The Marrocidenian war

[egamma]

Thanks, but I know how things are run in Aurvandil.

 The Commonwealth owns the land, and grants authority to the High Sovereign to delegate land as he pleases, the dukes may "own the land" but they lack the authority to remove the land from the Commonwealth, as the land is sworn to the Commonwealth first and foremost. Only the High Sovereign has the direct legal powers to say what is or isn't apart of the Commonwealth.

The Falkirkian Freestate didn't exist, but it still held the rights because the High Sovereign gave Falkirk a mandate granting them absolute authority over the territory and the permission to secede from the Commonwealth, thus they hold the right to the territory.

Game engine trumps roleplay.

[Chenier]

I'm sorry, what persecution exactly?

You mean the temples in the duchies of Madina and Paisly that Mendicant specifically ordered to be left untouched and remain as such save for one temple? Or the priests we allowed into the realm and gave legal immunity to? Aurvandil hasn't persecuted VE, however VE made a point of spitting in our face when they stole land and incited a Dukes rebellion in order to further their religious aims. Don't try to act like they've been persecuted, when at most Margrave Lex refused to let them build a temple in Madina after  Margrave Lucius went against Mendicant's order to tear down the temple, which was Lex's right to refuse them as it was his city, to which they responded by stealing an entire duchy and giving to the Grand Duchy and then trying to incite a war against Aurvandil, and failing that, incited one against the Falkirkian Freestate who held the right and claim to the lands they stole.

VE hasn't been persecuted, they just haven't got their own way as much as they'd like. But really, Aurvandil has been overly courteous to a religion we didn't need to be with and had no reason to be.

Temples were destroyed, threats were made. As I said, it could still be worse. However, it'd be a total and blatant lie to claim that no damage whatsoever was done against the church. It's not because Aurvandil could do worse that it hasn't done anything wrong at all.

You admit it yourself. "Save for one temple". That's already one temple too much. The Church hasn't counter-attacked because it doesn't want an all-out conflict, but that's a long way from feeling like it has been properly treated by your atheist government.

[NoblesseChevaleresque]

Game engine trumps roleplay.

Killjoy trumps people trying to have fun in a way he disagrees with, evidently.

Temples were destroyed, threats were made. As I said, it could still be worse. However, it'd be a total and blatant lie to claim that no damage whatsoever was done against the church. It's not because Aurvandil could do worse that it hasn't done anything wrong at all.

You admit it yourself. "Save for one temple". That's already one temple too much. The Church hasn't counter-attacked because it doesn't want an all-out conflict, but that's a long way from feeling like it has been properly treated by your atheist government.

No threats were ever given as far as I am aware, and if they were they certainly were not made by anyone with the support of Aurvandil in doing so. The temple that was destroyed was done by a rogue lord who was soon removed from power.

The Elementalists already stole a duchy, discussed waging a religious war on Aurvandil (I saw the letters where they speculated on launching a first strike on Aurvandil) and tried to enact religious oppression in Aurvandil by trying to force their religion on lords and regions that did not want it. You are right, it could have been worse, the Elementalists could have actually been persecuted like you say they were.

Also, Aurvandil's government isn't atheist by any measure.

[Penchant]

Also, Aurvandil's government isn't atheist by any measure.

They believe in the glory of Aurvandil and you are their god-king, or something like that-right?

[DamnTaffer]

Game engine trumps roleplay.

Game engine does not specify ownership, just leadership.

[Zakilevo]

Game engine does not specify ownership, just leadership.

Nope. Since they don't have any temples, they are just pagans.

[NoblesseChevaleresque]

They believe in the glory of Aurvandil and you are their god-king, or something like that-right?

It's only the northerners who have the cult of the God-king, and they're more than welcome to keep it in the north.

[Stabbity]

Harass Paisly and Paisland? You mean, outright take it away from Aurvandil, right?

Says the man who lost it in one turn of fighting to Aurvandil.

[Lanyon]

Says the man who lost it in one turn of fighting to Aurvandil.

I love you more than ever right now my freind.

Nope. Since they don't have any temples, they are just pagans.

or maybe i just have a secret shrine to mendicant on my estate. you'll never know unless you travel to fatmilak

[Zakilevo]

or maybe i just have a secret shrine to mendicant on my estate. you'll never know unless you travel to fatmilak

Nope. Unless you are willing to create a religion, you will stay a pagan. Can't argue.

Everyone believes in something in BM.

[Chenier]

Says the man who lost it in one turn of fighting to Aurvandil.

I was away when we lost Paisly. And I'm pretty sure that starvation took it from us, not Aurvandil. And that Aurvandil's TO of it when rogue took longer than one turn.

[egamma]

I was away when we lost Paisly. And I'm pretty sure that starvation took it from us, not Aurvandil. And that Aurvandil's TO of it when rogue took longer than one turn.

Correct on all points.

[Indirik]

It's only the northerners who have the cult of the God-king, and they're more than welcome to keep it in the north.

Where in the north is it that you think someone has a god-king?

[Lanyon]

Where in the north is it that you think someone has a god-king?

He's saying that northeners are the only ones that believe that.

[Chenier]

He's saying that northeners are the only ones that believe that.

"Why do the locals need religion when they have their Sovereign to provide for them" is basically what Mendicant has stated. If that's not an atheist statement, then it's a statement that proclaims him to be a god-king. Vice versa.