BattleMaster Community
BattleMaster => Locals => Far East Island => Topic started by: Indirik on April 14, 2013, 01:55:42 AM
-
So, since we're already halfway to dead, we might as well have a thread.
We finally have another ruler who isn't halfway down the road to autopause. Anyone think we can pull off a miraculous resurrection? Or will we suffer the most ignominious and embarassing death of all, and get wiped out by Ohnar West?
-
The latter.
-
We have Coralynth to save us!
At least we won't go the way of Papania.
-
Have you read the treaty you signed when joining the Empire? You get attacked, Arcaea helps you. It's one of the main benefits of being part of the Empire.
-
Sorraine's downfall will take a while. Of course King Edan could make a change. I must say I won't be investing too much in this realm, though I don't intend to impede progress either.
-
Just one more reminder that religion and politics tend to end like chocolate and water... one lumpy mess.
-
Just one more reminder that religion and politics tend to end like chocolate and water... one lumpy mess.
Mixing religion and politics worked more or less really well for the Vatican for more than a couple of centuries.
-
Mixing religion and politics worked more or less really well for the Vatican for more than a couple of centuries.
I'm sure it helped than there were a bunch of lords, nobles, and kings who followed their religion and, sometimes, cared to listen to the Vatican and took their faith seriously.
The conditions for Sartanism in the Far East seem less favorable, though I don't know your exact numbers.
-
Just one more reminder that religion and politics tend to end like chocolate and water... one lumpy mess.
Maybe in the 21st century. In the more liberal parts of Europe. Anywhere else or at any other time? Not so much.
But the thing is that BM IC culture is more similar to modern Europe than to anything resembling a medieval viewpoint, at least with regards to religion. You would have an easier time convincing Denmark to declare a jihad for Islam than making a BM state declare that it even has a state religion.
-
The problem with this is that the game is not really designed to model middle age religion. Religions in BM are local affairs that are easily started, ended and traded. Middle age Europe was united in christianity, mostly under a single church. Trading in, quitting or getting creative was suicidal. Unheardof. Punishable. The church of the time had the muscle to do it. Heck, the people had a will to see it done and did not need much, if any, urging on to take care of heretics.
This is why I so long to see Astrosim dominate Dwilight. Then we might have a change of seriously modeling what it was like to have have a monoreligious continent! It will never be the same though. I recall Anaris making a post about what he thought was needed to really model middle age religion. I agree with his post fully. I just wish I could find it now...
-
The problem with this is that the game is not really designed to model middle age religion. Religions in BM are local affairs that are easily started, ended and traded. Middle age Europe was united in christianity, mostly under a single church. Trading in, quitting or getting creative was suicidal. Unheardof. Punishable. The church of the time had the muscle to do it. Heck, the people had a will to see it done and did not need much, if any, urging on to take care of heretics.
This is why I so long to see Astrosim dominate Dwilight. Then we might have a change of seriously modeling what it was like to have have a monoreligious continent! It will never be the same though. I recall Anaris making a post about what he thought was needed to really model middle age religion. I agree with his post fully. I just wish I could find it now...
Yeah, obviously there's a game mechanics element to why there are no hugemongous religions. I still think there's a pretty large cultural element, too. You see people saying stuff like "religion doesn't mix with politics" or "religion is irrelevant" or "I believe in freedom of religion for everyone" everywhere, and pretending that that makes them super smart as opposed to just being bad RPers. Just because it's true and you believe it IRL doesn't mean your medieval ulta-conservative tyrant should believe it, too
-
No disagreements here!
-
Just because it's true and you believe it IRL doesn't mean your medieval ulta-conservative tyrant should believe it, too
You know I love you, Norrel, but medieval tyrants believed it all the time. They would get away with it if they could. They just couldn't, because sending the Church of Sartan packing is like a two on the scale of things that register as weighty decisions, while sending the Catholic Church packing was another matter.
Henry II comes to mind for an early Medieval King - 'would someone rid me of this troublesome priest.' And he was that way for the same reason that BM monarchs are that way: he didn't want people meddling in his business. Even worse for BM, religion doesn't bring in support or gold to the extent that it did in the middle ages, so your medieval King could at least count on a number of benefits from doing the Pope's bidding.
The medieval church was enormously corrupt and everybody knew it, down to the peasants who didn't know anything. They accepted it as a less bad alternative to another dark age. Heresy was very common, as were deals made between local bishops and local lords to enrich both at the expense of the Church (or vice versa). Which is why Henry II got his ass handed to him when he went up against the Pope more often than not.
The real trouble with making this happen in BM is that it would have to happen very quickly. Galiard isn't really anti-religion; he's just enough of a pragmatist that he sees inviting an organized church into his midst as trading away a significant chunk of his power in return for what exactly? Partially it's just that the Sartanist church is always its own worst enemy, but partially it's that Galiard knows his subjects will all get tended to anyway because all the religions are so happy to have followers that they'll take the table scraps they can get.
Crusader Kings models this very well, where you had holdings that belonged to whatever the local religion was, and making friends with them meant you got their tax instead of the church - and enabled you to make one of your 'own' bishops an anti-pope. Conservative tyrants like incentives. I agree that BM religion is not an analogue for the catholic church and I don't know that I'd want to make it one, but you could empower religion a bit more by making the priest game a little bit more about being a prince-bishop of some holding that non-priests can't have so that they can deliver the things medieval priests could deliver: gold, food, and even soldiers.
-
I don't doubt that that's true - there have been and always will be ruthless pragmatists. But, to my mind, they were more the exception than the rule. And I think there's a fair bit of difference between saying "this church sucks, I'm ditching it" and "religion and politics don't mix". As I understand it, medieval morality was basically 100% derived from faith, and so saying the above would be the medieval equivalent to saying "morality and politics don't mix". Do many modern politicians believe it? Probably. Would any of them say so openly? Hell no. Same goes for the medieval version.
I think heresy's a good thing for BM, I think it'd cause more religious conflict - you see that IRL, in that Abrahamic religions tend to hold pretty harsh grudges against each other in spite of being very similar, but at the same time are basically apathetic to outside faiths.
And yeah, I can see that there are like, huge reasons not to allow for state religions or whatever. There is zero gain for a ruler in doing it. Giving a faith a significant foothold is basically just ceding your own power for no gain, especially since the default stance of "all religions are equal, like I give a !@#$" is not only tolerated but lauded. But again, I see that as being part of the problem, not an excuse for it. I think that player culture and game mechanics exist in a viciously reciprocal cycle.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but almost all major medieval conflicts were at least partly religious in nature. This was the era that spawned the Crusades, after all. If ever there was a time when religion and politics mixed, it would be then.
Also, I just think the game would be more interesting if characters actually put some more weight into their faith. I don't really see the point of having religions if 99% of the playerbase is just going to say "they're irrelevant and I'll destroy anyone who tries to make them relevant"
-
This, in a nutshell, is Sorraine's problem. It takes a medieval attitude to religion while none of its neighbours do. This means that it winds up constantly isolated and pissing people off because of its state religion. When all it's neighbours have different religions, or have internal peaceful coexistence of religions, it's impossible for Sorraine to exist without pissing off somebody.
The only way it can escape this is if Sartanism becomes more dominant in places like Arcaea and Cathay. Then it might actually get somewhere.
-
Sartanism was doing pretty well in Cathay for a while. Sorraine's loss to Ohnar West and subsequent Imperial buy-out damaged the credibility of both the realm and the church to most Cathayans (whether fairly or not). If the church had said 'Sorraine lost the war, to the victors go the spoils' and let the realm fall and rebuilt something new, Sartanism would probably still be the dominant religion in Cathay.
But, to my mind, they were more the exception than the rule.
Henry II was probably further out than most, but so were really pious kings like Louis VII of France (ironically enough, Henry's spouse's first husband). If you were a typical medieval King you'd want to make sure that you had at least some of the bishops or archbishops in your corner, and that way everybody wins. You did have some big bones of contention like investiture, and of course the great schism.
especially since the default stance of "all religions are equal, like I give a !@#$" i
I don't know that that is a popular opinion, at least in the FEI. Edmund is probably closer to thinking so than Galiard. The MAE used to be very influential and he's stuck with it for a long time, and he did respect the CoS for a while until it imploded. What you're describing is probably more a symptom that most religions don't have very active constituencies - the Order has some great key players, for instance, but apparently not a heck of a lot in the way of active followers.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but almost all major medieval conflicts were at least partly religious in nature.
I wouldn't say almost all. Probably more true of the Renaissance than the Middle Ages. You certainly had your religious conflicts like the Crusades (foreign and domestic) and the Reconquista but 'most' medieval conflicts were local. The Hundred Years War had jack to do with religion and while religious influence was a major component in several wars (let's get the pope/the templars/the archbishop's money in on this) the wars themselves were not usually religious. If I had to generalize I'd say that 'most' religious conflict - that is, heresy - never made it to the 'war' stage because it typically involved really lopsided conflicts where the heretics were rounded up and set on fire.
Though if you measured number of deaths rather than number of wars, you might come ahead there. The sack of Jerusalem in the First Crusade and the sack of Constantinople in the fourth, as well as the Albigensian crusade add up to a lot of bodies. There's a quote from the Albigensian that would make at least some Norrels proud:
'"Today your Holiness, twenty thousand citizens were put to the sword, regardless of rank, age, or sex."
The streets of Jerusalem were said to have been a sea of blood after the Crusaders were done with it.
The big difference even between SA on Dwilight and medieval faith is that the Catholic Church usually incentivized rulers to do things. SA has theocracies which the Catholics never really had. BM will never see a successful crusade under current mechanics that isn't just 'allied theocracies fighting the same people.' The First Crusade didn't have Kings going along and it was famously difficult for later Crusades to enlist Kings. The First Crusade appealed to minor lords and second sons on the material plane, and a handful of rich and influential magnates like the Count of Toulouse on the spiritual plane with its 'all sins will be forgiven' bent. In BM you'd need the ability for the Count of Someplace to make his own war on a third party without dragging his whole realm into it for this to work.
Also, I just think the game would be more interesting if characters actually put some more weight into their faith.
I agree, but this is tough to turn into a game mechanic in a low fantasy world. I'd love to play a zealot. I just don't want to be the only zealot in the room.
-
Sartanism was doing pretty well in Cathay for a while. Sorraine's loss to Ohnar West and subsequent Imperial buy-out damaged the credibility of both the realm and the church to most Cathayans (whether fairly or not). If the church had said 'Sorraine lost the war, to the victors go the spoils' and let the realm fall and rebuilt something new, Sartanism would probably still be the dominant religion in Cathay.
Is this still the case? The CoS lost basically all of its followers, but, as I understand it, all those people are still Sartanists. They just don't hold to the Church.
Pretty hilariously, it seems like William's only real major contribution, religion wise, was destroying the CoS's grasp on Cathay.
I don't know that that is a popular opinion, at least in the FEI. Edmund is probably closer to thinking so than Galiard. The MAE used to be very influential and he's stuck with it for a long time, and he did respect the CoS for a while until it imploded. What you're describing is probably more a symptom that most religions don't have very active constituencies - the Order has some great key players, for instance, but apparently not a heck of a lot in the way of active followers.
I'm not really talking about Galiard. But if you look at everyone else, it seems that religious tolerance is the mode du jour. Velax, Edmund, probably Rhosmyria, Ingall, and then hundreds more who aren't at the ruler level. So yeah, I'd say it's a pretty damn popular opinion. And this is on the second-most fanatical continent in the game.
I agree, but this is tough to turn into a game mechanic in a low fantasy world. I'd love to play a zealot. I just don't want to be the only zealot in the room.
I don't think a game mechanic is necessary. It'd be helpful, but not necessary. The major problem is the culture; as you said, nobody wants to be the odd one out. Once the ball gets rolling, however, you get a shift. You can see something akin to that on Dwilight.
And you wouldn't be the only zealot in the room, at least in Cathay. William's a pretty hard zealot (though he's softened up in recent years), as are a few others.
If people can find ways to be zealots in the real-life information era, you can find a way to write a fictional zealot in a low-fantasy setting. I did it.
-
'"Today your Holiness, twenty thousand citizens were put to the sword, regardless of rank, age, or sex."
Welp, looks like I need to find an excuse for William to commit religious genocide. What a badass quote, holy !@#$.
-
Despite the church's corruption etc it had pretty intense ideological influence. Any individual Pope might not be able to have his way, but as an institution the church influenced behaviour quite significantly. One reason for its immense wealth was that nobles kept leaving it lots of money, to get them into heaven!
Unfortunately this kind of thing requires more RP investment than most people consider worth bothering with. A sufficiently widespread & active church can reduce the ideological legwork required, e.g. SA, but then you have the problem of coordinating people into the same church. In particular, I've found, getting motivated and active priests together around the same idea can be tricky.
-
I think you do need a game mechanic to incentivize people in the same way that medieval nobles were incentivized by a, uh, life mechanic.
You could tie it into morale or loyalty (as it already sort of is for region lords) but also battlefield performance. You could tie it into recruitment or recruitment centers: the availability of holy orders. This requires a decentralization of recruiting from 'everybody gets troops in the capital' to 'everybody recruits their own subjects', which has been talked about for a long time but is such a big change that I doubt we'll see it anytime soon.
The trouble is that even with SA on Dwilight, most of its magnates are also secular magnates. You don't have many people whose primary duty is to the church, and even if you did you'd need such people on the local level as well. You need a reason to give a crap not only about the Pope but also the local monasteries and abbeys. Gold and soldiers make for pretty good reasons.
Is this still the case? The CoS lost basically all of its followers, but, as I understand it, all those people are still Sartanists. They just don't hold to the Church.
I would love to make the sCoS an actual player in these things but with the invite to sermon bug I don't see that happening any time soon.
-
I would love to make the sCoS an actual player in these things but with the invite to sermon bug I don't see that happening any time soon.
If it weren't for this pesky war you decided to start, William would already have gone to the temple and got himself converted, haha
-
Hey, I've got nothing to do with making our little war into a huge war. Galiard doesn't go to war out of boredom. You should know that, you've tried to make him do it enough times. :)
-
... Ingall,
Given Ohnars lovely position, expressing any more zealotry than we do already would be akin to painting a big target on our chests. The little attempt of the Way of the Dragon to stir up followers raised enough heads by itself.
-
Given Ohnars lovely position, expressing any more zealotry than we do already would be akin to painting a big target on our chests. The little attempt of the Way of the Dragon to stir up followers raised enough heads by itself.
I'm not blaming you, I'm just stating the facts. That you are forced into the position is sort of my point.
-
I'm not really talking about Galiard. But if you look at everyone else, it seems that religious tolerance is the mode du jour. Velax, Edmund, probably Rhosmyria, Ingall, and then hundreds more who aren't at the ruler level. So yeah, I'd say it's a pretty damn popular opinion. And this is on the second-most fanatical continent in the game.
I'll admit to this. Edmund has religious preference, but it does not influence his major decisions. As a follower of the Order, he'll tweak things where he can to help their spread and give support to other members of the Order when asked. He's not overly fond of the Church of Humanity as of late, so he ignores them, and he really doesn't like Sartanism (even pre-Order Edmund didnt like Sartanism), so he'd gladly fight against them. Everyone else he ignores.
When it comes to major political decisions I keep the peace and nothing more. There's no gain in Edmund becoming a religious zealot in a realm that, for the most part, preaches tolerance and cultural acceptance. That's not an OOC decision either, but IC considering the way the world around him is.
I agree, but this is tough to turn into a game mechanic in a low fantasy world. I'd love to play a zealot. I just don't want to be the only zealot in the room.
I played a religious zealot before Edmund and thought it was huge fun. The Trinity under Cid was harsh, unforgiving, and brutal and he was uncompromising in his beliefs. I don't think many people liked him, but he was carrying out a mission from the gods and he loved it.
More incentives in the game for characters like that to exist would be great.
-
More incentives in the game for characters like that to exist would be great.
Aside from having peasant followers actually contribute something (which the devs have repeatedly rejected), there isn't much. So long as religions are a net loss, there'll never be a real impetus for expansion, as there is for realms.
-
Aside from having peasant followers actually contribute something (which the devs have repeatedly rejected), there isn't much. So long as religions are a net loss, there'll never be a real impetus for expansion, as there is for realms.
Lack of incentives is a huge problem.
The Order has one of the largest peasant bases on the Island and has a fair number of Nobles. But we have no real actual "power" or way to galvanize or give incentives to our player base. There are WAY to many regions with 95% followers of the Order and a heathen Lord.
We'd love to be more zealous - we use to be, and we had all the secular "we love every faith" Realms try to wipe us out because we actually RP'd like we wouldn't tolerate opposing faiths. The lack of caring in the Order is mostly a result of that backlash now.
Hard to be "hard line" when the only thing you get from it is cast out by people who want everyone to get along (and then the game gets boring).
-
We'd love to be more zealous - we use to be, and we had all the secular "we love every faith" Realms try to wipe us out because we actually RP'd like we wouldn't tolerate opposing faiths. The lack of caring in the Order is mostly a result of that backlash now.
Hard to be "hard line" when the only thing you get from it is cast out by people who want everyone to get along (and then the game gets boring).
I find that kinda tragic.
-
It definitely requires players to willingly have their characters submit themselves to the religious authority. Get enough people like that in secular power positions, and you can make something happen.
-
It definitely requires players to willingly have their characters submit themselves to the religious authority. Get enough people like that in secular power positions, and you can make something happen.
Yes, but that is true for anything in the game.
Velax is "emperor" because people with authority will submit to him. It is no different and doesn't require game mechanics to implement.
Religions really dont have any more influence or power than what the players give them. Which is a shame - the priest game could be a whole lot more fun and intricate if there was more influence to be wielded.
That said, I've run a priest character for years. Its amusing at least to try.
-
It definitely requires players to willingly have their characters submit themselves to the religious authority. Get enough people like that in secular power positions, and you can make something happen.
If people need to willingly sabotage themselves in order for religion to work, maybe it's time to admit that religion, as a system, is broken?
-
Yes, but that is true for anything in the game.
To some extent, yes.
Velax is "emperor" because people with authority will submit to him. It is no different and doesn't require game mechanics to implement.
Well, that and the biggest damned a war machine on the island. So, yeah, it is a bit different.
-
To some extent, yes.
Well, that and the biggest damned a war machine on the island. So, yeah, it is a bit different.
Hey now, if we could "raise" our own armies, it would be a pretty damn big one. :P If not noble wise, at least cash value wise :D Something has to be said about Zonasa, Batesaor, Alanurs, Osaliel, Ortedail, Hadthes, and Masahakon all having Elder Lords :D
The Gold must flow.
-
A crusade feature would be really cool, where nobles of the religion choose whether or not to join in on the crusade, such that their realm doesn't need to declare war. Could be on a realm, and then those of the realm being crusaded on must choose to leave their realm to join the crusade, or be kicked out of the religion.
-
Hey now, if we could "raise" our own armies, it would be a pretty damn big one. :P If not noble wise, at least cash value wise :D Something has to be said about Zonasa, Batesaor, Alanurs, Osaliel, Ortedail, Hadthes, and Masahakon all having Elder Lords :D
The Gold must flow.
Hatdhes doesn't have an Elder lord.
-
Hatdhes doesn't have an Elder lord.
Ah, you're right, my mistake. Want to convert? :D
-
Oh noes! Ohnar West declares war on Sorraine!
Is anyone surprised that the Ohnarians would go back on their word, and attack?
-
Oh noes! Ohnar West declares war on Sorraine!
Is anyone surprised that the Ohnarians would go back on their word, and attack?
I'm surprised it took this long, and that their attack was so obvious. Now let's make sure we get our regions back!
Also wtf: this thread's icon is a cellphone?
-
I'm surprised it took this long, and that their attack was so obvious. Now let's make sure we get our regions back!
Also wtf: this thread's icon is a cellphone?
With Sorraine's track record for war I think you should worry about keeping what you have.
-
Meh, Arcaea will wipe out OW. With Cathay pretty much handled, Sorraine, Coralynth, and drib-drabs of Arcaea will wipe out OW.
Srsly, though, why the late entry? Seems pretty poorly timed.
-
Ingall wanted to attack before, but internal disputes prevented him. They've apparently now been resolved.
-
If Ohnar West had attacked a month ago they'd have probably won. They've missed the boat now though and I really can't see how they can expect to win.
-
Agreed. If taken more by surprise while the Empire was busy, they might have had a chance. Now some peasants in Sorraine will suffer for a few days, but then OW will suffer a whole lot more. Too bad we don't have the nobility to expand our lands :) Maybe attract nobles by offering Lordships?
-
With Cathay pretty much handled,
Yes, we've been handled. Please turn your back and go about your business!
-
Please turn your back and go about your business!
I don't have a choice!
-
Cathay aren't "handled". Hurt, perhaps, but not handled.
-
Also wtf: this thread's icon is a cellphone?
I started the thread with a post from my phone, using the WAP2 version of the forum. The icon for posting via that method is always a cell phone.
-
It's because Velax and I are hanging out in Fiji, conspiring together via cell phone to keep the whole island at war for as long as possible.
-
Hehe :D
-
Jeez, stop giving away our secrets. *muffled in the background* "More mohitos for everyone!"
-
It's 'mojitos,' you ignorant clod.
And they let you rule an Empire.
-
I always thought it was Mohito too :(
-
My mohitos come from Cuba, thank you.
The drink is also spelled Mohito and Moxito in certain cultural areas of Cuba."
-
::)
I forgot the Cuban house of de Vere.
-
Mojitos? Are Velax and Galiard going to start riding a giant talking wolf, munching cookies and hug tackling each other?
(http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/16220561.jpg)
-
Mojitos? Are Velax and Galiard going to start riding a giant talking wolf, munching cookies and hug tackling each other?
If they did, you better watch the eff out.
-
It's a giant talking tiger. Get it right.
-
Velax & Galiard on a Giant Tiger
Cavalry?
Number of men: 2 (3, counting Dodd)
Cohesion: 5% (frequent arguing about Tiger direction)
Combat Strength: 5,000 CS (most of it is the tiger)
Weapons: 100% (Jaws of Verbosity)
Armor: 10% (whatever, it's a tiger)
Training: 100%
Captain: Tiger (+all the things)
Encounter Setting: grrr
Deployment formation: clusterf*ck
Designation: awesome
Provisions: tiger treats (for tiger), scotch (for Galiard), Emperor's Mallet (for Velax)
-
(http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/37959185.jpg)
-
"Deployment formation: clusterf*ck"
This should be an option for all units in game.
-
It is an automatic setting for any unit that has both Velax and Galiard on it.
-
(http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/37959185.jpg)
I echo that sentiment ;D