|
Tomn posted:It will take me some time to do the necessary cross-referencing, and for the moment I will take your word for it. Very well, then - let us take it as given that the Senate will not actively decry the promotion of the Mother Church (though I note that so far it's not been terribly well accepted regardless). What then of the peasants? I don't wish to accuse you of any intentional attempts to avoid the subject, but you will note I've spent most of my time and energy discussing how the Council of Smyrna is a propaganda godsend for Bogomilist radicals. Do you deny this? Disagree with it? Do you feel that Bogomilist preachers will be perfectly happy to read the Council in the spirit you intended? Do you feel that such preaching will not cause trouble amongst our rather large populace of Bogomilists? Or do you suppose that there was literally nothing else the Church could possibly say - that it has no choice but to antagonize Bogomilists? There are relatively few but shrill voices decrying it in the Senate, largely from those committed to other faiths or with a vested interest in those committed to other faiths. I do not expect Papists and Islamists to tolerate an Orthodoxy that does not roll over and surrender, just as we do not expect it of them. This intolerance was unavoidable given all sides being true to their beliefs. Your own criticisms are a notable exception, but presuppose hypothetical bogomilists under the beds ready to swarm the Empire from the shadows, united in their zealous and radical belief in Bogomilism to the point they are willing to overthrow the Roman Empire itself. I am not entirely willing to accept this presupposition. Are there Bogomilists? Yes. They are antithetical to Christianity, to the Church and to the structures of the Empire. Lying about that to pander to their whims won't help: Calling a ravenous lion a nice kitty will not make it less likely to try and eat you. Those who are zealous in their Bogomilism will rebel and rise up anyway, and there is nothing that can be done to prevent them acting on fervently held beliefs. The peasantry want to live their lives. They don't want their children sacrificed in war. This doesn't just unilaterally mean they don't want them dying for church and empire, it means all war. A youth who dies fighting for Bogomilism is still a dead youth, still grieves his parents, and is still one more grave's worth of wasted potential. Do not overestimate or overstate their willingness to die. People are on the whole not a slavering mass of warmongers willing to rise up in bloody rebellion at the least provocation. Will the Bogomil firebrands use the Council of Smyrna against us? Yes, of course they will. They'd use it against us no matter what it said, because we are the Church and they oppose us. It's as straightforward as that, so we may as well be honest and truthful as it will not change the contents of their hearts.
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 15:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 01:11 |
|
|
HiHo ChiRho posted:If the Council didn't happen, the Bogomilists would still seek to dismantle the Church. If the Council decision were to just simply avoid denigrating the Bogomilist position, the Bogomilists would still seek to dismantle the Church. That is the basis of their belief, there is nothing the Council nor the Church can do or say that would convince them otherwise. But do we convince the unaligned? Does the Council do much to dispute the accusations and complaints of Bogomilists? Should there be a Bogomilist preacher and a Church preacher in the same village, who will the village turn to in the end? Will, in short, the Council actually serve to stop the wave of conversions towards Gallicanism and Bogomilism, or will it help ensure that the Mother Church is left a minority within its own Empire? At the moment it feels like the Council is only praiseworthy to those already solidly entrenched within the Mother Church - to others, it feels considerably more dubious and less convincing. Natural result of locking a group of committed churchmen in a room for days and asking them to keep talking amongst themselves, I suppose. It's hard to address the concerns of others when you're not talking to them, and easy to believe that there's nothing for it but to shut them out entirely. Oh, well, radicalism ho, I guess - I'm sure religious civil wars will be entirely in the service of both church and state. Out of curiosity, Rincewind, what's the geographical distribution of religion look like in the Empire? Any particular region bastions of faith, or is it more of a patchwork quilt?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 15:40
|
|
|
Tomn posted:But do we convince the unaligned? Does the Council do much to dispute the accusations and complaints of Bogomilists? Should there be a Bogomilist preacher and a Church preacher in the same village, who will the village turn to in the end? Will, in short, the Council actually serve to stop the wave of conversions towards Gallicanism and Bogomilism, or will it help ensure that the Mother Church is left a minority within its own Empire? At the moment it feels like the Council is only praiseworthy to those already solidly entrenched within the Mother Church - to others, it feels considerably more dubious and less convincing. Honestly curious, can you tell me what you think the Bogomilists believe? What they want? Peasant males are no longer being carted off by Church recruiters, and the tithes taken from the populace are now being invested in public works for the public, not churchmen's personal residences. As I understand it, that's two major problems of the peasantry addressed right there. Not to mention that this is just a foundation for future growth: there are great inroads to yet be made among the population. Orthodoxy has been their religion for hundreds of years, while Bogomilism is a fad turned to out of desperation. With the pressure towards heresy eased, I wouldn't be surprised to see many return to the true faith naturally and freely. We're not going to accommodate Bogomilism because, frankly, Bogomilism is dumb. Forgive us for not bringing the people who want to see us destroyed into the discussion. We will address the concerns of the peasantry as best we can through word and deed, and in doing so hope to bring them away from heresy. Should the Bogomilists rise up against the state, as you are so fond as saying, it will be something that had been decided as soon as we decided to remain Orthodox. While I will mourn the needless bloodshed, I will not feel sorry that traitors to the Empire and The Lord receive their just reward. Edit: I will also note that opposition to the council in the Senate has come mainly from the Inclusionists, who either seem to have not read the bill or are content to construct their own straw men. Not exactly an unbiased source. sniper4625 fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Aug 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 15:46
|
|
|
 Kαλλίστη My sisters and brothers. When you're tired of the unending bullshit and self-serving lies... We're over here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
Now I'm hearing a common theme here - "The Bogomilists are radicals ANYWAYS, so we shouldn't have to defer to them in the least because they wouldn't listen to us." But is this really an intellectually rigorous analysis of Bogomilism, or is this simply giving in to intellectual sloth - a justification that allows the Church to act as it desires, not as it needs to do? For consider this: Bogomilist radicals there are, surely, who wish to see all state and church hierarchy overthrown. But at least as common, I am sure, are Bogomilist moderates who wish only to live in peace, without being ruled by the church. After all, if they are not willing to die in foreign lands for the sake of the Mother Church, how much more willing would they be to die in Roman lands for the sake of "liberating" others from the oppressive grip of the Mother Church - so long as they are left alone? Yet here is the Council, proclaiming that Bogomilism is the foulest heresy, to be opposed to the furthest extent of the law. Keep in mind that people turn to Bogomilism because they distrust the Church, and do not believe it will do what it says it does. How easily then will they believe that the Church will stay perfectly within the letter of the law, let alone the spirit? And after all, how much might they be harassed even within those legal limits? And given that the Council has just derided Bogomilism as rank heresy, how restrained do you imagine the priests on the ground to be - those without the wisdom to realize that they exist at the sufferance of their community? The Council has in effect declared that for Bogomilists, it is either the Church way or the highway. But Bogomilists, even moderate Bogomilists, already have one foot on the highway. Does the Council's decree not force them further and further into radicalism? Will they not come to view the struggles of distant Bogomilists as their struggles, believing that they will be next? Will they not come to think of the Church as an implacable foe that will give them no peace? Will not the smallest transgression (and transgressions there will be) come to be viewed in the most sinister of lights, proofs of the openly-stated hatred the Church has for them? Do you not force them to unite, force them indeed to listen to their greatest radicals who will preach that the only path to peace and self-protection is to destroy the Church that attempts always to destroy them? "But we don't wish to destroy them!" you cry. "The Edict of Athens forbids our interfering with them! We can and will act only peacefully, and do only peaceful things!" What does that matter? You are not personal friends with the Bogomilists, that they might divine your true will and desire and capabilities. They know only this: That you are the Church which has done them so much evil in the past, and that you are now the Church who has decreed the very existence of their creed to be unacceptable. This is not a state of mind that lends itself to generous interpretations and forgiving souls. No matter what the truth of your own desires may be, it is never the truth that matters in politics, only the perception of the truth - and the perception the Council offers is not a good one. Bogomilists there may have been willing to sit quietly and watch the effects of the Edict of Athens. Bogomilists there might have been, indeed, who may have been swayed back to the Mother Church. But the Council of Smyrna creates two armed camps who with every conflict great and small will come to believe more and more than they cannot exist under the same sun. The large and unmotivated mass will be thus motivated to act, where previously they might have been willing to act only in purely local self-defense. Is this, truly, what is best for Rome? Is the lofty morality of doing what you find pleasing worth the price to be paid? Now I'd like to change tack here for a moment to discuss something which I feel hasn't been adequately addressed - namely, the doubtlessly very great frustration of the members of the Council. You have, I understand, been long and hard at work hashing out the issues of the Council. I understand that there have been disagreements amongst you, and compromises have been made. Lengthy and tedious hours were no doubt spent creating something you could all be satisfied with, and I can only begin to imagine the incredible, incredible frustration you must feel when the fruits of your labor are met with skepticism, derision, and criticism. It is easy to tear things down - it is not so easy to create. We who stood on the outside - what do we know of your arguments, of your complaints, of your worries and fears and concerns and the loggerheads that needed breaking down? What do we know of the tears, the sweat, yea, even perhaps the blood that went into the final resolution of the Council? Yet it is this feeling, however bitter, that I want you to focus on, for this is precisely how the Bogomilists will feel as they learn of the Council. They too have spent much time and effort creating for themselves a creed and belief they feel good and true. The hostility you now feel towards those who dare pull down your hard work - will this not be the same hostility the Bogomilists feel when they see how the Council has declared their theology outright unchristian? The sense you may have of the Senate in arms against you - will this not be the same sense of threat that afflicts the Bogomilists when they learn that the Church wishes them gone? The sense of isolation and bitterness, the sense that nobody understands you or even wants to understand you except those who are already of your creed - is this not the selfsame reaction the Bogomilists shall have to the Council of Symrna? The hardening of your hearts and the rash actions you may even now be contemplating - will not the Bogomilists too harden their hearts and contemplate actions just as rash to protect themselves, only magnified a hundred-fold because of their weakness? To those of you who were at the Council, you poured your very souls into a work which you hoped to last a thousand years and more, I say to you this: Look into your hearts now. Look into the seeds of bitterness and frustration, and know that the Council will plant that very seed in the hearts of Bogomilists throughout the Empire. Look closely, and thus you will know what the Bogomilists might be capable of if they feel threatened and forced. Consider then: Do you wish the Bogomilists to feel as you do now? Tomn fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Aug 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
Where's Trent? For all your amazing verbosity, I honestly do not understand your Bogomolist apologism. Why should they be offended that we consider them unchristian and wish to see their works undone? It's exactly what they have in mind for us, for the Gallicans, really for any branch of Christianity that does not ascribe to their neo-paganist creeds. I use creed in the plural here because I don't believe there is one true defined version of Bogomilism - every sect seems to interpret it differently, save for a few key (and highly heretical) principles. The declaration of Bogimilism as heresy is nothing new, and is indeed a reaffirmation of long standing church doctrine. The official position of the Orthodox Church is that Bogogogolism is a foul heresy to be opposed to the full extent of the law. To do otherwise would be to ignore hundreds of years worth of the teachings of the Church, to open the door to all forms of sin! We are not blind zealots - see our position on the Gallicans, the other major heresy afflicting the Empire at present. Bogolomism, by virtue of its inherent opposition to church and state, and the utterly theologically odious nature of its foundation (Dualism, for heaven's sake! This isn't the first millennium!) We acknowledge the sins of the past, and are moving to make amends. Through education, good works, and healing, we plan to show not only the Empire, but the Christian world that the Orthodox Church has returned to the roots it was built upon: charity, sacrifice and service. Throwing away over a millenium's worth of tenets and traditions to attempt to appease a bunch of damned heretics would spit in the face of all who have come before us, the good and pious men who have constructed the church which has withstood pressure from within and without. You speak of what the Bogogolimists would think - what would the loyal Orthodox of the Empire, of the Christian World, think if we said anything other than "those Christians who do not believe in one almighty God are entirely incorrect?" The Trinity? Incorrect! Madness! Should armed camps be formed, it is not the Orthodox that will be the aggressors. We are committed to spreading our message peacefully, and in line with the Edict of Athens. We cannot argue against hypothetical situations and strawmen, for we have not had a chance to demonstrate our sincerity! Ultimately I do not wish to devolve this thread into the petty bickering that has afflicted others, but it is hard to remain silent when our attempts at good faith are met with hostility. We acknowledge the problems in the Church, we acknowledge the need for progress and reform, but we will not abandon some of the most sacred principles of Christianity to do so. Edit: Impy states my position far more concisely and eloquently than I do. I believe a meal is in order. Double edit: I think we need to get back to the spirit of HiHo ChiRho. The party of  not  !
sniper4625 fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Aug 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
Tomn posted:Consider then: Do you wish the Bogomilists to feel as you do now? Of course not. Why would I want believers in a syncretic dualist pagan faith with no scriptural foundation to feel that over a thousand years of witness are imperilled? That would imply they had lasted for a millennium as opposed to being forged out of whole cloth in living memory from a mishmash of source material. Have you studied the tenets of Bogomilism? Actually looked at what they say, what they believe, what they want, what they stand for? I can tell you that those at the Council of Smyrna certainly did. The conclusion we reached was exhaustively researched. We have put in an enormous amount of effort to see if this strange faith can be reconciled with Christianity. It can't. It really can't. In any way, shape or form. It's that crazy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 18:00
|
|
|
AJ_Impy posted:Of course not. Why would I want believers in a syncretic dualist pagan faith with no scriptural foundation to feel that over a thousand years of witness are imperilled? That would imply they had lasted for a millennium as opposed to being forged out of whole cloth in living memory from a mishmash of source material. If you feel that, theologically, there was absolutely no choice, then there was no choice. I am no priest, as as I said - I leave such matters to you and your colleagues. You will do as you must, the Bogomilists will do as they must, and I - all of us - shall do as we must. The early years of this new faith are when it is most malleable, its tenets most open to change. It is a child of its times and circumstances, and shall grow as it is shaped. The Church has decided that it has but one choice in which to shape this child, and the monster it becomes will be of our own creation. But I do not assign blame. We can all act only in accordance with our consciences, and if there is no choice, there is no choice. No man can be asked to do that which he believes to be wrong. God has willed that we are where we are and things shall happen as they shall happen. Now I cannot claim to know God's plan and God's will, and I cannot claim to know with certainty what the future will bring, yet still I will make a prediction - a short, simple vision of what lies before us: Blood in the Bosphorus.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
Tomn posted:If you feel that, theologically, there was absolutely no choice, then there was no choice. I am no priest, as as I said - I leave such matters to you and your colleagues. You will do as you must, the Bogomilists will do as they must, and I - all of us - shall do as we must. Think of it like this. If someone said to you there are two suns in the sky, adamantly insisting on that as fact even with a single sun overhead, angrily reacting if you point out the evidence to the contrary, what do you do? So it is with the Bogomilists. If they're willing to listen, great! If they aren't there's not a lot we can do for them. Maybe a hospital for the mind?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
Tomn posted:The early years of this new faith are when it is most malleable, its tenets most open to change. It is a child of its times and circumstances, and shall grow as it is shaped. The Church has decided that it has but one choice in which to shape this child, and the monster it becomes will be of our own creation. I can barely imagine the horrors that SCHOOLS! and HOSPITALS! will create.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
   Monternos Order of the Holy Spirit Suppose things are as you say, then a firm rule must be imposed upon our nation before it destroys itself. Rome needs some theology and geometry and evidently some taste and decency. I suspect that we are teetering on the edge of the abyss. But then as well... I don't think things are quite as you say. You claim for us to create a monster, a monster of education, healthcare and love of God and fellow man. You claim that there are hordes of bitter entranched men and women out there, who would snarl and buck at a peaceful attempt to show them God's love. You try to hide it with great verbosity, in your lengthy indictment against us, without giving us any chance to prove our goodwill and honest intentions... Since love is shown more in deeds than in words, I believe that soon our rightiousness should be selfevident, given time. But that might perhaps be to much to ask for from you, since it seems you havent bothered to read or comprahend our mission statement. Further as a part of that mission statement is indeed the guidance that you claim that we lack! Our goal is, contrary to what you claim, to debate, to discuss and to educate the people back into the fold. Make them better men, bodily, mentally and spiritually. We do not force any conversions, not by sword, hand or harsh words. We do it the gentle way. If the people have questions and doubts theological, we seek to discuss, debate and finally educate it. The Bogolimists in my classroom shall bring up their ideas and soon our mind and soul shall be richer from what we have to say to eachother. This is how I turned back from Bogomilism, mostly through self-reasoning. And if one has knowledge, he shares it with the one who does not possess it. This is love, weather it is knowledge, health, honors, or riches one gives to the other.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 20:37
|
|
|
 I feel it prudent to again mention at this point that the New Marians do not engage in long theological arguments and are open to anyone. Also, we give you the opportunity to work out your frustrations by hitting things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 20:40
|
|
|
Tomn posted:Now I'm hearing a common theme here - "The Bogomilists are radicals ANYWAYS, so we shouldn't have to defer to them in the least because they wouldn't listen to us." But is this really an intellectually rigorous analysis of Bogomilism, or is this simply giving in to intellectual sloth - a justification that allows the Church to act as it desires, not as it needs to do? No, I wish for them to feel like Christ did. Let's crucify them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 21:06
|
|
|
  You know what? As long as the Resolution of Athens stands, I no longer give a poo poo, aside from commending the Church on the establishment of hospitals and schools across the empire. I also encourage every other church, sect, ideological society, or cult to follow your fine example. I shall also note that Ratoslov Bronzeworks is now offering a program where any religious association may commission religious iconography, statuary, and works of noniconic religious art at a ten percent discount if said bronzework is for a free clinic or public school.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
Ratoslov posted:
  Your contribution to education and to healthcare is greatly appreciated. It is pleasing that even in the midst of all this pointed rhetoric, we can still work together for the common good and for the advancement of the Citizens of Rome.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
OOC: I'm having some wierdness with this thread. I had a post, it's gone now, along with like, a bunch of posts that came after it. Is anyone else getting that as well? Edit: Huh. Well, posting a reply made them show up again. Problem solved, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
Hutter posted:Suppose things are as you say, then a firm rule must be imposed upon our nation before it destroys itself. Rome needs some theology and geometry and evidently some taste and decency. I suspect that we are teetering on the edge of the abyss. Here's the thing - if the Council's decree had been written up the way you present it here, I would have absolutely no problem with it, snarky little aside notwithstanding. Speak of reasoning, of debate and discussion and gentle persuasion, and I'm sure that even the most militant Bogomilist would have trouble riling up his flock. But when you speak of "insulting the very core of Christian beliefs" or "opposing them to the permissible limits of the law," well, I don't think you really need to be a radical to think that this is going to rouse a few tempers. How many people do you suppose will be convinced of anything except the Church's latent, in-built hostility with that kind of language? If you want to persuade people gently, then for Heaven's sake write as if you want to persuade people gently, not as if you're secretly waiting for the Empress to look the other way so you can get the thumbscrews out. As is the decree feels like it's one imperial law away from burning Bogomilists at the stake. (Seriously, I wasn't originally intending to make a big deal of this. I just wanted to remark on what seemed to be unnecessarily hostile language, and then things seemed to keep escalating, so...  )Edit: I mean, really, even a short rider to clause 9 that ran "But despite the fact that we think they're super super wrong we are committed to changing their ways solely through gentle persuasion not just because the law says we should, but because we think violent conversion is morally bad" would have shut me up early. I'd still think the REST of clause 9 wasn't gonna win any friends, but at least it wouldn't have made enemies. Fakeedit: Uh...the post I was responding to seems to have disappeared. As have a number of others? Edit: Oh, it's just the preview thing being weird. Tomn fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Aug 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
 Just though I'd let everyone know that the mercantile coalition has been sitting in our boats, having barbecues, since the session started. Get back to us when something involving money and/or ditching Eurasia for Africa.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
Funky Valentine posted:
African operations, you say...
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
I heard Iberia is lovely this time of year....
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
I'd rather hear more about this "New Scotland" or somesuch the Scots have founded somewhere! I can't say I'd think the Scots would adapt to the deserts of Africa that well...
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 22:01
|
|
|
Funky Valentine posted:
I say we grab all these jokers and stick them on a boat going straight out west. Worst case scenario is they find something, best case is they all starve.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
Not So Fast posted:I'd rather hear more about this "New Scotland" or somesuch the Scots have founded somewhere! I can't say I'd think the Scots would adapt to the deserts of Africa that well...  Funny you say that, Ma' once told me this bedtime story 'bout a couple Scots becoming rulers of all of Egypt. Obvious fable or legend, but they always have some grain of truth to them, y' know? Maybe the Scots have found that Vinland the Varangians always mention when they're drunk enough.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 22:36
|
|
|
Rumors of the Far West ...the Republic of Iceland is said to have sent expedition after expedition in search of the fabled land of 'Vinland'. None returned... Some Nova Scotians have reported seeing large ships passing by their colonies. Some are unquestionably those of Lai Ang, bound for the Iberians' own colonial ventures. Others are of a much more unfamiliar silhouette. They silently pass the Habsburg before turning back south and sailing to parts unknown... The Far West seems to be composed of two vast continents and an archipelago of rich islands. The Scottish have named the northern continent "Avalon", after their first settlement in what is now Nova Scotia... and, perhaps, in honor of the heir to Great Britain, Prince Arthur van Habsburg. ...Northeastern Avalon seems to be extremely sparsely populated, but their are signs of a much more dense population existing in the past, as if some kind of devastating calamity decimated the numbers of Mikmaq. The Mikmaq tell tales of of vast cities and thriving trade empires to the south. The Habsburgs see little cause to believe them, chalking it up to wishful thinking or rumors spread by the Lai Ang to keep Christians out of their areas of colonial interest.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
Senate posted:This is why I continue to call for the dissolution of the senate. None of this bitching is going anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:This is why I continue to call for the dissolution of the senate. None of this bitching is going anywhere. Neither's yours, at least this way they can have fun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:This is why I continue to call for the dissolution of the senate. None of this bitching is going anywhere. Just scroll up to that Rincewind post above you and click the little ? button under the nice red-hooded girl. It's what I do 90% of the time in these goon-vernment threads.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
NewMars posted:Neither's yours, at least this way they can have fun. Watch your tongue. I may not be able to officially be a member of the Black Chamber in the senate but I can still roleplay my way to stabbing you in the back. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
It is too bad our relations with Scotland are frosty, if not quite as hostile as with other Papist states. I would be fascinated to meet one of these 'Mikmaq' they have encountered. Learning of new cultures and histories never grows old. I doubt the Scottish would allow such an envoy though. Also good job on Iceland on not getting annexed by Norway.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 23:26
|
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:Watch your tongue. I may not be able to officially be a member of the Black Chamber in the senate but I can still roleplay my way to stabbing you in the back. Yes, but that would require roleplay, which requires bitching that goes nowhere, which means you will become all that you hate to destroy me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Reading all the arguing is tiresome enough without hearing elaborate descriptions of how you're murdering one another.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
Okay, there's something seriously weird going on with the forum, because Rincewind's post there didn't show up until I hit reply. To clarify: It was already visible from the forum itself that Rincewind had replied to the thread before I tried to reply. NewMars fucked around with this message at 23:42 on Aug 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 23:38
|
|
|
Rincewind posted:Reading all the arguing is tiresome enough without hearing elaborate descriptions of how you're murdering one another. I wait four days in the rafters until you finally walk underneath my position and then make my strike. Roll for initiative. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
Rincewind posted:Rumors of the Far West I rather like that descriptor. "Avalon." Gives it a bit of  to it.Edit: Woah those replies weren't there when I hit reply.  NewMars posted:Okay, there's something seriously weird going on with the forum, because Rincewind's post there didn't show up until I hit reply. OK so it's not just me then. The hell? StrifeHira fucked around with this message at 23:56 on Aug 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 23:54
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:I wait four days in the rafters until you finally walk underneath my position and then make my strike. One idea for a Paradox LP I've been tossing around is a CK2 LP where I take the "roleplaying" up a notch, with a few particular readers taking up characters with stats, traits and everything and roleplaying their actions between updates, then I actually roll some dice and make the story from there. Still, I'd have to think up the system first and become more confident in my writing. Or maybe somebody else takes this idea up before I get to it.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 23:55
|
|
|
TheMcD posted:One idea for a Paradox LP I've been tossing around is a CK2 LP where I take the "roleplaying" up a notch, with a few particular readers taking up characters with stats, traits and everything and roleplaying their actions between updates, then I actually roll some dice and make the story from there. Still, I'd have to think up the system first and become more confident in my writing. That sounds like it will lead to the most horrible trainwreck imaginable. Frankly, I can't wait to see it in action.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 00:02
|
|
|
StrifeHira posted:I rather like that descriptor. "Avalon." Gives it a bit of I think the forums are having some difficulty today.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 00:51
|
|
|
TheMcD posted:One idea for a Paradox LP I've been tossing around is a CK2 LP where I take the "roleplaying" up a notch, with a few particular readers taking up characters with stats, traits and everything and roleplaying their actions between updates, then I actually roll some dice and make the story from there. Still, I'd have to think up the system first and become more confident in my writing. That sounds incredibly dorky and I am pretty sure the Mods would move it to The Game Room sub-forum of Traditional Games.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
Stuff like that makes me think posters like HGS aren't wrong about wanting the whole Senate thrown out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 01:11 |
|
|
Flesnolk posted:Stuff like that makes me think posters like HGS aren't wrong about wanting the whole Senate thrown out. Just type ## Join Discordians and never deal with that nonsense again! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 22:30
|
|
