AGCEEP Religions, game bonuses and penalties

[ConjurerDragon]

Venice, swiss and Genoa would be another 3, they did have a religion but it had no power, cardinals and priests where assigned only by each republic and not on the order of the papal states.

So, if the religion is powerless, then we need a "secular" religion or name it something else.

Switzerland historically did have some sort of state religion - they even had a civil war between the protestant and catholic cantons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reformation_in_Switzerland

And no religion in the game has anything to do with who assigned the bishops. A catholic state would be catholic regardless if the bishop is assigned by the emperor or the pope. That difference only means that the state was somewhat independent from the popes commands but not that it had a different religion or even was a secular state. Concordats between states that regulated how much influence the pope had in different countries were common:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concordat

 

[ConjurerDragon]

if we introduce anglican, it would have a greater stability cost as there where religious wars in England and also the conflict section would have catholic in it

Religious wars as reason for higher stability? How high then should the stability cost of catholic and protestant countries be who fought in the 30-years-war?
Or do you mean that England with a new "anglican" state religion would have religious civil wars - just like France does?

A secular religion would have very low stbility costs as the government would ignore the state's reliogous peoples ideas, thus avoiding internal conflicts....

Or that the state alienates it´s population because during the games timeframe the majority of the population did not even understand what a secular state should be.

example in Venice they had catholic religion but also greek orthodox church, armenian church, lurtheran church and even from 1610 a protestant church.
MAYBE Pagan is similar to secular .........maybe we can change something there

That means that Venice had religious tolerance towards other religions - that´s what the religious tolerance sliders are for.
Venetians first, catholics second or similar is mentioned in one of the events texts. But that does not mean that Venice as a state abondoned all religion and was a secular state.

If I would follow your view then we would have to give the Ottomans "secular religion" because they had more churches of different religions in their empire than anyone else had - and that would be really wrong.

 

[Toio]

Religious wars as reason for higher stability? How high then should the stability cost of catholic and protestant countries be who fought in the 30-years-war?
Or do you mean that England with a new "anglican" state religion would have religious civil wars - just like France does?



Or that the state alienates it´s population because during the games timeframe the majority of the population did not even understand what a secular state should be.



That means that Venice had religious tolerance towards other religions - that´s what the religious tolerance sliders are for.
Venetians first, catholics second or similar is mentioned in one of the events texts. But that does not mean that Venice as a state abondoned all religion and was a secular state.

If I would follow your view then we would have to give the Ottomans "secular religion" because they had more churches of different religions in their empire than anyone else had - and that would be really wrong.

a secular state does not mean a state without religion, it means a state where religion has no political power in peace or war

 

[Toio]

Switzerland historically did have some sort of state religion - they even had a civil war between the protestant and catholic cantons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reformation_in_Switzerland

And no religion in the game has anything to do with who assigned the bishops. A catholic state would be catholic regardless if the bishop is assigned by the emperor or the pope. That difference only means that the state was somewhat independent from the popes commands but not that it had a different religion or even was a secular state. Concordats between states that regulated how much influence the pope had in different countries were common:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concordat

All I am saying is that we need a new "religion" called it secular or tolerant or whatever, its needed in europe also for the USA portion of the game and the prussians, venetians, genoese, grisons, frisians and many many others

 

[ConjurerDragon]

a secular state does not mean a state without religion, it means a state where religion has no political power in peace or war

No, a secular state is a state that has no religion. It´s citizens may have religions but the state may have none
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state

According to your definition any state would be secular where the religion had nothing to say in politics. Then Henry VIII´s England would nearly be "secular" because he as the monarch decided and the church in england turned from papal catholicism to being anglican with Henry as the church´s leader. Like in most protestant countries of the time not the church or the religion had the political power but the monarch was the head of the church replacing the pope.

After the 30-years-war one of the compromises was that each prince of the HRE could decide freely which religion he would choose - and his entire realm had to take the same religion. But even where religion was clearly subordinate to the monarch and religion had no influence on politics that were no secular states. The state still had a state religion - that of it´s ruler.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuius_regio,_eius_religio

And with the head of state being the head of the church the monarch controlled the religion - but the state was not secular because of that.

 

[ConjurerDragon]

All I am saying is that we need a new "religion" called it secular or tolerant or whatever, its needed in europe also for the USA portion of the game and the prussians, venetians, genoese, grisons, frisians and many many others

I agree with you regarding the USA -however I see the USA as the only truly secular state in the game´s timeframe.

With the others I think you exaggerate here. e.g. the house of Hohenzollern that ruled in Brandenburg-Prussia certainly did NOT create a secular state - they saw themselves as defenders of protestantism in Germany. The Hohenzollerns motto is even "Nothing without God"...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Hohenzollern

What you see as "secular" is tolerance for other religions. And for religious tolerence we dont need another religion - that is what the religious tolerance sliders are for.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_the_Great#Religious_tolerance

 

[Toio]

No, a secular state is a state that has no religion. It´s citizens may have religions but the state may have none
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state

According to your definition any state would be secular where the religion had nothing to say in politics. Then Henry VIII´s England would nearly be "secular" because he as the monarch decided and the church in england turned from papal catholicism to being anglican with Henry as the church´s leader. Like in most protestant countries of the time not the church or the religion had the political power but the monarch was the head of the church replacing the pope.

After the 30-years-war one of the compromises was that each prince of the HRE could decide freely which religion he would choose - and his entire realm had to take the same religion. But even where religion was clearly subordinate to the monarch and religion had no influence on politics that were no secular states. The state still had a state religion - that of it´s ruler.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuius_regio,_eius_religio

And with the head of state being the head of the church the monarch controlled the religion - but the state was not secular because of that.

Modern day nations say they have a secular government , like canada australia etc etc yet they have tolerance over all religions. In your understanding of secular would mean that there is no nation in the world that would be secular, because they all have religions. Even USA swear allegiance to the bible for matters of law.
Secular means , not allowing religions in interfereing with the politics of the state.
Tolerenace means that all religions are equal within the state , but have no interference with the state.
Basically, secular and tolerenace has the same path in running a state/nation.

 

[ConjurerDragon]

Modern day nations say they have a secular government , like canada australia etc etc yet they have tolerance over all religions. In your understanding of secular would mean that there is no nation in the world that would be secular, because they all have religions. Even USA swear allegiance to the bible for matters of law.
Secular means , not allowing religions in interfereing with the politics of the state.
Tolerenace means that all religions are equal within the state , but have no interference with the state.
Basically, secular and tolerenace has the same path in running a state/nation.

Not at all. Secularity and tolerance are two different matters.
A secular state can be completely intolerant - e.g. the french revolutionary state that persecuted priests loyal to the pope, or much later soviet russia where religion had no influence on the state but all religions were suppressed.

The USA in the games timeframe would be the only secular and tolerant religious state - as they themselves stated, e.g. in their treaty with the Pasha of Tripoli:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli

 

[Therion]

I agree with ConjurerDragon. And having state religions that cannot be portrayed as provincial religions is meaningless and would seriously debilitate nations that have such state religions. Not to mention having to contend with random religious conversions and colonies ... who'd want a train of colonists from Revolutionary France convert Madagascar to the Cult of the Supreme Being?

 

[Toio]

What would be the outcome if we had some provinces in europe pagan religion, be it for any mod AGCEEP, migrations, ancients or whatever

Can the province be pagan and the owner christian?......Is it a revolt scenario or purely one of technology

 

[Garbon]

Toio, I'm not sure I understand what you are asking. :blush:

 

[Toio]

Toio, I'm not sure I understand what you are asking. :blush:

regardless of which mod,

is there a way a province can become pagan if it started out as christian, while the monarchs retain the religion, i cannot recall any sliders for pagan in AGCEEP , but what about ancient mod.

If there is a way, what would be the likely scenario if a province reverted back to pagan.


to me, in the ancient times, pagan ........or what we call pagan , where religions ( usually female gods ) that where not accepted by the christian, muslim and jewish faiths. these religions are the ones that classified them as pagans.

example, celtic religion was classified pagan by the romans and yet there many gods where also classified "pagan" later

 

[Therion]

is there a way a province can become pagan if it started out as christian, while the monarchs retain the religion

By event.

 

[Sabratha]

If you ask me, "Pagan" in Eu2 terms is any religion outside of the christian-muslim-bhuddist-hindu spectrum. Shinto is a notable exception as while it is a traditional animist religion, it is treated separately in-game. All the other animist (big precolumbian religions, eastern shamanism, african animist religions, north american native rleigions etc) are treated as pagan for simplicities sake.

 

[Toio]

If you ask me, "Pagan" in Eu2 terms is any religion outside of the christian-muslim-bhuddist-hindu spectrum. Shinto is a notable exception as while it is a traditional animist religion, it is treated separately in-game. All the other animist (big precolumbian religions, eastern shamanism, african animist religions, north american native rleigions etc) are treated as pagan for simplicities sake.

read
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11388a.htm

I agree with simplicity sake, I was just after the consecquences if a european province became pagan ( by event ). would the reigning monarch send a missionary, ?...would there be revolts? etc etc

 

[ConjurerDragon]

read
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11388a.htm

I agree with simplicity sake, I was just after the consecquences if a european province became pagan ( by event ). would the reigning monarch send a missionary, ?...would there be revolts? etc etc

Toio what historical example do you mean in which a european province between 1419 and 1820 reverted from another religion to paganism?
Or is that a more general question which has nothing to do with AGCEEP and should better be asked in the main mod forum?

 

[Garbon]

Toio what historical example do you mean in which a european province between 1419 and 1820 reverted from another religion to paganism?
Or is that a more general question which has nothing to do with AGCEEP and should better be asked in the main mod forum?

Yeah I'm still not clear where this is going / a pagan province under a Christian monarch would fare just the same as any other unsupported state religion. AI would eventually move to convert and would suffer slight increase in rr (unless tolerance sliders allowed for tolerance).

 

[Toio]

well, many areas are classified as pagan in europe in old scripts, due to the meaning of pagan as per my attachment. I was wanting to know what we brand as pagan in this game.

If its purely only for african and american natives, well is pagan the right label. Is pagan the right label for other mods, like the ancient mod.

Anyhow, I tested this on Lappland , and no conversion was done by SWE on Lappland for 100 years and still counting. So , I assume the game cannot define pagan in europe the same as it defines it elsewhere

 

[ConjurerDragon]

well, many areas are classified as pagan in europe in old scripts, due to the meaning of pagan as per my attachment. I was wanting to know what we brand as pagan in this game

Everyone who does not have any of the other religions in the game? ^^

If its purely only for african and american natives, well is pagan the right label. Is pagan the right label for other mods, like the ancient mod.

Ancient Mod <> AGCEEP.

Anyhow, I tested this on Lappland , and no conversion was done by SWE on Lappland for 100 years and still counting. So , I assume the game cannot define pagan in europe the same as it defines it elsewhere

SWE would need available missionaries AND the available money to send them before it tries to convert a pagan province. As SWE is rather poor at the start of the 1419 scenario my guess would be that they spend their available money on tax collectors instead of trying to convert Lappland.

 

[Therion]

I'm playing as Austria and in 1569, the only Protestant nations are England and Prussia and they only became so by events. Elsewhere there is not a single Protestant or Reformed province. Only one province from my empire converted (Silesia, now converted back). It's almost as if the Reformation mod didn't get activated.