on September 28, 2014, 02:42:27 AM
The idea of religious tolerance on an SMA island has to be one of the worst ideas I've ever heard
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on September 28, 2014, 05:23:52 PM
In order to survive against SA we've had to adapt a policy of tolerance. It doesnt mean we will maintain it forever ie: Muslims and Jews started off pretty buddy buddy but look at them now. Its just that the religions outside of SA have been rather non-entities. The history of Asylon required tolerance our kingdom was half SA and a smattering of other religions we couldnt isolate them to appease SA. SA's weakness was its intolerance it could afford to be intolerant because many if not all its nobles were SA and its regions were SA. CoB came about in the busy mid-west of Dwilight and needed to survive in different ways.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Antonine on September 28, 2014, 07:14:34 PM
Bear in mind that religious tolerance did exist in the middle ages - it was rare and only happened in unique circumstances out of necessity but it did happen in some places. And those places usually benefited as a result.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on September 28, 2014, 11:59:34 PM
I would like some examples of religious tolerance in the time frame that bm takes place.  I looked and could find none.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on September 29, 2014, 12:02:11 AM
Pretty sure examples have already been given here and there on the forums.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on September 29, 2014, 12:58:01 AM
I haven't seen examples.  That's why I asked
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eduardo Almighty on September 29, 2014, 05:33:56 AM
Playing as Priest of another faith in Dwilight is becoming a pain in the ass... two days playing, two/three days wounded.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on September 29, 2014, 05:46:54 AM
SA has almost all the followers.   ESA and CoB are declared evil by SA so the peasants automatically attack priests off those religions
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eduardo Almighty on September 29, 2014, 06:04:35 AM
Yes... and that's why is becoming a pain in the ass to play as a Priest in Dwilight. It's even hard to play...
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on September 29, 2014, 07:28:18 AM
You should join SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on September 29, 2014, 07:33:55 AM
The Varangian guard is an example of religious tolerance. The Byzantine Emperors embraced the Vargangians difference in faith for it made them hardier warriors. At least in the early days of the Vargangian guard, prior to the North converting.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Lorgan on September 29, 2014, 11:51:43 AM
Also Jews in Christianity and Christians and Jews in Islam. Remember you're playing Counts and Dukes, not ignorant peasant rabble.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on September 29, 2014, 02:25:49 PM
The Varangian guard is an example of religious tolerance. The Byzantine Emperors embraced the Vargangians difference in faith for it made them hardier warriors. At least in the early days of the Vargangian guard, prior to the North converting.


My brief scan of the wiki shows that they were pagans and didn't have an organized religion.  And they conveyed to orthodox Christianity fairly early in the time line
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on September 29, 2014, 02:40:44 PM
My brief scan of the wiki shows that they were pagans and didn't have an organized religion.

They were norse (vikings). The norse religion was pretty well established, with festivals, rituals, centers of worship, and clergy often forcefully refusing conversion and leading rebellions against christians.

And they conveyed to orthodox Christianity fairly early in the time line

It still took a few generations which, even in BM-time, corresponds to a few RL years.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Renodin on September 29, 2014, 03:35:07 PM
Eduardo:

You are sitting in a huge city with lots of SA followers, you are taking on a goliath task (staying with the religious term hehe). Its not supposed to be easy if I look at the game mechanics. That you are getting wounded so often is a direct result of your choices to take on such a task.

I wish you luck though, I for one have said my piece on it In Game hehe.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on September 29, 2014, 03:35:55 PM
The janissaries were christian soldiers serving muslim leaders from the 1300s on.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on September 29, 2014, 03:40:04 PM
Eduardo:

You are sitting in a huge city with lots of SA followers, you are taking on a goliath task (staying with the religious term hehe). Its not supposed to be easy if I look at the game mechanics. That you are getting wounded so often is a direct result of your choices to take on such a task.

I wish you luck though, I for one have said my piece on it In Game hehe.

I'm pretty sure all of the faiths currently considered evil by SA declared SA evil themselves first. For a long time, we've had reports of priests being attacked by mobs of the Bloodmoon Cult, while having it on ignore and doing nothing about it. When there finally was interest in reviewing the official positions on other religions, this was the tipping point that determined the end result as evil instead of misguided.

SA is one of the least oppressive entities this game has seen. If it keeps crushing smaller entities, it's because Dwilight has an overabundance of suicidal entities going out of their way to paint themselves as targets.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on September 29, 2014, 04:49:34 PM
The janissaries were christian soldiers serving muslim leaders from the 1300s on.

If I remember correctly, they were slaves that were kidnapped in their youth.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on September 29, 2014, 05:21:48 PM
If I remember correctly, they were slaves that were kidnapped in their youth.

I don't believe that is true. Janissaries were non-muslims (primarily christians) given a chance to earn privileges not otherwise available to non-muslims in the Ottoman Empire, and eventually became more privileged than the Muslim portion of the military (which lead to the decay of the Empire and loss of significant amounts of territory, but that was a bit past the middle ages when Janissaries started becoming that influential).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on September 29, 2014, 05:25:43 PM
Ah, you are correct vonGenf, the original Janissaries were conscripted slaves. Though kidnapped isn't a term I'd use personally, especially seeing as how well off they were in comparison.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on September 29, 2014, 05:28:51 PM
I don't believe that is true. Janissaries were non-muslims (primarily christians) given a chance to earn privileges not otherwise available to non-muslims in the Ottoman Empire, and eventually became more privileged than the Muslim portion of the military (which lead to the decay of the Empire and loss of significant amounts of territory, but that was a bit past the middle ages when Janissaries started becoming that influential).

Relevant info from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janissaries:

Quote
The Janissaries were kapıkulları (sing. kapıkulu), "door servants" or "slaves of the Porte", neither freemen nor ordinary slaves (Turkish: köle). They were subjected to strict discipline and were the first army to wear a uniform, but were paid salaries and pensions upon retirement and formed their own distinctive social class. As such, they became one of the ruling classes of the Ottoman Empire, rivaling the Turkish aristocracy. The brightest of the Janissaries were sent to the palace institution, Enderun. Through a system of meritocracy, the Janissaries held enormous power, stopping all efforts at reform of the military.

According to military historian Michael Antonucci and economic historians Glenn Hubbard and Tim Kane, the Turkish administrators would scour their regions (but especially the Balkans) every five years for the strongest sons of the sultan's Christian subjects. These boys (usually between the ages of 6 and 14) were then taken from their parents and given to Turkish families in the provinces to learn Turkish language and customs, and the rules of Islam. The recruits were indoctrinated into Islam, forced into circumcision and supervised 24 hours a day by eunuchs. They were subjected to severe discipline, being prohibited from growing a beard, taking up a skill other than soldiering, and marrying. As a result, the Janissaries were extremely well-disciplined troops, and became members of the Askeri class, the first-class citizens or military class. Most were non-Muslims because it was not permissible to enslave a Muslim.

So they were kidnapped as kids and did not have the possibility to leave the Janissaries, which makes them slaves. However they were paid and held some political power.

This covers the medieval period - past 1683 turkish muslim men could also enroll voluntarily.

Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: vonGenf on September 29, 2014, 05:31:18 PM
Ah, you are correct vonGenf, the original Janissaries were conscripted slaves. Though kidnapped isn't a term I'd use personally, especially seeing as how well off they were in comparison.

I imagine there were some families that would let them go voluntarily in hopes of a better life, yes. However it is probable that most of these kids never saw their parents again. 6 years old is very young, most of them must have completely forgotten their origin by the time they reached adult age.

Edit: This sources implies, as you say, that most would volunteer to become Janissaries.

http://history.howstuffworks.com/history-vs-myth/slaves-ottoman-empire.htm
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Constantine on September 29, 2014, 05:44:40 PM
Janissaries were slaves kidnapped, bought or received as a tithe mostly from Christian communities.
But they were all of course islamized and properly indoctrinated at an early age.

That said, unlike Christianity medieval Islam was often quite tolerant and enlightened, Ottomans being a great example here. Folks here seem to base their perception of medieval religious strife off of Christianity, but that's just one religion. And even medieval Christians had times when they were not irredeemably evil bustards. Like Spain during early Reconquista.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eduardo Almighty on September 29, 2014, 11:28:45 PM
Quote
You are sitting in a huge city with lots of SA followers, you are taking on a goliath task (staying with the religious term hehe). Its not supposed to be easy if I look at the game mechanics. That you are getting wounded so often is a direct result of your choices to take on such a task.

I know. Just crying a bit.
Someone need to convert these regions  :D
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on September 30, 2014, 12:58:44 AM
I'm pretty sure all of the faiths currently considered evil by SA declared SA evil themselves first. For a long time, we've had reports of priests being attacked by mobs of the Bloodmoon Cult, while having it on ignore and doing nothing about it. When there finally was interest in reviewing the official positions on other religions, this was the tipping point that determined the end result as evil instead of misguided.

SA is one of the least oppressive entities this game has seen. If it keeps crushing smaller entities, it's because Dwilight has an overabundance of suicidal entities going out of their way to paint themselves as targets.

Suicidal entities , painting themselves as targets... Thats not biased at all.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on September 30, 2014, 01:25:20 AM
Suicidal entities , painting themselves as targets... Thats not biased at all.

I've been saying as much since long before I joined SA.

If you don't want to get mauled, don't bitchslap a bear. On Dwilight, too many people did not seem to understand this. Those who applied a non-confrontation agenda towards SA, even if subversive to it, were left alone to do their thing.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on September 30, 2014, 05:29:33 AM
I've been saying as much since long before I joined SA.

If you don't want to get mauled, don't bitchslap a bear. On Dwilight, too many people did not seem to understand this. Those who applied a non-confrontation agenda towards SA, even if subversive to it, were left alone to do their thing.

Thats not true. CoB as a religion has never been hostile to SA, we have always allowed their temples to stand. SA has shut down our temples merely because of the association with Asylon. CoB came from SA, we recognize the effects of the Bloodstars on the sacred flowers of Bloodmoon. There was even members of SA in the past who partook in the eating of the sacred fruit. CoB is a wild offshoot from SA. Our intention from day one was tolerance. Things have changed obviously.

My original intention while in SA was to try and fuse elements of the idea of Bloodmoon into the church. Once I was excommunicated there wasn't much of a reason.

Unlike you Chenier I have ran a theocracy of the church. If they had very little use for a zealot like myself, you are then merely mud on a shoe.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on September 30, 2014, 01:34:26 PM
Thats not true. CoB as a religion has never been hostile to SA, we have always allowed their temples to stand. SA has shut down our temples merely because of the association with Asylon. CoB came from SA, we recognize the effects of the Bloodstars on the sacred flowers of Bloodmoon. There was even members of SA in the past who partook in the eating of the sacred fruit. CoB is a wild offshoot from SA. Our intention from day one was tolerance. Things have changed obviously.

My original intention while in SA was to try and fuse elements of the idea of Bloodmoon into the church. Once I was excommunicated there wasn't much of a reason.

Unlike you Chenier I have ran a theocracy of the church. If they had very little use for a zealot like myself, you are then merely mud on a shoe.

Little of what you say matters. What is the official stance? In game mechanics?

Because reports are that it is "evil". Maybe you have all that history of being nice. Well, SA also has all that history of not persecuting CoB. That only changed when we got the report that you had changed your view to SA as "evil". And I'm pretty sure SA only reciprocated well after all of the West was lost.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on September 30, 2014, 05:42:57 PM
We never declared SA as evil with ig mechanics. They declared us evil. We are still neutral.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on September 30, 2014, 05:56:35 PM
We never declared SA as evil with ig mechanics. They declared us evil. We are still neutral.

Then maybe someone lied. As far as the elders were concerned, CoB set SA to "evil". Which, if true, is something best left alone on such OOC forums.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on September 30, 2014, 09:56:20 PM
It doesnt really matter, SA has stated time and time again that they wish to rule all of Dwilight, militarily and religiously. Our job is to make sure that Dwilight remains a dynamic , chaotic plethora of civilizations , cultures and religions. We are the force of light beset by hegemonic darkness.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 01, 2014, 12:19:16 AM
It doesnt really matter, SA has stated time and time again that they wish to rule all of Dwilight, militarily and religiously. Our job is to make sure that Dwilight remains a dynamic , chaotic plethora of civilizations , cultures and religions. We are the force of light beset by hegemonic darkness.

Nobody believes you. You keep saying you like the underdogs, and you keep siding with the true behemoths (Aurvandil, Luria).
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on October 01, 2014, 06:17:55 AM
Have you left them any choice in the matter?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on October 01, 2014, 02:31:18 PM
Yes. They are responsible for their own choices. They were never forced into anything.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on October 01, 2014, 03:35:57 PM
Nobody believes you. You keep saying you like the underdogs, and you keep siding with the true behemoths (Aurvandil, Luria).

We are beset on all sides by every realm in Dwilight. This is as underdog as you get.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 01, 2014, 05:37:24 PM
We are beset on all sides by every realm in Dwilight. This is as underdog as you get.

No, it isn't. Repeating it doesn't make it any more true.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on October 01, 2014, 05:52:27 PM
Saying it doesn't, doesn't make it any less so. Care to explain how having every realm in Dwilight against you isn't as underdog as it gets?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on October 01, 2014, 06:01:18 PM
Asylon has always been in that position because that's where they have chosen to be. You don't get to choose your spot and then bitch about how crappy it is.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Stabbity on October 01, 2014, 06:07:31 PM
Ding! A constructive post. We could even expound upon it.

Asylon screwed itself pretty hard in the war against Kabrinskia by being overzealous in its prosecution. It had allies, but then completely alienated itself, and took very few steps towards rekindling alliances with anyone other than realms that were pretty much universally hated (barring Niselur)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on October 01, 2014, 06:56:13 PM
Having said that, I'm not bitching about the path that Asylon has taken. They've had a wild ride, and I bet that the players in it had a hell of a lot of fun along the way. My issue is with the characterization of Asylon as the persecuted victim. That's a load of propaganda crap.

Asylon had a long history of involving themselves in everyone else's business, because they just couldn't handle the fact that no one wanted to play with them. Other than Kabrinskia, pretty much everyone's policy toward Asylon was "go away and leave us alone".
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 01, 2014, 08:29:29 PM
moderator note: I'm nuking this one. It's a response to a 6 month old post that is destined to restart a flame war. What prompted you to respond to this now is beyond me. Just let it go.  -Indirik
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on October 02, 2014, 02:16:22 AM
Persecuted? We have never been or feel persecuted. We are victorious and if it wasnt for the monster invasion they'd be speaking Asylonian from Astrum to the shores of D'Hara.

Asylon always had a policy of limited alliances, few allies and a philosophy of total eternal war. Joining Luria insured us that. Joining any other realm would have insured boredom.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on October 02, 2014, 06:06:28 PM
Mod note: I've nuked the flaming. Please stop. This argument ended months ago. If you insist on flaming each other, then do it in private.[/quote]
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: CyberGenesis on October 04, 2014, 05:49:38 AM
Persecuted? We have never been or feel persecuted. We are victorious and if it wasnt for the monster invasion they'd be speaking Asylonian from Astrum to the shores of D'Hara.

Asylon always had a policy of limited alliances, few allies and a philosophy of total eternal war. Joining Luria insured us that. Joining any other realm would have insured boredom.

This is the most beautiful reason I've ever seen to join Luria.

Having said that, I'm not bitching about the path that Asylon has taken. They've had a wild ride, and I bet that the players in it had a hell of a lot of fun along the way. My issue is with the characterization of Asylon as the persecuted victim. That's a load of propaganda crap.

Asylon had a long history of involving themselves in everyone else's business, because they just couldn't handle the fact that no one wanted to play with them. Other than Kabrinskia, pretty much everyone's policy toward Asylon was "go away and leave us alone".

Ever bit of SA propaganda i've ever read was "DEATH TO THE CULTISTS" so that is probably where a large portion of that comes from. However considering current developments in that regard, Morek's gone guano so the Cultists have no enemies left - except Alaster, and his days are numbered to whichever realm manages to catch him with an active ban first
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on October 04, 2014, 11:47:52 AM
Just Alaster and street1.2 million peasants.

Alaster has tried to be friends CoB but the aren't interested.  If it's a bet on survival I'd bet Alaster survives longer than CoB
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Constantine on October 04, 2014, 05:15:23 PM
Survival is pointless if he'll be unable to pursue his goals any more and even leave the realm that harbors him.
I wonder how he even managed to get banned from every Dwilight realm (except one?). Was he just so universally.. uh.. imprudent or is it some sort of a global conspiracy?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on October 05, 2014, 02:37:48 AM
Just Alaster and street1.2 million peasants.

Alaster has tried to be friends CoB but the aren't interested.  If it's a bet on survival I'd bet Alaster survives longer than CoB

Alaster hasn't tried to be friends with CoB. Alaster and SA have declared CoB to be evil. They have acted as if we are evil since before our founding. The only contact we ever recieve from SA is them asking that we of CoB rejoin SA and we'll be allowed to keep our beliefs... My opinion is this, why have a sandwich when you can have whole buffett.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on October 18, 2014, 08:06:57 PM
Duel to the death between the Justiciars for control of SA.  Who will win?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Indirik on October 18, 2014, 09:32:47 PM
And more importantly: who will care?
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on October 18, 2014, 10:47:30 PM
And more importantly: who will care?


Most are ambivalent.  Which has been SA's curse for a a long time.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 19, 2014, 12:31:49 AM
And more importantly: who will care?

My prediction:

If Helm wins, then SA continues it's previous slow decay. A few who left might join it back to temporarily hold that off.

If Alaster wins, then SA continues its new increased decay. Temples, shrines, and followers will continue to be destroyed until there is little left for him to use. SA becomes completely insignificant to everyone within a few months.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: dustole on October 19, 2014, 05:34:15 AM
Sexually only 1 temple has been closed down in a backwater region.   Nobles have tried to close them down but only one has been successful.  Most of the nobles who left or were kicked out have returned. 

I don't think SA is gonna just disappear like you claim.  Less noble followers? Sure, but all won't leave.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 19, 2014, 03:02:53 PM
Sexually only 1 temple has been closed down in a backwater region.   Nobles have tried to close them down but only one has been successful.  Most of the nobles who left or were kicked out have returned. 

I don't think SA is gonna just disappear like you claim.  Less noble followers? Sure, but all won't leave.

Give it time.

I'll close your temples, and you can't stop me.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: D`Este on October 19, 2014, 03:57:31 PM
Give it time.

I'll close your temples, and you can't stop me.

So why don't they just kick you? Unless you are a priest and you keep that class only to prevent them from kicking you from the religion, which would be strange if you did that, as you became pissed IC and OOC when Fulco was priest and you couldnt kick him from SA.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 19, 2014, 04:55:49 PM
So why don't they just kick you? Unless you are a priest and you keep that class only to prevent them from kicking you from the religion, which would be strange if you did that, as you became pissed IC and OOC when Fulco was priest and you couldnt kick him from SA.

Fulco became a priest specifically to not get kicked, had never been one before as far as I can tell.

Machiavel has been a priest for years. Temples he's closed and peasants he deconverted were the ones he built and converted himself.

Fulco sided with the most hated heretic of the Church. Machiavel sided against an usurper placed in power by her.

Are you really going to claim you can't see a difference between these two cases?

I've always argued for priest power and protection within a church to be directly proportional to his contribution to it. And Machiavel has been a priest of SA longer than Alaster has been on Dwilight.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on October 19, 2014, 04:57:19 PM
Any character that becomes or remains a priest of a religion solely to avoid being kicked out while he deliberately sabotages that religion is clearly no longer a true follower of the religion, and is abusing game mechanics.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 19, 2014, 05:01:53 PM
Any character that becomes or remains a priest of a religion solely to avoid being kicked out while he deliberately sabotages that religion is clearly no longer a true follower of the religion, and is abusing game mechanics.

What about elders who deliberatly sabotage the religion by making it so that nobody wants to be part of it anymore, eh?

Jonsu and Alaster took actions that would obviously hollow it out from within. Alaster even went about and kicked a bunch of people. I really don't see it any differently.

The true followers of the religion are those who oppose it being usurped and perverted. Not those who decide to go along with whatever clown was put at the top without anyone being consulted.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on October 19, 2014, 05:08:41 PM
What about elders who deliberatly sabotage the religion by making it so that nobody wants to be part of it anymore, eh?

Jonsu and Alaster took actions that would obviously hollow it out from within. Alaster even went about and kicked a bunch of people. I really don't see it any differently.

The true followers of the religion are those who oppose it being usurped and perverted. Not those who decide to go along with whatever clown was put at the top without anyone being consulted.

There is a substantial difference between making major changes in a religion's doctrine or political structure from the top, and simply doing your level best as a priest to turn peasants away from that religion and close down its temples.

If your character does not believe in Sanguis Astroism as it is currently structured, then he should no longer be part of it. The only reason you have for remaining in it is so that you can reduce the number of people believing in it—an act that is obviously antithetical to the actual goals of any religion—without having to do the work of setting up a competing religion, or run the risk of being attacked by the peasants you're trying to convert to a competing religion.

I don't care if the religion in question is Sanguis Astroism, the Blood Cult, or Yet Another Pointless State Religion. No one gets to pretend to be a believer or priest of any religion just to deliberately reduce the religion's following. Damaging the religion politically out of ambition and attempts to take control of it, even to change its doctrine to something they know would be disliked by a majority of its current followers, are a completely different matter.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eduardo Almighty on October 19, 2014, 05:12:53 PM
Quote
Give it time.

I'll close your temples, and you can't stop me.

Sounds like Erik before a yellow message  8)
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 19, 2014, 05:16:53 PM
There is a substantial difference between making major changes in a religion's doctrine or political structure from the top, and simply doing your level best as a priest to turn peasants away from that religion and close down its temples.

If your character does not believe in Sanguis Astroism as it is currently structured, then he should no longer be part of it. The only reason you have for remaining in it is so that you can reduce the number of people believing in it—an act that is obviously antithetical to the actual goals of any religion—without having to do the work of setting up a competing religion, or run the risk of being attacked by the peasants you're trying to convert to a competing religion.

I don't care if the religion in question is Sanguis Astroism, the Blood Cult, or Yet Another Pointless State Religion. No one gets to pretend to be a believer or priest of any religion just to deliberately reduce the religion's following. Damaging the religion politically out of ambition and attempts to take control of it, even to change its doctrine to something they know would be disliked by a majority of its current followers, are a completely different matter.

Every. Single. Faithful. has publicly opposed Alaster.

If the game won't handle schisms or give us tools to get rid of usurpers, then that's not the players' fault.

Enoch did not believe in SA. He was one of those, what do you call them again, spiritualists? He ran for leadership of SA, then put in the most hated heretic just to bring it down.

Enoch, Jonsu, Alaster took great power, without making any effort to improve the church, only to bring it down.

If you are going to tell me that that was more justified than a priest returning to the people he converted and telling them "you know what, the usurper in charge does not represent the teachings I told you", I call bull!@#$.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on October 19, 2014, 05:20:07 PM
Every. Single. Faithful. has publicly opposed Alaster.

Then they should all leave, and start a competing religion en masse.

Quote
If the game won't handle schisms or give us tools to get rid of usurpers, then that's not the players' fault.

Well, I've had plans for it for years, but I just haven't had time. Sorry.

That doesn't give you license to abuse game mechanics.

Quote
Enoch did not believe in SA. He was one of those, what do you call them again, spiritualists? He ran for leadership of SA, then put in the most hated heretic just to bring it down.

That's a political struggle. That's frustrating, and ugly, but as far as the rules are concerned, fine. There's a fundamental difference between that and abusing the mechanics of a priest to deliberately deconvert believers.

Quote
If you are going to tell me that that was more justified than a priest returning to the people he converted and telling them "you know what, the usurper in charge does not represent the teachings I told you", I call bull!@#$.

You can call bull!@#$ all you want, but that's exactly what I'm telling you.

If your character does not believe in the teachings of the religion he is a priest of, then he is no longer truly a priest of that religion, and should simply leave it.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 19, 2014, 05:46:04 PM
Then they should all leave, and start a competing religion en masse.

Well, I've had plans for it for years, but I just haven't had time. Sorry.

That doesn't give you license to abuse game mechanics.

That's a political struggle. That's frustrating, and ugly, but as far as the rules are concerned, fine. There's a fundamental difference between that and abusing the mechanics of a priest to deliberately deconvert believers.

You can call bull!@#$ all you want, but that's exactly what I'm telling you.

If your character does not believe in the teachings of the religion he is a priest of, then he is no longer truly a priest of that religion, and should simply leave it.

Almost every priest action is a pointless deconvert action. ALWAYS.

There is no "deconvert"-named button. There is only influence follower buttons. And there is plenty of reason to influence followers against an enemy nation that houses a competing church. Now, if that happens to deconvert the region, that's just because of how !@#$ing pointless the priest game is. Alaster opposes ESA, which is housed in Luria Nova. That's the !@#$ing irony of it. I could be Alaster's most loyal follower, and conduct precisely the same acts as I do as his opposer.

Piousness is independant of whatever lame gamey shennenigans the guild leaders have. Players are not to be hostages to whatever clowns abuse of the ridiculous guild mechanics religions use.

And every single antecedent has backed up the IR of choosing one's class, regardless of how stupid the contexts were. To decide otherwise now, to overwrite the IRs on such an arbitrary basis, would completely contradict all precedents. A ton of characters became priests for the sole purpose of being immune to expulsion all while abusing of this protection. Their right to remain priests has always been defended and all titan complaints against them has always failed.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on October 19, 2014, 05:58:09 PM
Almost every priest action is a pointless deconvert action. ALWAYS.

Ah...no. First of all, there's that little option labeled "Preach."

Second of all, intent counts. If you're coming straight out and admitting—as you, and several others are—that you are deliberately using the Influence options in order to reduce the number of followers of the religion, that's pretty damning evidence that you're abusing game mechanics.

Quote
And every single antecedent has backed up the IR of choosing one's class, regardless of how stupid the contexts were. To decide otherwise now, to overwrite the IRs on such an arbitrary basis, would completely contradict all precedents. A ton of characters became priests for the sole purpose of being immune to expulsion all while abusing of this protection. Their right to remain priests has always been defended and all titan complaints against them has always failed.

You're both welcome and encouraged to remain a priest—once you have founded a new religion to be a priest of. There is no Inalienable Right to be a priest, or follower, of a particular religion.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: D`Este on October 19, 2014, 10:49:58 PM
Fulco became a priest specifically to not get kicked, had never been one before as far as I can tell.

Machiavel has been a priest for years. Temples he's closed and peasants he deconverted were the ones he built and converted himself.

Fulco sided with the most hated heretic of the Church. Machiavel sided against an usurper placed in power by her.

Are you really going to claim you can't see a difference between these two cases?

I've always argued for priest power and protection within a church to be directly proportional to his contribution to it. And Machiavel has been a priest of SA longer than Alaster has been on Dwilight.

Well, Fulco became priest before the elders told him they wanted to kick him, after that he switched classes so that he could be kicked. So actually, yes, I see a difference, Fulco changed his class.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 19, 2014, 11:59:12 PM
Ah...no. First of all, there's that little option labeled "Preach."

Second of all, intent counts. If you're coming straight out and admitting—as you, and several others are—that you are deliberately using the Influence options in order to reduce the number of followers of the religion, that's pretty damning evidence that you're abusing game mechanics.

You're both welcome and encouraged to remain a priest—once you have founded a new religion to be a priest of. There is no Inalienable Right to be a priest, or follower, of a particular religion.

Using and "abusing" these game mechanics have the exact same results. That's how much priests suck. You lose hundreds of followers for a 1% effect, if lucky. Using them for their intended purpose has the same effect as using them for any other purpose.

If "Influence followers" isn't meant to be used as a rapid "deconvert" action, then maybe it shouldn't act that way? Because there is no way for that action to be useful at doing anything else than precisely that.

It would be increadily easy to code the mechanics so that one cannot easily deconvert a region. If you don't, then that's because it is intended that these actions result in huge follower loss, and thus using them to do so is quite plainly using them for their intended purpose. As I said, that's the irony of the situation: Alaster was the one pushing the most to have ESA declared evil, and the whole of SA was pretty much united against Luria Nova: Influencing followers to decrease sympathy to Luria Nova is totally in line with what someone loyal to Alaster could have wanted to do.

And you should know full well that intent is an absolute !@#$ criteria, because the only way it can be proved is if someone admits to it. To have a rule based on intent is to allow everyone to break it with impunity as long as they don't admit to it, while the less insidious who admit to it get crushed by titan action. Rules on intent don't favor fair play, they do the opposite. And that's why generally intent was said not to matter. It was considered to weight the sentence, not to determine the verdict.

And please, are you really going to claim now that the Dev team and Tom never cited the IR for the impossibility of players to deport priests or for religion elders to kick them out of the religion? Because that's exactly the reason that was given every time the issue came up. Only recently did you start admitting that "yea, maybe that should be changed". But you did not. The game mechanics are exactly the same now as they were then. And influencing followers to lower their numbers is insanely tame compared to everything else others got away with before.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Anaris on October 20, 2014, 12:13:34 AM
Using and "abusing" these game mechanics have the exact same results. That's how much priests suck. You lose hundreds of followers for a 1% effect, if lucky. Using them for their intended purpose has the same effect as using them for any other purpose.

If "Influence followers" isn't meant to be used as a rapid "deconvert" action, then maybe it shouldn't act that way? Because there is no way for that action to be useful at doing anything else than precisely that.

It would be increadily easy to code the mechanics so that one cannot easily deconvert a region. If you don't, then that's because it is intended that these actions result in huge follower loss, and thus using them to do so is quite plainly using them for their intended purpose. As I said, that's the irony of the situation: Alaster was the one pushing the most to have ESA declared evil, and the whole of SA was pretty much united against Luria Nova: Influencing followers to decrease sympathy to Luria Nova is totally in line with what someone loyal to Alaster could have wanted to do.

And you should know full well that intent is an absolute !@#$ criteria, because the only way it can be proved is if someone admits to it. To have a rule based on intent is to allow everyone to break it with impunity as long as they don't admit to it, while the less insidious who admit to it get crushed by titan action. Rules on intent don't favor fair play, they do the opposite. And that's why generally intent was said not to matter. It was considered to weight the sentence, not to determine the verdict.

Your entire argument seems to rest upon multiple faulty premises.

First, that intent does not matter. Sure, sometimes it's hard to divine. That doesn't mean we aren't allowed to try, and it absolutely does not mean that when people flat-out publicly state their intent to abuse game mechanics, we can't punish them for it.

Second, that a feature having an unintended, abusable side effect, or being poorly balanced, means that we want you to abuse it. Sorry, but no. I shouldn't even have to address this.

Third, that the fact that we know about that abusable aspect and have not yet changed it, means that we intend for that abusable aspect to remain. Have you noticed the state of dev work lately, Chenier?

If you really want me to fix the problem of being able to deconvert peasants too fast with that option, I'd be happy to simply remove the ability for priests to influence followers at all, and tell everyone exactly why.

Quote
And please, are you really going to claim now that the Dev team and Tom never cited the IR for the impossibility of players to deport priests or for religion elders to kick them out of the religion?

No, I'm not going to claim anything of the kind, but I have never agreed with that interpretation of the IRs. Tom and I had multiple arguments about it.

If he wants to come in here and state that a priest who is deliberately abusing the fact that influencing followers loses followers is not an abuse of game mechanics, and should be protected and allowed to do whatever the hell he wants, then that's up to him, but that's what it's going to take to change this, Dominic.

So go ahead. Go tell Tom you want to be able to be a priest who is telling peasants, "Don't follow this religion!" and still get all the advantages of the protections priests enjoy. See how far you get.

If it were up to me, I would have long ago changed the code to allow priests to be expelled from their religions. Probably alongside the schism mechanic, so that if they really wanted to remain priests, they could try their hand at being the head of a religion, but that would have taken a lot more time.

Infiltrators already get booted out of their class if they go rogue, by any means. I don't see any reason why priests should have an effective inalienable right to be a priest in the religion they're currently in.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 20, 2014, 03:17:57 AM
Honestly, you could remove "Influence followers" from priests, and it wouldn't be a nerf. Heck, it'd be a boon. That action sucks at everything else than sabotaging your own religion. The more "advanced" you get access to, the worse it gets.

A senior priest with 100 oratory fame can't cause more harm to a region than what it can naturally recover by itself at TC. He can't fix a region any more quickly than a newbie courtier who just started out. He can't increase or decrease sympathy any more than a newbie diplomat. The deaths from his mobs will likely go unnoticed and will undo themselves within days.

It's an awful ability.

By the way, Alaster is dead, so SA is now somewhat "unsurped". It can now return on its slow path to death.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Antonine on October 20, 2014, 07:14:42 PM
Honestly, you could remove "Influence followers" from priests, and it wouldn't be a nerf. Heck, it'd be a boon. That action sucks at everything else than sabotaging your own religion. The more "advanced" you get access to, the worse it gets.

A senior priest with 100 oratory fame can't cause more harm to a region than what it can naturally recover by itself at TC. He can't fix a region any more quickly than a newbie courtier who just started out. He can't increase or decrease sympathy any more than a newbie diplomat. The deaths from his mobs will likely go unnoticed and will undo themselves within days.

It's an awful ability.

By the way, Alaster is dead, so SA is now somewhat "unsurped". It can now return on its slow path to death.

This is complete nonsense. I can say first hand that influence followers can be an extremely powerful weapon (and occasional regional maintenance tool) when used correctly. It's really good at lowering enemy realm control, for example. And if you can't find something useful to do with that then the problem is with you rather than the mechanic not doing anything.

That being said, reducing the number of followers lost by using it wouldn't hurt.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 20, 2014, 07:38:34 PM
This is complete nonsense. I can say first hand that influence followers can be an extremely powerful weapon (and occasional regional maintenance tool) when used correctly. It's really good at lowering enemy realm control, for example. And if you can't find something useful to do with that then the problem is with you rather than the mechanic not doing anything.

That being said, reducing the number of followers lost by using it wouldn't hurt.

My experience is always the same with these abilities. Zero impact, huge cost. Every time. Different characters (all top skills in oratory), different continents, targets in different starting condition, always the same result. Always. I used to think it was powerful and feared enemy priests, but that's before I became experienced at playing a priest myself.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Eduardo Almighty on October 21, 2014, 02:32:45 AM
I used it... unh... three times. Too hard to get followers these days to lose a lot of them to have a boost. But for your "purposes", hell yeah! The easiest way to lose followers...

It's like years of work to convert them, then you use one option... they've gone.
Title: Re: Sanguis Astroism
Post by: Chenier on October 21, 2014, 03:01:26 AM
I used it... unh... three times. Too hard to get followers these days to lose a lot of them to have a boost. But for your "purposes", hell yeah! The easiest way to lose followers...

It's like years of work to convert them, then you use one option... they've gone.

I've used them in regions with large populations, over 95% following, large temples, top oratory skill and as an elder of the faith. Mobs would cause somewhat more deaths than in less-optimal situations, but otherwise no priest action did visible or lasting damage. So even if you'd get these followers, it wouldn't be any stronger than what you've seen yourself.