Okay so, we know that the more pilgrims travel to a holy place the more influential that holy place, common sense.

The Ymaryn haven't outright said the Xoh gods aren't some sort of gods, that's not in our traits. Thus if our curious shamans and priests go to explore this really popular holy sight and see these gods being worshipped by a whole empire, then they will likely try to either prove their not real, which could backfire and legitimise the Xoh gods, or take this popularity as proof of divinity and bring some of the gods back to us.

It's how religion spreads in the real world, saying it won't with no reasoning beyond 'it doesn't fit our culture', which is untrue as cultures change and as I've said we haven't outright said their gods are not gods, it's not part of our culture, means you have to disprove why the real world examples of how religion spreading are not going to be applicable in this case.

So again, as others have said, the burden of proof has always been on you.

Actually the Ymaryn are pretty clear on the Xoh gods: demons from the Outer Dark, unnatural monstrosities to which only fools and madmen give worship. Powerful yes, but malignant and thus unworthy of worship.
 
Precisly we were abhorred by the bloodthirsty gods and priests, the key thing however is that we recognised them as Gods, albeit evil ones. And we only waged war on the priests.
Are you basically trying to get at the False God idea? I.e "Any God but our God is a False God and must be expunged".
 
Will we get other opportunities to increase the pilgrimage trade good? If it becomes an action, what is the description of the action?
Prestige.
We can boost this quite easily with our mega/extended projects.
Adhoc vote count started by Killer_Whale on Jun 8, 2017 at 4:43 AM, finished with 49730 posts and 75 votes.
 
Actually the Ymaryn are pretty clear on the Xoh gods: demons from the Outer Dark, unnatural monstrosities to which only fools and madmen give worship. Powerful yes, but malignant and thus unworthy of worship.
Where is this stated?
In the local religions informational post they are called gods, not demons, granted it is out of date but the point still stands until we get an update on local religions and our own solidifying pantheon
 
...yes, and waging war on priests of evil gods/spirits/demons fits a sacred war and a crusade to a t.

What is your point?
I'd call it a primitive crusade. A real Judaeo-Christian Crusade requires that the fighters believe that Their God is the only Real God, and all others are False and probably demons in disguise, or don't even exist. Which I think is the distinction maximillian is trying to make. They are both holy wars, but at a fine level, different. Not different enough to matter in my mind, I'll be honest. Not in this current situation.
 
Last edited:
A weak holy war CB would let us go to war with the Xoh. A strong holy war CB would prevent us from ever being at peace with the Xoh.
 
I just don't want our people being converted to the Xoh Empires bullshit religion, which is possible if they gain a strong enough pilgrimage advantage. If we are not careful we could end up seeing their gods becoming more dominant in the region.
I don't think it's feasible while we have an in-house Temple and conflicting cultural values, any more than Buddhists are going to convert to Kali despite being in the same area.

Our neighbors are at risk however, but since nobody is leading Religion, I suspect they're a long ways away. We're more likely to see the Thunder Speakers spread the legend of the Rainbow Pony.
I do not want us to become a crusading people, and since Xohyssiri clearly intend to go into this direction the clash would be early, and fierce.
More the Thunder Speakers. The Xohyssiri are in the game, but not really playing it well.
We can't become crusaders because of our inability to just up and declare war due to our traits.
It would probably not be very difficult to obtain a Holy War casus belli.
Actually what could happen is this:

We gain dominant in pilgrimage -> Someone else gets dominant and knocks us out -> We freak out and go to war (very likely if it's the Xoh) -> Crusade!
Too far away to wage war. More likely we'd freak out and build a dozen temples and pyramids instead(which plays to our strengths). Then THEY freak out and try to invade us, which is far more favorable :p

Of which is a very high number of people in this age.
Not very high. Lactose intolerance is culturally high in agrarian cultures with limited access to milk.
Due to our Sacred Herds deliberately maintaining a large population of cows that have recently given birth(and thus, produce milk), we actually have milk access only matched by Nomad cultures.

I figure our herders mostly churn it into cheeses because they simply can't USE nearly that much milk and you can trade cheeses.

The problem is over-extesion, but we might turn them on a colony...
They're actually less overextended than the Stallion Tribes despite the distance. Nice long coast, then the civilization itself is in hills and mountains.
Are you implying that there's something wrong with a good fight to test beliefs?
Greek Philosophers did their share of brawling too.

SERIOUS brawling, because many of their philosophers were landowner-soldiers in their youth. Which means that instead of clustered nerds, doing slap fights, you have Ex-Marines wrestling over philosophical points.
 
Are you basically trying to get at the False God idea? I.e "Any God but our God is a False God and must be expunged".

Yes

...yes, and waging war on priests of evil gods/spirits/demons fits a sacred war and a crusade to a t.

What is your point?


My point is finding the practice of a priesthood dangers is cause for war, believing that the war pleases the gods makes it sacred, but for it to be crusade, you need not fight against priests but belief itself.

For example the wars for slaves the azetics had were very much sacred and hyper ritualised. But ideological depute wasn't a factor in them.

The Romans destroyed a religion and God knows how many temples and priesthoods, the reason being they were in the way, and since we destroyed it, it must have been a pathetic god to begin with. The wars targeted priesthoods and temples, and definitely pleased the Roman gods but were by no means crusade.



You seem to think a crusade is the same as any conflict involving priests, temples or the rituals of worship. I hold that crusades are quite distinct and impossible in polythiest civilisations.
 
Which means that instead of clustered nerds, doing slap fights, you have Ex-Marines wrestling over philosophical points.
Our farmers are also hunters and trained to be part time Warriors much like the Hoplites, all I'm saying is that since everyone has to know how to use a bow, which requires a good amount of upper body strength, those slaps might be a damn lot harder then your average nerds
 
Last edited:
You seem to think a crusade is the same as any conflict involving priests, temples or the rituals of worship. I hold that crusades are quite distinct and impossible in polythiest civilisations.
I guess my question is, do you think there is much mechanical difference and like, difference in scale of the warfare, between a sacred war and a full on Crusade?

I admit I kinda got lost in my own argument here.
*Hugs*
 
I guess my question is, do you think there is much mechanical difference and like, difference in scale of the warfare, between a sacred war and a full on Crusade?




*Hugs*




My position is that crusades are wars of ideology. You are not fighting the soldiers or thier God(who you do not believe exist to begin with), you are fighting thier very belief system, thier ideology.
And you believe that the enemy ideology is anathema to your own, and thus cannot be tolerated in any form, it must be purged intellectualy and it's followers will see the light or die. You do this because you believe utterly and completely that it's the right thing to do.


A sacred war meanwhile is a war that is particularly pleasing to the gods, or allows you to do something that really pleases them. You fight the war to gain the favour of the gods.
 
So guys, with the Temple done and the Library a third complete, how long do you think it will be until our pantheon solidifies properly like the Greeks and Egyptians did?
 
My position is that crusades are wars of ideology. You are not fighting the soldiers or thier God(who you do not believe exist to begin with), you are fighting thier very belief system, thier ideology.
And you believe that the enemy ideology is anathema to your own, and thus cannot be tolerated in any form, it must be purged intellectualy and it's followers will see the light or die. You do this because you believe utterly and completely that it's the right thing to do.


A sacred war meanwhile is a war that is particularly pleasing to the gods, or allows you to do something that really pleases them. You fight the war to gain the favour of the gods.
That sounds like you do believe there is a difference in scale. Okay. Not totally sure I agree, at least not in the context of the game and it's level of current development. Outside of it yes, I do agree fully.

So guys, with the Temple done and the Library a third complete, how long do you think it will be until our pantheon solidifies properly like the Greeks and Egyptians did?
One main turn and a mid turn. Max.
 
Yes




My point is finding the practice of a priesthood dangers is cause for war, believing that the war pleases the gods makes it sacred, but for it to be crusade, you need not fight against priests but belief itself.

For example the wars for slaves the azetics had were very much sacred and hyper ritualised. But ideological depute wasn't a factor in them.

The Romans destroyed a religion and God knows how many temples and priesthoods, the reason being they were in the way, and since we destroyed it, it must have been a pathetic god to begin with. The wars targeted priesthoods and temples, and definitely pleased the Roman gods but were by no means crusade.



You seem to think a crusade is the same as any conflict involving priests, temples or the rituals of worship. I hold that crusades are quite distinct and impossible in polythiest civilisations.

...and I think you are trying to argue semantics here.
 
That sounds like you do believe there is a difference in scale. Okay. Not totally sure I agree, at least not in the context of the game and it's level of current development. Outside of it yes, I do agree fully.


One main turn and a mid turn. Max.


I see it as a difference of goals, in a crusade the goal is ideological victory, in a sacred war the war itself is the goal.
 
Considering that the original cause of this aside was someone saying they didn't want the Ymaryn to become a crusading people, splitting that fine a hair on what counts as a crusade is pretty worthless.
 
[] [Temple] Let the glory of your gods be known far and wide (+1 Prestige, Pilgrimage trade power increased)
I mean nothing says this will convert people to our religion, it simply lets people know were rich and have goodies they might want under the message of the great temple we just built to honor our great gods.
I have zero reason that this alone will start making us a religious contender to the religions in the lowlands, mostly because
A. Zoh have been at the religious game far longer then anyone else we know that still lives, so were not turning them or changing them.
B. highland kingdom hates the Zoh
C. The horse Empire's leadership just openly converted and put themselves under the Zoh
D. The lowland minors are no longer relevant because their either already vassals of one of the 2 different groups,
E. the Haylthen people are 2 far away currently to be effected by Zoh religion unless the Highland kingdom falls.
F. The nomads, will going by past experiences are about to get a purge from us truly thus any survivors of the current lot will side with us because we great at beating them up thus our gods rock.
G. Our people are as disinterested in the Zoh religion as can be without calling for a war against them for it.
H. The GM has stated that the religious and traits of the Zoh have a nasty habit of pissing people off.
So unless you think the trade benefit alone is worth more the a new tech...... theirs no reason to vote for it.
 
...and I think you are trying to argue semantics here.


Semantics spawned many a schism and heresies.

Many a soul faced a firing squad on semantics.

such are the consequences of dealing in/with truth (ideology)

It's the perfect morbid joke actually.




And this whole thing started about us crusading against them, but seeing as how we are competing for pilgrims, I don't see happening. If our systems of belief are similar enough to be viable for pilgrimage, they cannot be a causus belli of war.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top