1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Civ 5 Religion Mod

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Chazcon, Mar 10, 2010.

  1. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    I am certainly not an expert on Chinese religions and philosophies but I quite enjoyed reading the Tao of Pooh. (Winnie the Pooh that is.) Hardly a very deep book but a fun read.



    In it, it talked about an allegory that I found quite interesting.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinegar_tasters

    So, in my opinion and likely from a Taoist's perspective, it was always a three way battle for the hearts and minds of China.
     
  2. Malkaviel

    Malkaviel Prince

    Joined:
    May 17, 2009
    Messages:
    338
    1. "Paganism" is not a religion. It is a term used by Christians to loosely define non-Abrahamic beliefs as a whole. I'm not going to argue this with someone who calls himself a pagan. Just go do some reading.

    2. All cultures (or civs) certainly do not "start with animism". By game timeline parameters, however, all civs "may" start with ancestor worship but most cultures grew on premises of their national heroes and venerated leaders (names later transliterated and conceptualization deified), so this point is moot.
    I know we've all been taught cavemen ran around with their shaman guys making poultices and appealing to hunting spirits, but modern archaeology shows us this wasn't always the case. While animism is quite ancient, we see no evidence of it pre-dating ceremonial burial for example, or "appeals to forefathers". Macedonian (later Greek) culture seemed to skip animism completely, while others had a quasi-polytheistic-animism (meso-america, some of north america).

    3. Polytheistic civs certainly did not simply chum-up and get effective faction bonuses for the pure concept of having pantheons. Quite the opposite, cultures clashed violently for the pure reason of "our gods are bigger than your gods". Also polytheistic cultures often had internal strife as to which god that week, month, or year had particular prevalence.

    4. The transformation of a peoples' conception of spiritual belief to monotheism was mostly a difficult one, sometimes failed (ie. Akhenaten; also recently discovered dedications to "Zeus the one true god" in southeastern europe) sometimes hundreds of years in it's progress (Exodus Israelites still worshiping the golden calf, thru the draconian efforts of Ezra to bring Jews back to god).

    5. I feel a state religion should grant the possibility for "specialized religious military units". Use your imagination, but some examples could be argonauts, zealots (sicarii), templars, or mujahid.

    I want to add more, but alot is nit-picking on various and indiscriminate topics of mis-information about evolution of human spirituality, some of which have been cited in this thread. I think it's neato people want to include some historical realism in games like civ, but I really, really wish people would do more reading. Truly your opinion doesn't mean jack; only your educated opinion.
     
  3. Malkaviel

    Malkaviel Prince

    Joined:
    May 17, 2009
    Messages:
    338
    Also, to touch on the issue of "whether atheism is a state religion", personally not for or against because I feel it a brand of mind stapling, but I submit this wiki entry..

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism

    inb4 haha you cited wiki. But seriously, atheism has been, and is currently a "state religion" in the world.
     
  4. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    That was an interesting read until your last paragraph. If you are going to make the assertion that others are uneducated and don't know jack then you are going to have to back up what you said a little better. Otherwise it's just another opinion that is no more valid than the others.
     
  5. Malkaviel

    Malkaviel Prince

    Joined:
    May 17, 2009
    Messages:
    338
    Yeh, I suppose in retrospect it's an affront, but there are people itt throwing around terms, labels and concepts without consideration. If religion's inclusion is important to one, be a little more knowledgeable or one can make others aggressive, or worse, stupid.
     
  6. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    Well, I think people are open to new ideas. You seem to know a great deal on the subject. Provide some links where you think they've been lead astray then.

    I think that would be more productive and could lead to a better religious model. That and they (including me) will have learned something new. :)
     
  7. Malkaviel

    Malkaviel Prince

    Joined:
    May 17, 2009
    Messages:
    338
  8. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
  9. Janig

    Janig Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2010
    Messages:
    358
    Why?
    That already happens in Civ4 "our mutual military struggle brings us closer together". Regarding your third point that demonstrates unfounded prejudice which will not improve diplomacy, unless you like stupid leaders that is.

    Given the lack of suggestions regarding religion in diplomacy I doubt whether it should have such a role
     
  10. Malkaviel

    Malkaviel Prince

    Joined:
    May 17, 2009
    Messages:
    338
    I also feel there should be some small happiness penalty for towns with religions conflicting the state's, possibly even a massive penalty if a captured city has an opposing religion's holy shrine. An early religion value civic of religious tolerance, akin to free religion, could be added to avert this penalty but would not add the happiness and science benefits of free religion. The obvious benefit would be income from the shrine.

    citing polytheistic culture influence over monotheistic culture...

    597BC neo-babylonians conquer jerusalem, largely destroying Solomon's temple. A long period of insurrection and civil strife results wherein neo-babylonian kings like Nebuchadnezzar II need to institute reforms, not the least of which involving physically transplanting swaths of population from the levant to Babylon and vice versa (an occurrance later iterated by the Jews as slavery under Babylon).

    539BC Cyrus the great captures mesopotamia and, subsequently, the levant. In a demonstration of wise religious mandate, Jews are allowed to return to Jerusalem and again openly practice their faith. 538BC Cyrus approves rebuilding of Solomon's temple which is completed in 516BC under Darius' reign. So from this we get 2 things:1)Some cultures had wisdom (tech) to practice philosophies (civics) wherein religious freedom can be accommodated in the ancient world. Cyrus was actually seen by many as a "deliverer" or "messiah". 2)Religious holy shrines can be rebuilt.

    flash forward

    6AD Jerusalem and much of the surrounding area come under control of Roman authority as the Iudaea Province. Over following years extremist Jewish sects who find control by a foreign occupying imperialism aberrant, attempted numerous times to usurp Rome's influence, eventually organizing a political front which led to the confrontation we know now as the first Jewish-Roman War (Titus, 67-70AD). This culminated in the destruction of the second temple and a mortality rate among the region's cities in the tens of thousands between casualties and ritualistic suicide.

    Similar events too numerous to list occurred between conflicting polytheist cultures, monotheist vs polytheist cultures (re:Winfrid, later known as St. Boniface, altho essentially non-violent, a good short read), and monotheistic vs monotheistic cultures (re:crusades thru modern day). Perhaps missionaries should have the ability to not only spread religion but also remove religion from cities (complete conversion). Perhaps as culture is disseminated, likelihood of "conflicting religious corruption" could diminish (Alexander's initiated Hellenistic period).
     
  11. Janig

    Janig Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2010
    Messages:
    358
    Cities without state religion in Civ4 already suffer a sort of unhappiness. If you agree entirely with sbrylski06s quote based only on a feeling then youre wrong as far as discussion is concerned. :sleep:
     
  12. Malkaviel

    Malkaviel Prince

    Joined:
    May 17, 2009
    Messages:
    338
    In the 6th century Judea and Israel were conquered. The following deprivation of order on several occasions culminated from the denizens' spiritual convictions, not from outside cultural influence. Because of differing religious concepts there was extreme civil disobedience, uprising, and repeated destruction to the region. Those are not feelings, those are facts.

    It was possible to institute reforms, and in many cases even placate followers, but that required caring and active effort on the part of the occupiers which were likely to come at some cost, be it material or conceptual. But then, the sicarii would just come along and assassinate everyone...

    edit: 6th century BC ^^ mneh
     
  13. Janig

    Janig Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2010
    Messages:
    358
    Im not trying to argue your description of religions conflicting, its a simple term, but sbrylski06 gave no mention of conflict so you cant "also feel" in this regard. Besides people conflict not religion. Youve addressed me but havent answed why this quote makes sense
    Please try again if you want.

    From what I remember the developers only negative statement about religion in civ4 concerned diplomacy, so far I still dont see any positive diplomatic options for religion in civ5.
     
  14. r_rolo1

    r_rolo1 King of myself

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    13,818
    Location:
    Lisbon, Portugal
    Well, I have a sugestion to make:

    In Civ IV all the civs are in a binary state: a city has it or does not have it. That, besides stupid ( because a city with the 7 religions would have 100% hindu, 100 % jewish ,... ) also limited a lot of what you could do in terms of religious balances . So, I would sugest making the presence of religions in a city not binary, but linked to a certain % of the pop in that city.

    P.S Just a dent in the "Atheist" issue : some posters are confusing Atheism and Agnosticism. Atheism can be defined as the belief that there are no deities ( even the greek roots of the word say exactly that ), but Agnosticism is basically not knowing it they exist or not ;) The first might be seen ( justly or not ) as a religion because it implies a faith , the second doesn't.
     
  15. Jecrell

    Jecrell Ruled: Civ3 - Civ5

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Messages:
    709
    Location:
    California, USA
    I think every civilization should be able to create their own religion (perhaps when they enter the mysticism tech), and then from there they can choose to cultivate it. [Edit] If we're going a step further, on a different level every civilization should have its own culture that they can also choose to invest in that can be separate from religion (Then again that should already be in the game obviously!).

    Atheism is a lack of a belief in deities, and thus not related to a faith.
     
  16. r_rolo1

    r_rolo1 King of myself

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    13,818
    Location:
    Lisbon, Portugal
    Wrong, becauce that definition includes Agnosticism. That was my whole point ;)
     
  17. Jecrell

    Jecrell Ruled: Civ3 - Civ5

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Messages:
    709
    Location:
    California, USA
    I apologize, but I have understood Atheism as a position of a lack of belief in a deity. Whereas Agnosticism implies that such things are unknowable. They are different positions, of course.
     
  18. r_rolo1

    r_rolo1 King of myself

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    13,818
    Location:
    Lisbon, Portugal
    Agnosticism is not only the position of those that think those things are unknowable, it is also the position of the ones that, regardless of thinking that is unknowable or not, are not sure of the existance of deities.

    Atheism, as I said , is the position that states there are no deities.

    From Britannica
    A lot of those that would fall in your definition of Atheists would actually be Agnostics, specifically the ones that simply don't know if deities exist or not... lack of faith in X existance is not the same than faith that X does not exist, after all ;)
     
  19. Thorburne

    Thorburne Centurion

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2005
    Messages:
    1,449
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Carney, MD
    Agnosticism is a person who is spiritual, but does not follow an organized religion.
     
  20. Jecrell

    Jecrell Ruled: Civ3 - Civ5

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Messages:
    709
    Location:
    California, USA
    Well to be honest I don't really have a problem with some overlap of Atheism and Agnosticism. My real point was to point out that Atheism is a lack of a belief, (whereas you stated it was a belief in a lack of a deity) and thus it's not necessary to be a believer or a follower and so forth. For instance I wouldn't say I have a belief of no fairies, but rather I have a lack of a belief in fairies. This is the point where I disagree with you that atheism is a belief. I say it is a lack of belief. Unless I have misunderstood what you are saying, for which I apologize.
     

Share This Page