The Stranglehold of the Holy Order

[Helena]

I am agreeing with Deadhandsome on the desastrous side effect of IC blackballing on the Order's population, and the motivation of seekers.

We could have racist priests/knights, alcoholic ones, or simply characters who do not make consensus on the player base.

[Helena]

"Actually, I DO find the Order scary powerful and oppressive." Do other people feel that way?

I do, that was mentionned in my first post in this thread.

[Taunya]

To keep this thread on topic, I've started another thread for talking about magery and confessions. viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1823

[Solipsis]

I am agreeing with Deadhandsome on the desastrous side effect of IC blackballing on the Order's population, and the motivation of seekers.

We could have racist priests/knights, alcoholic ones, or simply characters who do not make consensus on the player base.

We absolutely could. Perhaps said racist alcoholic could be very charismatic and convince their GL through their RP that they are qualified nevertheless, or have things under control, or otherwise be on the good side of said GL. The public opinion doesn't control what happens to your character inside your guild, I imagine, but rather influences it. For people with problematic characters (heretical beliefs, abrasive attitudes, troublesome habits), one must manage those influences.

[The_Last_Good_Dragon]

I am agreeing with Deadhandsome on the desastrous side effect of IC blackballing on the Order's population, and the motivation of seekers.

We could have racist priests/knights, alcoholic ones, or simply characters who do not make consensus on the player base.

We absolutely could. Perhaps said racist alcoholic could be very charismatic and convince their GL through their RP that they are qualified nevertheless, or have things under control, or otherwise be on the good side of said GL. The public opinion doesn't control what happens to your character inside your guild, I imagine, but rather influences it. For people with problematic characters (heretical beliefs, abrasive attitudes, troublesome habits), one must manage those influences.

Precisely this. There absolutely can be racist priests, Inquisitors, Acolytes, etc. There can be priests, Inquisitors, Knights, etc. who belong to cults. They can be mages or scallywags. A key part of success in a Guild is making sure you maintain a healthy-enough relationship with your Guild Leaders. I think many Guild Leaders are quite willing to do all the range of tolerate to enabling "uncouth" behavior so long as it doesn't strain the inter-guild power structures.

[Starstarfish]

The Cardinal has maybe spoken up on something as frequently as 4 times in the last two OOC years

I've thus far hesitated to wade into this thread, for a number of reasons. But I think the difficulty if there is one, arguably, with the Cardinal as a vehicle of staff intervention isn't in them being so. I would say the difficulty, is that is the only time they are seen outside of plots/events is these situations. So that is the only experience people have to draw from to create an opinion. I honestly feel like having meetings or even more open communication with the Cardinal for Orderites or the Council or the population at large might IMHO make them feel like a more natural part of things. And less like a staff vehicle ICly if that makes sense.

[chronodbu]

> No good Davite admits to being a mage and then doesn't turn themselves in to the Inquisition.

Well, that kind of sentence is an inquisitorial interpretation of the lore. There are other valid interpretations:
- though the mage is a good davite, and knows not being pyred will make him become a demon, his will is not strong enough to go to suicide. He may blame himself and seek penance constantly for that, but never find the strength to actually declare himself to the inquisition. He is a sinner, not a heretic.
- And his priest, remembering the Erra says that a penance cleanse "when the penance is accepted and undergone with an open heart", knows that as long as he does not desire the pyre, he will not reach the Fountis. In his desire to save his soul, he protects him from the inquisition to give him the time to desire the pyre, and does his best, during his confessions to convince him.

What I mean with that example is that the inquisitorial interpretation of the Lore is not an OOC truth. It is an IC point of view strengthen by the IC power of the inquisition. By considering it as an OOC truth, we are collectively limititating RP opportunities. I am feeling that is a kind of excess of the IC power of the inquisition on the OOC level, and I think it's not good for the game. That's why I am asking for a more strict usage of the term Heresy: sinners are not heretics. Believing in the Erra, but failing to obey it is not heresy, it's a sin. Heretic are those who don't believe in the Erra.

This, a thousand times this. This is a PERFECT example of how a Priest would handle the confessional with a Mage. So many people play Inquisitors exclusively or otherwise consider things only from the Inquisitorial side of the Order but they refuse to acknowledge that this is -exactly- how a clergyman would and should react. People keep throwing around Heresy for everything like anything that isn't perfectly and utterly to the Erra Pater makes them a heretic. No, it makes them a -sinner-. Heretics are people who directly espouse anti Davite views and seek to subvert the flock. A Mage who's in a state of confusion and guilt over what they are but are too afraid to go to the Pyre are most certainly not heretics.

The Cardinal has maybe spoken up on something as frequently as 4 times in the last two OOC years

I've thus far hesitated to wade into this thread, for a number of reasons. But I think the difficulty if there is one, arguably, with the Cardinal as a vehicle of staff intervention isn't in them being so. I would say the difficulty, is that is the only time they are seen outside of plots/events is these situations. So that is the only experience people have to draw from to create an opinion. I honestly feel like having meetings or even more open communication with the Cardinal for Orderites or the Council or the population at large might IMHO make them feel like a more natural part of things. And less like a staff vehicle ICly if that makes sense.

So you mean to say you'd like to see the Cardinal a bit more frequently other than just when they're having to step in to mediate?

[Starstarfish]

Name redacted says OOCly, "Okay, so I checked with Temi, and apparently it is a tradition for some nobles to only confess to bishops."

If we are discussing over multiple threads the concern over Order players having active ways to engage with people, I'd like to raise the concern about the idea that people look to bypass good, bad, or otherwise RP with players and instead handle things with NPCs. This removes a lot of power from the Orderite players. I appreciate we have not had, to my knowledge a PC Bishop in at least 3 OOC years, however, I feel like we need to ponder how we can support the Order we do have rather than handle things as if it still had more PCs in it (or the game in general) as we used to.

Personally, I think the whole idea in the confession helpfile about being able to utilize NPCs and vNPCs does us a serious disservice as it does allow people who just don't feel like dealing with things to chose to RP they go to NPC/vNPC priests and then can use that against PC Orderites in arguments. And honestly, it seems sort of a weird loophole in our concept of non-consensual roleplay.

[Temi]

Name redacted says OOCly, "Okay, so I checked with Temi, and apparently it is a tradition for some nobles to only confess to bishops."

I want to clarify what I said. I agreed that this was a theme point that nobles were traditionally only able to confess to certain levels of priest, though I pointed out explicitly that high priests were sufficient for that, and that I didn't know that we'd really kept to this of late. Because of the population issues, though I don't think I said that. I was asked further if some nobles might insist upon the highest level Orderites available, and I agreed that they could if they liked.

[Giles]

I actually registered for the forums just to make this one post, because I really do feel bad. I promise not to be a regular poster! It was me, and I want to apologize again Temi for misquoting her. She definitely did say High Priest.

I know I can't discuss (much) information here, but I think a little context is important. Giles' NPC wife was saying that she hadn't confessed in a while because essentially she was waiting for the GI (someone appropriate to take her confession, in her mind), who is super busy, and was getting IC flak for it, and that's what led to the tell discussion. I misquoted. I don't know why my statement needed to be discussed on the forums instead of a private chat with the staff or even on OOC, but I'm fine with it. Anyway, I actually paid RPA to have a bishop come in and give him and her confession, prompting that IC speech. I think it was a suitable punishment. The GI may disagree, and if that's the case, fine.

However, all this leads me to my two major points. Then, I will go back to lurking. First, I know our Order population is rather low at the moment, but I do sort of think confessing to vNPC priests borders on lame at times. I understand we have to be practical due to the population, but just being able to go "well, I confessed to my sins (to a person that doesn't technically exist), so I don't really need to talk about it to you or anyone" seems kind of dangerous to me. I understand that the GI can't be online all day, every day and there are a ton of reasons people probably don't want to play priests (not being able to marry, for one) and the staff is wary about letting people play them. I definitely understand. However, vNPC priests are like "get out of jail free cards" for sins up to a certain level, and you can just create those "get out of jail free" cards whenever you want. It isn't like Monopoly where you are lucky to get one. I like the idea of vNPCs in general, but not for priests.

My second point is that I don't think it is unreasonable for nobles (and I bring this up only because the game has become more noble-heavy lately) to expect to confess to better than your average priest. As the help file states, precedence is sort of a nebulous thing, and I definitely agree with that. However, titled nobles are second tier, and the average priest is third tier. They should at least confess to high priests, and I am assuming there aren't that many of them and their schedules are pretty tight.

The only time, yet, that I've ever gotten in "trouble" with this character is when Giles willingly went to confession for "acting below his station" because he was hanging out in the Queen's associating with the common man (and the Queen's isn't exactly a dive bar consider where it is situated). Wouldn't going to a common priest be way worse than that considering there's a legit religious ceremony going on? Wouldn't the priest be acting above his/her station in a way? I don't know. Food for thought.

More importantly: sorry again Temi!