Buddhists also have Relics, and Relics were kind of the cornerstone of the Hero Cult in Ancient Greece. Relics were also a thing in some Mesoamerican and Andean religions. If you take into account they were the "whole person" and not "part of a person," I'd count Egyptian mummies as Relics, too. To go a step further, what Civ6 calls "Relics" would seem to include icons, idols, cult statues, fetishes, and totems, too, so...
Just had a thought re: ethnicities. What if Cyrus’s personal ability was one which “created” a second ethnicity which spread via pressure when he conquers his first capital, to replicate him freeing the Jews in Babylon.
Buddhists also have Relics, and Relics were kind of the cornerstone of the Hero Cult in Ancient Greece. Relics were also a thing in some Mesoamerican and Andean religions. If you take into account they were the "whole person" and not "part of a person," I'd count Egyptian mummies as Relics, too. To go a step further, what Civ6 calls "Relics" would seem to include icons, idols, cult statues, fetishes, and totems, too, so...
I mean in Buddhism is mostly Śarīras (and rarely, the kāṣāya of a famous Buddhist master) that are considered as relic, while in Catholic everything related to a saint can become a relic (robe, shroud, sandal, oil, etc). Eastern Orthodoxy on the other hand is more inclined to the "whole person" idea of relic (for example, uh, Lenin's body).
The idea of relics in civ6 is more of a collection of "things that are considered as sacred".
(It's very off topic now so I just stop at here: The joke is how his body is displayed strongly resembles how an Eastern Orthodox saint's remain is displayed, and the dude who presumably ordered his body to be displayed like this coincidentally had a theological background.)
Killing two birds with one stone and getting a feathered relic out of it . . .
Give Cathedrals a Relic Slot, have Relics create Religious Tourism starting back in the medieval Era (so, earlier than almost any other Tourism mechanic)
Then have a chance of creating a Relic whenever an Apostle not only dies in Religious Combat, but also 'converts' Barbarians or converts more than one city, which should increase the 'production' of Relics in just abut every game.
I mean in Buddhism is mostly Śarīras (and rarely, the kāṣāya of a famous Buddhist master) that are considered as relic, while in Catholic everything related to a saint can become a relic (robe, shroud, sandal, oil, etc). Eastern Orthodoxy on the other hand is more inclined to the "whole person" idea of relic (for example, uh, Lenin's body).
The idea of relics in civ6 is more of a collection of "things that are considered as sacred".
There's also the footprints of the Buddha - covered in gold and elaborated upon. I've never heard of them being moved around, but they certainly could be. Some temples have the "bodies" of famous monks that mystically do not decay (because, I suspect, they are wax), the trunks of trees, pieces of boats, the preserved bodies of mystical figures (there is one at Wat Mahabut in Bangkok that famously predicts sports matches). Not to mention the Buddha images themselves - what is the Emerald Buddha but a relic, "found" in Chiang Mai, moved to Vientiane and looted from the ashes of that city and moved to Bangkok!
The current city razing mechanism will usually result in a lose-lose situation, AI lost a city. you lost a city as well, and you don't get anything directly (you do get a massive penalty because everyone thinks you are a terrible person). But if you do get something - say, a settler, which means you still technically gain a city - that can sometimes encourage the player to become more militaristic (see: Montezuma's free builder).
This mechanism can also become more sophisticated if civ introduced ethnic groups as a mechanism in the future (though unlikely).
There's also the footprints of the Buddha - covered in gold and elaborated upon. I've never heard of them being moved around, but they certainly could be. Some temples have the "bodies" of famous monks that mystically do not decay (because, I suspect, they are wax), the trunks of trees, pieces of boats, the preserved bodies of mystical figures (there is one at Wat Mahabut in Bangkok that famously predicts sports matches). Not to mention the Buddha images themselves - what is the Emerald Buddha but a relic, "found" in Chiang Mai, moved to Vientiane and looted from the ashes of that city and moved to Bangkok!
Thanks for the additional explanations about Buddhist relics! My knowledge about them are mainly from the Chinese/Japanese Buddhism context, I have no idea how Buddhist relics are defined in Southeast Asia.
You also mentioned the bodies of famous monks that mystically do not decay - this does remind me that there are several preserved bodies (or mummies, to be exact) of famous monks in China. The most famous one is a mummy supposedly of Huineng (being mummified using lacquer).
Thanks for the additional explanations about Buddhist relics! My knowledge about them are mainly from the Chinese/Japanese Buddhism context, I have no idea how Buddhist relics are defined in Southeast Asia.
You also mentioned the bodies of famous monks that mystically do not decay - this does remind me that there are several preserved bodies (or mummies, to be exact) of famous monks in China. The most famous one is a mummy supposedly of Huineng (being mummified using lacquer).
There is a monk's body in Samoeng district in Thailand that I know reasonably well. Certainly old ones are lacquered, but lifelike wax sculptures of famous monks (Somdet tho, Kruba siwichai) are pretty common nowadays. There's a dissonance between what monks at the temple will tell you ("oh this is a statue that serves as a reminder of his teachings") and what many local people will say ("that's his body; it doesn't rot."). The dissonance is interesting for two reasons - on one hand it reflects how many Buddha statues gain power not as symbols of the Buddha, but as divine objects in themselves (the famous Emerald Buddha, or the popular เจ้าพ่อปากแดง, who gives out lottery numbers), and on the other hand reflects how monks can often walk a line re: popular religions -- "hey, if it gets them into the temple, it's good. They might be asking for lottery numbers, but maybe they hear a bit of the Dharma".
Moving slightly off the theard. I hope that if we get Portugal as a full civ, they'll use monophonic cante alentejano as a musical theme. It would be a cool change from omnipresent fado
Moving slightly off the theard. I hope that if we get Portugal as a full civ, they'll use monophonic cante alentejano as a musical theme. It would be a cool change from omnipresent fado
Don't be ridiculous. Everyone knows that the only music from the Iberian Peninsula is Spanish guitar, flamenco, and mariachi. Yes, I hope if Portugal comes it gets something different, too.
the most amazing result of NFP would be if there were no european civs in it. Imagine how many options that would free up:
5 remaining civs, one of which is guaranteed to be Vietnam. Imagine if you could get two of Assyria, Babylon, Hittites, plus two of Swahili/Oman, Berbers, Navajo, Tlingit, Coast Salish, Shona, Benin
the most amazing result of NFP would be if there were no european civs in it. Imagine how many options that would free up:
5 remaining civs, one of which is guaranteed to be Vietnam. Imagine if you could get two of Assyria, Babylon, Hittites, plus two of Swahili/Oman, Berbers, Navajo, Tlingit, Coast Salish, Shona, Benin
Why stop at two lol? Hittites are kind of shoved out by the Ottomans, and Babylon is great as a city-state. We could get away with only Assyria and THREE new civs (or dare I say four new civs).
I do have a huge suspicion that DLC is the Middle East and will have at least one new civ: Oman, Timurids, Palmyra/Armenia, etc. Every other region in the world has at least two completely new civs added to it, and even if you divide Africa into cis- and sub-Saharan Africa and Asia into central and eastern Asia, they each have one completely new civ (Nubia, Kongo, Scythia, and Vietnam, respectively). The Middle East, for all of its historical importance, only has Phoenicia and Macedonia as new civs, and both are really just returning civs: Carthage and Alexander-the-civ. Granted, it was always the most densely represented region outside of Europe in civ games, but I also suspect that the devs would want to introduce a completely new civ to that region.
the most amazing result of NFP would be if there were no european civs in it. Imagine how many options that would free up:
5 remaining civs, one of which is guaranteed to be Vietnam. Imagine if you could get two of Assyria, Babylon, Hittites, plus two of Swahili/Oman, Berbers, Navajo, Tlingit, Coast Salish, Shona, Benin
the most amazing result of NFP would be if there were no european civs in it. Imagine how many options that would free up:
5 remaining civs, one of which is guaranteed to be Vietnam. Imagine if you could get two of Assyria, Babylon, Hittites, plus two of Swahili/Oman, Berbers, Navajo, Tlingit, Coast Salish, Shona, Benin
I think that would be awesome, but thinking about the almost certain Europe set we'll be getting (next month, probably?) and the 99% chance I estimate of it being Byzantium and Portugal, well... I've loved both of those civs in the past, and will get excited for them, but would throw both under the bus for Ireland & Renaissance Italy instead.
I do hope they never make a civilization under a leader of one of the Italian city states representing all of the Italian city states to be honest, I think that would be a fairly ugly amalgamation. Florence instead of Venice returning or something would be cool, but a civilization representing all of the Italian city states fictitiously united I just find completely unappealing. I know there is the example of how Greek, Phoenician and Mayan city states are merged under one civilization, but doing that to Italian city states somehow seems even worse to me. Perhaps because so many of them are individually famous and seen as distinct, perhaps because they are more recent than those ancient city states, but either way I don't like it at all. Following the format of Greece where they were happy to split Macedon off and not have it a part of the broader civilization representing Ancient Greece, I think that individual representation for states like Venice or Florence isn't unreasonable. If there is an 'Italian' civilization make the leader Garibaldi or Victor Emmanuel II maybe, but not Lorenzo de' Medici.
I do hope they never make a civilization under a leader of one of the Italian city states representing all of the Italian city states to be honest, I think that would be a fairly ugly amalgamation. Florence instead of Venice returning or something would be cool, but a civilization representing all of the Italian city states fictitiously united I just find completely unappealing. I know there is the example of how Greek, Phoenician and Mayan city states are merged under one civilization, but doing that to Italian city states somehow seems even worse to me. Perhaps because so many of them are individually famous and seen as distinct, perhaps because they are more recent than those ancient city states, but either way I don't like it at all. Following the format of Greece where they were happy to split Macedon off and not have it a part of the broader civilization representing Ancient Greece, I think that individual representation for states like Venice or Florence isn't unreasonable. If there is an 'Italian' civilization make the leader Garibaldi or Victor Emmanuel II maybe, but not Lorenzo de' Medici.
I can live with a more modern Italian leader, as long as the other civ abilities including the unique infrastructure, UU etc. at least deals with the Medieval/ Renaissance eras.
If I had to choose one I would choose Florence though, but at the same time I would feel bad about leaving Venice, Milan etc. out as well which is why I'd want to give it the Greek, Phoenician, and Maya treatment.
. Following the format of Greece where they were happy to split Macedon off and not have it a part of the broader civilization representing Ancient Greece, I think that individual representation for states like Venice or Florence isn't unreasonable.
Greece also has the Athens-Sparta split - although not to much of a split in terms of government bonuses, UU, UD, etc - and IMHO that's a promising direction.
"Italy's unique ability is called 'Italo-Ethiopian War': for every tech or civic Italy has that its opponent does not have, its opponent gains a +5 bonus to combat strength. Its allies suffer a -5 combat penalty when both civs are at war with the same civ."
"Italy's unique ability is called 'Italo-Ethiopian War': for every tech or civic Italy has that its opponent does not have, its opponent gains a +5 bonus to combat strength. Its allies suffer a -5 combat penalty when both civs are at war with the same civ."
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
![Andrew Johnson [FXS]](https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/m/326/326908.jpg?1589646534){kind=avatar}
