>the villain is an evil not-Catholic pope
Should I say anything? I probably shouldn't be so sensitive, but it really seems like my GM is really putting a focus on vilifying the religion, and to take exaggerations of its past misdeeds and soapbox about them.
I have a feeling that it will blow up into a big argument, but I really just wished he'd keep his personal feelings toward organized religion out of our games.
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
twitter.com
Nigga, are you serious? How many times has this been done in RPGs, vidya, novels, etc already? Doing the good grace of assuming this isn't just a crappy bait thread to waste your and everyone else's time for (you)s, no you shouldn't be so sensitive. This doesn't even have to come from the CC itself, this could just come from secondary media which have used this plot.
Can we get some examples of what he's done? This could really go either way.
>you're not allowed to have evil religious people because of muh fees fees
kys
Ignore this guy: If its starting to affect your enjoyment of the game and making you feel personally uncomfortable at the table, take your GM aside at some point and have a polite conversation about it. He might not change his mind, but he might be a bit more mindful in his approach.
>make your character a good not-Catholic
>use game events to spur your character towards reforming the structure of not-Catholicism towards the ideals it represents
If your GM's a cunt he'll do something to show nomatter how good you are, your not-Catholic leaning and desire to preserve the faith will destroy you. This will prove he is a cunt and you can leave without worry.
If your GM is down with you Making Not-Catholicism Great Again you good.
That wasn't quite an unmitigated success in reality.
...
So far, we've had the selling of indulgences/robbing the poor, inquisition/witch hunts, and murdering scientists.
The "good guys" are lead by a DMPC who keeps trying to explain that religion is just a tool to oppress people, that organized religion can only do evil, and that killing the pope is not enough, we need to kill all the cardinals as well.
I kind of wish we had more evil Muslim villains, myself. Those are basically tailored-made for a Chaotic Evil, demon-worshipping cult.
I've used them for the main antagonist, and my players thought I was overdoing it.
Historically speaking, there have been plenty of Popes who were complete assholes - there's a reason why a lot of Medieval art concerning Hell actually shows a number of Popes there.
How is the GM at showing other members of the religion? Is there a suggestion that the religion is the source of the problem, or is it just this one guy and his cronies?
I'm an atheist, but I got over my "rah-rah religion evil" phase a long time ago once I realized that a) humans are bastards and, if not for religion, would just find some other reason to kill each other, and b) for any terrible thing that religion has done, you can find at least one example of a good thing religion has done. It's positively affected the lives of millions of people. Who am I to deny them whatever comforts them, as long as they don't harm others pursuing it?
I mean, except Scientology. I reserve the right to still be an asshole about that.
My point is that if you feel it's a major problem, then just talk to your GM about it.
I was inclined to suggest this first, but I sense that if you do this then the GM might begin to feel that you're trying to "ruin his campaign". It's passive-aggressive, is my point.
Just talk to your GM like an adult. Maybe suggest to him, directly, that your character become a good not!Catholic to serve as a counterpoint to the evil not!Pope and show that even if the head of the religion is a dick, the religion CAN still do good.
Whatever you do, don't make it a personal religious debate, however - instead, just respond to any attempt with "I respect your views on religion, I'm just asking for you to respect mine and realize that your not!Catholicism is making me uncomfortable since it's been solely depicted as evil, and I'm just requesting that you allow me to play a character that displays its good aspects."
If he still tries to draw you into a religious debate after that and "convert" you to atheism, then abandon ship.
>and murdering scientists.
This one never even happened in real life. The others are often taken out of context or relayed in the most extreme possible ways.
You know what you do?
Fuck it. Become a cleric. Have aims to become the new Pope. Lead the Church to a glorious age of goodness and prosperity should you succeed, or die trying to rid the church of a corrupting influence that does not represent the tenants of your faith.
Nah, man, not Muslims. Mohammedans.
What? Isn't that just the same thing, only with a misleading name?
Well, technically, but...Medieval Europeaners didn't have a huge understanding of the Muslim religion, and through cultural osmosis, half-remembered features, and so on, there kind of developed a consensus version of what Islam was *really* like in places like England, France, the Holy Roman Empire, and so on - places that rarely saw interaction with Muslims to any real extent (obviously these rumors and myths were somewhat less common in, say, Iberia or the Byzantine Empire).
There's some pretty good stuff there:
>and murdering scientists.
Literally never happened. He's probably rolling with the house arrest of Galileo, which only happened because he was a massive dongle at the Pope and wouldn't back down from being a cockgobbler when he got told to tone it the fuck down.
Also this:
Launch your own inquisition. Become the purifying flame of righteousness and cleans the Lord's House of rot.
Hell, they didn't even kill Galileo. They gave him a slap on the wrist for his first judgement, basically telling him "fuck off with that heliocentrism bullshit", and basically just keeping him in house arrest in his cushy villa for his second judgement.
I mean it was still an unfair judgement for someone who was eventually proven right, but nigga got off easy.
The only one of those which is out of the ordinary is the outright murdering of scientists - usually they were just forced to recant their vows. Indulgences were sold, things like auto-da-fes did happen.
If you don't want to turn this into a religious debate, just suggest that you want to see a different kind of villain for once, because this is getting boring and predictable.
Is this the thing where multiple /pol/niggers try to open le overtone window and just have a religion bitching thread on an unrelated board?
This.
>killing scientist
So he's running a campaign on the "oppressive Catholic Church" meme instead of actual historical abuses? Ditch that retard.
Its worth pointing out that the Vatican Inquisition and the Spanish Inquisition, were very different institutions and the Spanish Inquisition fell under the authority of the Spanish crown rather than the Holy See.
I don't know whether or not you're trying to be antagonizing with that picture. You do know what it's depicting, right?
Dude, you don't have to be /pol/ to go "Oh man, those Islamic fundamentalists are really awful people."
Does going "Man, fuck ISIS. Those people are fucking assholes" make you a racist?
>I don't know whether or not you're trying to be antagonizing with that picture.
Holy shit tell me you're not OP. If you're still sensitive about Martin Luther in the 21st fucking century hell yes you are being too sensitive.
If it's not actually catholicism stop being a triggered little bitch. Big evil religious groups are a normal thing in fantasy worlds. Stop trying to be a victim, stop whining, and just play the damn game or don't.
One of the church reformatories? It's not the Husshite one because he's not on fire, but besides that I don't know who specifically.
It's of Martin Luthor, a guy who tried to reform the Catholic Church for the better. It's not like he's posting Mohammed or something.
You should actually totally mention it to him. If you're not allowed to criticize Islam, you shouldn't be allowed to criticize the Catholic faith either.
Clever, but you'll have to be stabbed for that.
Sure but let's not pretend the Vatican Inquisition never tortured and murdered anybody. Look at the Cathars.
I'm the guy he's responding to, but going full Luther would also be a fun idea. Probably would end up splintering the church rather than causing reform, but it'd be pretty baller to play as not-Luther.
>getting triggered by Martin Luther.
yeah fuck that guy for trying to change a broken system.
You mean 'ragheads' or 'haijis', right?
Martin Luther was a fanatic that triggered one of the bloodiest pre-20th century conflicts in European history because of his antics.
>If you're not allowed to criticize Islam
????
This really is this shit isn't it . Why would you not be allowed to run a pseudo-Islam as the villain in your game?
Of course not. However, that's not what happened here, . No mention was made of ISIS or the like, just that "[Muslims] are basically tailor-made for being a Chaotic-Evil, demon-worshipping cult."
That's /pol/ bait. And no, it doesn't necessarily mean that the person is from /pol/ trying to bait us, it just means that "this is bait, in a manner that is recognized as being a typical tactic of /pol/."
>the most extreme possible ways.
That's basically what's going on. Rich people are essentially using indulgences to purchase sins while everyone else is being tithed in order to keep them oppressed, all while the inquisition tortures and murders with almost comical degrees of sadism.
>Historically speaking, there have been plenty of Popes who were complete assholes
True, but what we're dealing with is Hyper-Hitler and Super-Stalin's lovechild in a dress, with the emphasis that all religious leaders are like him.
>How is the GM at showing other members of the religion?
They're either terrified and unwilling, or super evil and devout.
>Is there a suggestion that the religion is the source of the problem
That's actually been flat-out stated by several NPCs.
>Whatever you do, don't make it a personal religious debate
That's my dilemma, because it is personal for both of us, and the only ways to really avoid hurting his feelings is either to let him continue or to come up with some other excuse and leave the game.
OK OP you are officially a little bitch.
Not that guy, but they're the same thing.
I'd give you shit, but he started off on the right path, and the counter--reformation was actually really good for the church.
Seems like your options are clear then. Decide how important a no-hassle friendship and the game are to you, and either risk them both and talk it out, preserve both and stay silent, or sacrifice one for the other and leave the game.
No, I'm not OP, I'm just wondering if you were trying to be antagonizing. I mean...you're posting Marin Luther. In a thread about not!Catholicism. Wherein the OP is probably seriously considering trying to play a character who's intent will be to reform the not!Catholic religion.
The parallels are kind of hard to miss, and a Catholic might not appreciate having to portray a pseudo-Luther.
>an evil not-Catholic pope
But user, the Protestants don't have popes.
Come on bruh. That's too low hanging fruit.
>fanatic
>dude how about we don't have these rich assholes with their golden sex boy slaves ruling the entire continent from their golden marble palaces in rome, who just buy away their sins with money collected from our own worshippers lmao
I mean, he was a real jerk!
You could say the 30 Years War was about prince's rights or religion and be right both ways. Kinda like how people can say the American Civil War was about state's rights or about slavery and still be right. Luthor was just a catalyst for some deep-seated issues in both the HRE and Catholic Church and it all came to a head in bloody conflict, which if it didn't happen then would've happened in some form at some other time.
The Albegensian Crusade wasn't as one-sided an affair as is often claimed. The Cathars weren't shy about the occasional murder, and it only became a truly bloody after the Cathars murdered a papal legate and the French nobility saw it as a prime moment for a bit of land redistribution.
It's 2017, stop being catholic and maybe you'll stop being such a child about whether or not other people like your imaginary friends.
Why do you comment on historical events you know nothing about?
>Kinda like how people can say the American Civil War was about state's rights or about slavery and still be right.
Yeah, a state's rights to slaves.
Or those fucking Lollards, right. John Wycliffe, what a complete cunt.
Well, they say that making peaceful change impossible is making violent one inevitable.
>standard JRPG plot device #8
>a gigantic problem
Sack the fuck up.
Nope, just states rights. Slavery didn't come into it until more than halfway into the war.
You forgot your fedora user
>Should I say anything?
I honestly couldn't care any less about what you do here if I'm being honest.
Just make up your mind and do or do not do something, it's not that hard.
How about you refute me or shut you dirty catholic mouth, bitchboy?
That's just incorrect
>Prince's right to religion
You see how this works both ways, right?
>Nope, just states rights. Slavery didn't come into it until more than halfway into the war.
Slavery came into it with the Cornerstone Address, which preceded the war. Learn some fucking history.
>Kinda like how people can say the American Civil War was about state's rights or about slavery and still be right.
You actually can't. It is unambiguously about slavery, and this was understood even at the time. While a few individual people were only in the war in support of their home state - Lee, natch - the overall war entirely centers around slaves. Black slaves, specifically.
I mean, fuck, just read the Confederate Constitution. It's nearly word-for-word a copy of the US Constitution, except for a few minor changes, additions, and subtractions here and there...and one of the changes was that in every case where the US Constitution refers to "persons held to service or labor" (thereby including, say, indentured servants), the Confederate Constitution explicitly mentions the slavery of the African race by name. For example:
>Article I, Section 9(4):
>"No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed."
I could go on for some time. The point is that the idea that the Civil War was about anything other than slavery is a post-war myth invented by the United States - both North and South - to make Reconstruction and reintegration of the South easier and cut down on the chances of a second rebellion. But at the time, it was understood and completely unambiguous that the whole thing was being driven by and fought over slavery.
Yeah and JRPG plots totally aren't shit, right?
> Our new government is founded upon exactly [this] idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth
Well, religion is garbage and should end, but kudos on sinking to the level of base SJW fags.
OP, do this and you'll be golden!
Protect the weak and the innocent and do everything that christians are supposed to do, along with defeating the evil organization, bringing down religion and spreading the name of Christ and what he stood for.
DEUS VULT!
Indulgences aren't what really terrible in and of themselves, and were never supposed to excuse or permit sin. Theologically, they're components of penance and forgiveness, and only went astray when the concept was exploited for commercialization by corrupt individuals.
And, the Inquisition was actually considerably less blood-thirsty than any secular court, and most of its bad reputation comes from failing to compare it to its contemporaries, combined with blatant exaggeration.
Henry VIII executed more than twenty times (70,000+ compared to 3,000+) the amount of people the Inquisition did in a quarter of the time.
One of the states rights in question was their right to own slaves. Lincoln never cared about slavery specifically. The civil war was more about whether or not a state has the right to secede than it was about saving anything.
I can say with total honesty that they're probably better than anything you've ever come up with.
We'll heck, you learn something new every day. However, the 30YW was still about both religion and (at least in a meta way) Proncely autonomy.
Well I heard he sometimes didn't say bless you after people sneezed and occasionally got his drank on, so i say it's only fair that you dig up his corpse from consecrated grounds and burn the remains out of spite.
The Confederacy went so far as to say no member state could pass legislation that would lead to the abolition of slaves.
So much for state's right.
Christianity is evil, you fucking idiot.
...
The Union fought to preserve the Union. The Confederacy fought to preserve the institution of slavery. The balance of power had tipped to the point slave states were becoming out numbered by non-slave states with abolitionist leanings. Their decision to secede was solely to ensure their cultural institution of race based slavery persisted.
The Confederacy saw the abolition of slavery as inevitable under the eyes of the Union as a whole, even if the North hadn't yet come to that conclusion.
>catholics are still triggered by protestants
>even though the vatican is still one of the most corrupt entitites in the world
keke
You wouldn't be so upset if it weren't true, user.
No, again, it wasn't. This was totally understood at the time, that the war was over slavery.
Listen to the "Battle-Hymn" of the Republic, for example, written in 1861, just one year into the war. The very last line before the final chorus is:
>As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free,
>While God is marching on.
but religion has been used to oppress/control people and is still used to do so to this day
That wasn't what they disapproved of his heliocentrism theory. The church had been dutifully preserving ancient Greek teachings that suggested that very thing.
What he was arrested for was breach of contract, because he ye olde copy pasted half those ancient Greek texts, and spending half the book taking the piss out of the Pope. It was a purely secular matter and that's why they sent him to a state court rather than a church court.
>the south wanted to keep slavery and that's why civil war! Just look at reddit!
You couldn't be more wrong... but then again revisionist history is all that (((they))) teach in schools any more...
Catholicism has to be villified in fiction because they're the legit good guys IRL.
I mean, you can't really villify jews, muslims or protestants because the shit you'd have them doing to prove their evil, they actually do IRL.
S&M nuns and pope Palpatine having an army of supernatural inquisitors is pulp. Zionist bankers enslaving people through calculated economic violence, jihadists driving trucks into a crowd of tourists and rural american preachers fucking everyone at sunday school under the age of ten are things that actually happen.
No it wasn't. Slavery was a topic, but the war was about the federal government overstepping it's bounds and imposing laws that it was not constitutionally obligated or empowered to. It was the tipping point in American history when it became apparent that you could have too much freedom and that was a bad thing.
So is every government, institution and organization everywhere. If they weren't it would be total anarchy.
I think Alabama made it legal so that any white man, regardless of whether he was even from America or not, could vote in their election
Somebody from Britain could theoretically have travelled to the Confederacy and as long as he was white he could vote. Confederacy were basically just proto-Nazis
Kill everyone starting with the DMPC and start your own Popedom.
Fucking right wing snowflakes.
>but the war was about the federal government overstepping it's bounds and imposing laws that it was not constitutionally obligated or empowered to
Which laws?
And its damn funny the South cries poor, after the North was obligated to humor their Fugitive Slave Laws that violated Northern sovereignty and Northern morality by compelling Northerners to assist in the abduction of human beings for life time bondage.
Yeah except there's nothing scientific about religion that can be corroborated with reality or history. No religion has any scientific basis
Like the south requiring the rest of the nation to follow the fugitive slave law?
>No religion has any scientific basis
Not even Scientology?
>Human beings
Missing property. I would expect back then it would be common courtesy to return someone's property if you found it.
Lol, using triple bracketing to avoid mentioning jews. Where the fuck do you think you are?
Also, the jews aren't in education, there's no money in it.
> muh scientific method
Surprised we got this far before the retards showed up
What does science have to do with governmental organization?
I see. Well there's no point even having this conversation with you if that's your take on the issue. Your arguments, like the South at the time, is purely legalistic and in essence hypocritical, without an ounce of moral fiber.
ALL PRAISE XENU
Oh wait, shit, he's the bad guy isn't he? Guess I'm a Scientology Satanist now.
This is like getting mad at someone because they want their lost dog returned to them.
You're way too paranoid of the /pol/ boogeyman.
There is no /pol/ army doing tactical posting strikes on the internuts, it's just a containment board for idiots. No board has a monolithic culture anymore, not even /b/ or /r9k/
Especially Scientology.
They believe Hubbard met with wizards in China