Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Tolerance Law Ideas

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Crusader Kings II 69939 Bug Reports 19717 User Modifications 10604 Suggestions 5969 Tech Support 6373 After Action Reports
Sorry your approach to communitarian and sectarian religions is too simple. The approach towards whether you ought to convert (save souls) or not (maybe you want to dominate or exterminate) is not correlated to open-mindedness.

Kharijite or Angra Mainuyi have an ancestral mentality: they are the archetypes of a sectarian religion. I could quote Teotl of course, who want to sacrifice rather than convert...

Audianism or Docetism are proselyte religions: but they are the archetypes of a non-communitarian ones.

I could continue, but I would like to invite you to have a look at the Matrix if you are interested in LI's religious features. There you will understand what is the factor that makes the Alexandros-Ammonite community communitarian, i.e. not so open-minded. It is their archaic ascendant:
  • In a SELIN-mechanics perspective, Archaic civilization gives 1 point of sectarianism. This represents the fact that religions several millennia old tend to have built pretty strong spiritual boundaries to just survive. See real-life Yazidis as an example of an Archaic religion being communitarian.
  • In a lore perspective, you see, this faith is not just a cult of Alexandros. It is a cult of Alexandros merged with the cult of Amon in a heavily Egyptianized version. This indeed results in this community to be considered as bordering unacceptable heresy by many who love Alexandros or Amon, while they prefer keeping to themselves as in their view every one else is wrong about both Alexandros and Amon, something close to their heart. To go further, other Greeks do not tolerate the twist on Alexandros done by Alexandros-Ammonite, and another Greek will be displeased by an Alexandros-Ammonite liege's insistence on the Egyptian nature of Megalos Alexandros. Still, they are not Sectarian, so everything remains within reasons.
If you go find the factor resulting in a religion being communitarian or sectarian, you will always find that the mechanical logic of SELIN matches a solid lore rationale. At least I challenge you to find 1 inconsistent case... :)

Edit: I'll post an entry in Spirituality Enhancement thread on this feature to provide visibility on what are the factors. I wish I could indicate them in-game, so that an Alexandros-Amonite ruler would indicate that it is because of the Archaic ascendant. But I don't see an elegant coding way to do so.
 
Numahr said:
Sorry your approach to communitarian and sectarian religions is too simple. The approach towards whether you ought to convert (save souls) or not (maybe you want to dominate or exterminate) is not correlated to open-mindedness.

Kharijite or Angra Mainuyi have an ancestral mentality: they are the archetypes of a sectarian religion. I could quote Teotl of course, who want to sacrifice rather than convert...

Audianism or Docetism are proselyte religions: but they are the archetypes of a non-communitarian ones.

I could continue, but I would like to invite you to have a look at the Matrix if you are interested in LI's religious features. There you will understand what is the factor that makes the Alexandros-Ammonite community communitarian, i.e. not so open-minded. It is their archaic ascendant:
  • In a SELIN-mechanics perspective, Archaic civilization gives 1 point of sectarianism. This represents the fact that religions several millennia old tend to have built pretty strong spiritual boundaries to just survive. See real-life Yazidis as an example of an Archaic religion being communitarian.
  • In a lore perspective, you see, this faith is not just a cult of Alexandros. It is a cult of Alexandros merged with the cult of Amon in a heavily Egyptianized version. This indeed results in this community to be considered as bordering unacceptable heresy by many who love Alexandros or Amon, while they prefer keeping to themselves as in their view every one else is wrong about both Alexandros and Amon, something close to their heart. To go further, other Greeks do not tolerate the twist on Alexandros done by Alexandros-Ammonite, and another Greek will be displeased by an Alexandros-Ammonite liege's insistence on the Egyptian nature of Megalos Alexandros. Still, they are not Sectarian, so everything remains within reasons.
If you go find the factor resulting in a religion being communitarian or sectarian, you will always find that the mechanical logic of SELIN matches a solid lore rationale. At least I challenge you to find 1 inconsistent case... :)

Edit: I'll post an entry in Spirituality Enhancement thread on this feature to provide visibility on what are the factors. I wish I could indicate them in-game, so that an Alexandros-Amonite ruler would indicate that it is because of the Archaic ascendant. But I don't see an elegant coding way to do so.
Click to expand...
The problem is that in gameplay terms, the only way a sectarian ruler is going to be able to maintain control is by being very aggressive with conversion, which doesn't always fit with their mentality.
Also, giving Archaic/Gnostic religions sectarianism by default causes an issue in places like Nubia, where maintaining any degree of pluralism is effectively impossible. There isn't a clear reason why these particular Civilizations/Ascendants are particularly despised (it makes sense for Heretical/Messianic/Populist religions though, as they're generally hostile to others).

Additionally, I tried the newly updated Holy Wars; they don't appear to work (no territory is transferred at the end of a war, and the effect description says "X subjugates." (i.e. there's no entry).
 
From too much to none. I'll take a look at what's wrong, but probably won't have a chance to do any testing tonight (my wife wants me to take her shopping.)
 
I am sorry but my vision is that Sectarianism and drive for conversion is not related. Indeed a Sectarian ruler preferring to oppress religious enemies than converting them will have a hard time building a world empire. But well that's logical to me and a normal occurrence in LI. The good thing with LI is that you have many different religious gameplays: don't take such a religion if you want a state-building one. For this, take a statist or clerical soul in a non gnostic or non archaic civilization, there are many of them. Or then if you insist for Ragnarokirc gameplay (Ancestral Sectarian), prepare for a very difficult empire-building, indeed... There is a reason why LI's empires were not built by such religions. But instead you'll get bloody wars and success on the battlefields, for sure!

The gameplay change to deal further with this apparent contradiction would be to make these religions get an easier access to warfare and invasion CBs so they can more effectively apply their violent approach to inter-faith relationships. In fact that is already done for some of them which have the Total War CB, or others that have the Prepared Invasion CB. So we could extend these features to make sure they cover all Sectarian Ancestral / Bastion of the Faith religions.

I do not want, by design, to decrease differentiation between different gameplay experiences by giving easy conversion to religions which are not proselyte by nature or removing the negative modifiers that Sectarianism gives. What is possible is to improve balance by cautiously giving more advantages against identified and normal drawbacks.

Archaic and Gnostic communities are closed communities not easily accepting others, living in a world of their own. They do not want to inter-marry, they do not want others to have access to their places of worship or holy texts, etc. So they are despised by others as all such communities in history, to some extent. If you do not like my Yazidi example, take the Ismaili community, a perfect example of Islamic Gnosticism today, never truly accepted in the world of Islam; or the way Jewish communities in the Middle Ages, an archetype of a communitarian religion (a religion that defines a community that is not open to others and is despised by their environment).
 
@Numahr, @LAF1994 : Further tweaks to the holy war CBs, please test and see if it fits your vision. Also test the de jure county claim CB, as it has had changes as well. Crusades have been changed to require the head of religion to have 500 piety, so crusade spam at game start is eliminated (may be too harsh.)
 
Numahr said:
I am sorry but my vision is that Sectarianism and drive for conversion is not related. Indeed a Sectarian ruler preferring to oppress religious enemies than converting them will have a hard time building a world empire. But well that's logical to me and a normal occurrence in LI. The good thing with LI is that you have many different religious gameplays: don't take such a religion if you want a state-building one. For this, take a statist or clerical soul in a non gnostic or non archaic civilization, there are many of them. Or then if you insist for Ragnarokirc gameplay (Ancestral Sectarian), prepare for a very difficult empire-building, indeed... There is a reason why LI's empires were not built by such religions. But instead you'll get bloody wars and success on the battlefields, for sure!

The gameplay change to deal further with this apparent contradiction would be to make these religions get an easier access to warfare and invasion CBs so they can more effectively apply their violent approach to inter-faith relationships. In fact that is already done for some of them which have the Total War CB, or others that have the Prepared Invasion CB. So we could extend these features to make sure they cover all Sectarian Ancestral / Bastion of the Faith religions.

I do not want, by design, to decrease differentiation between different gameplay experiences by giving easy conversion to religions which are not proselyte by nature or removing the negative modifiers that Sectarianism gives. What is possible is to improve balance by cautiously giving more advantages against identified and normal drawbacks.

Archaic and Gnostic communities are closed communities not easily accepting others, living in a world of their own. They do not want to inter-marry, they do not want others to have access to their places of worship or holy texts, etc. So they are despised by others as all such communities in history, to some extent. If you do not like my Yazidi example, take the Ismaili community, a perfect example of Islamic Gnosticism today, never truly accepted in the world of Islam; or the way Jewish communities in the Middle Ages, an archetype of a communitarian religion (a religion that defines a community that is not open to others and is despised by their environment).
Click to expand...
Going over the list of Sectarianism points:
-Heretical religions: this makes perfect sense, as they are defined by aggressive opposition to an established religious orthodoxy, so you'd expect them to be intolerant and persecuted. On the other hand, Local religions are generally much less confrontational, so they'd be less likely to be opposed, as they generally try to 'smooth over' any doctrinal clashes (e.g. in game, Pelagians are communitarian because they are generally very hostile to the Mainstream Catholicism, while the more compromising Semipelagians are not). Incidental side note: religions such as Irminsulic, Dionysian, Solar-Christian and Mithraic-Christian should act as separate religions rather than as vanilla-style heresies (otherwise weird things happen like Swabia or Wessex randomly flipping to Irminsulic, or the ERE turning Solar-Christian).
-Populist Soul: Logical- having strongly revolutionary tendencies means that you're going to be disliked by more conservative religions.
-Messianic Soul: Again, makes sense- strong revolutionary streak and very confrontational.
-Archaic/Gnostic Civilization: this doesn't necessarily fit. The problem is that it leads to the Mainstream Mithraic, Sabean, Neoplatonic or Luwian religions being considered Communitarian, or Platonic Islamic (a Scholarly religion) getting the same effect as Kharijite (a very aggressive Heretical Populist religion which is most definitively Sectarian). OTOH, in some cases the point about Archaic/Gnostic religions is valid (e.g. it makes perfect sense for the Cathars), but I'm not sure if the Mithraic or Neoplatonic religions should be considered Gnostic (they'd be Greco-Roman, with Mithraic having a Persian ascendant perhaps?)
 
richvh said:
@Numahr, @LAF1994 : Further tweaks to the holy war CBs, please test and see if it fits your vision. Also test the de jure county claim CB, as it has had changes as well. Crusades have been changed to require the head of religion to have 500 piety, so crusade spam at game start is eliminated (may be too harsh.)
Click to expand...
De jure claim doesn't work; winning the war doesn't transfer any titles or vassals.
 
Should be fixed now.
 
LAF1994 said:
Going over the list of Sectarianism points:
-Heretical religions: this makes perfect sense, as they are defined by aggressive opposition to an established religious orthodoxy, so you'd expect them to be intolerant and persecuted. On the other hand, Local religions are generally much less confrontational, so they'd be less likely to be opposed, as they generally try to 'smooth over' any doctrinal clashes (e.g. in game, Pelagians are communitarian because they are generally very hostile to the Mainstream Catholicism, while the more compromising Semipelagians are not). Incidental side note: religions such as Irminsulic, Dionysian, Solar-Christian and Mithraic-Christian should act as separate religions rather than as vanilla-style heresies (otherwise weird things happen like Swabia or Wessex randomly flipping to Irminsulic, or the ERE turning Solar-Christian).
-Populist Soul: Logical- having strongly revolutionary tendencies means that you're going to be disliked by more conservative religions.
-Messianic Soul: Again, makes sense- strong revolutionary streak and very confrontational.
-Archaic/Gnostic Civilization: this doesn't necessarily fit. The problem is that it leads to the Mainstream Mithraic, Sabean, Neoplatonic or Luwian religions being considered Communitarian, or Platonic Islamic (a Scholarly religion) getting the same effect as Kharijite (a very aggressive Heretical Populist religion which is most definitively Sectarian). OTOH, in some cases the point about Archaic/Gnostic religions is valid (e.g. it makes perfect sense for the Cathars), but I'm not sure if the Mithraic or Neoplatonic religions should be considered Gnostic (they'd be Greco-Roman, with Mithraic having a Persian ascendant perhaps?)
Click to expand...

Haha I see that you studied your Matrix. :)

Well you have a point. I agree with you that the Archaic and Gnostic civilizations are less obvious than the other ones. In fact it is very much related to how I understand that these religions must have evolved in LI to survive. In a way it is like trying to imagine what dinosaurs would be if they had survived alongside mammals. They would not be the same right... This is alt history, version LI, version SELIN. I concede that this particular vision is debatable. And in a way it was, indeed, already debated in these forums.

Now if I can make my point, it is that these religions, as mainstream as some may be such as Mithraicism (well, mainstream relative to Christo-Mithraicism...), they still built some stricter than usual spiritual boundaries to simply survive. Archaic and Gnostic are the two "dinosaur"-most civilizations in LI. They are living fossils, which, unlike the graeco-roman civilization survived by opposing something. Ancient Egyptians clinged to their, well, Archaic Gods in defiance of the Hellenistic civilization. Sabeans maintained their Arab Pagan ways as an ever-threatened community with a death mandate on them from the Caliphs. Neoplatonic religions developed strong fascist-like tendencies using, as some canon quote from Shaytana attest, the pure world of ideas to elevate themselves from the rest of mankind and more easily slaughter/conquer them. In fact as I said as soon as I have time I want to dig further in that vein of fascist tendencies of scholarly religions if they meet a special leader to guide them in their spiritual fantasies.

Also there is another factor to consider. For a maximum of diversity, the SELIN characteristics play better if they are scattered on several dimensions. That is how a Matrix works well. So I want indeed to have communitarian Civilizations in addition to communitarian Souls, so that interesting of civilizations may emerge. Of course this is not a rationale in itself, but it complements and strengthens the lore rationale explained above.

@richvh, did you find the solution for the CBs work now - should I test them / elaborate on their codes?
 
Last edited:
I believe they all work now, but further testing isn't out of line.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back