[Discuss] Religion

[Marc J.]

On 11/30/06, Kylie wrote:
>
> With the implementation of religion on stable, there are many people
> interested in founding and following a religion, and trying the priest
> class.  However, none of the region lords in my realm are interested in
> it.


Heh, reminds me of Beluaterra pre-religion.

One of the region lords offered to step down temporarily to allow a
> noble to found a religion, if he was reinstated to his position
> afterwards.  I know this this doesn't follow the true game mechanics, as
> to found a religion you should be an influential region Lord and this
> player would only be holding the region for one purpose - to found a
> religion.
>
> Would it be wrong to do this?  If it was heavily roleplayed would it be
> acceptable?
>
> I don't like side-stepping the game mechanics in this way, the only
> reason I would consider doing this is to allow the players that want to
> explore the new options and start using the new class to do so.
>

The way Qyrvaggism was founded was to find a Lord-less region where there
where player-enforced elections and elect the soon-to-be Founder in with the
express purpose of founding the religion.

Also, a huge political stink was raised, (and still arises during
Irombrozian/Riombarian relations) when the Ruler of a realm appointed
someone intentionally to found a religion.

Play politics with religions! Want a religion? Find a weak region lord and
offer him gold/a position in your religion if he lets you found a religion
there. In my opinion, so long as there's an *understandable* RP basis, and
if it doesn't negatively affect other players, it should be fine.

-- 
Marc J.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://news.battlemaster.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20061130/f4daf4d2/attachment.htm