Your interpretation of this quote is flawed as I explained already:

QUOTE:

QUOTE:
It has to be clear that the NPC is no character at the game - it is a third person. The NPC is not allowed to have a position of a king, chancellor, count. This positions are for players only.

Hoern says that the NPC is not a character at the game and then he explains the consequences of this statement: "The NPC is not allowed to have a position of a king, chancellor, count." - King, chancellor and count are all positions implemented in the game mechanics. NPCs, who are not represented in the game mechanics but only exist in roleplay, cannot hold those positions.
To put it differently: Roleplay has to take place within the limits that are set by the game mechanics. Roleplay cannot overrule game mechanics.
This is all Hoern stated regarding restrictions on NPCs. This paragraph does not state that NPCs may not be important characters, and it does not state anything regarding one´s entourage.

The correct understanding of that quote is part of the three rules I mentioned in my last posting:
"- NPCs can hold any rank and position that is not limited to PCs by the game mechanics."

Of course.. and the sky is green, the grass is blue.. please post more of your "interpretations" about the game, dude!

It is truly wonderful the twists and turns an off-topic thread can meander through.

When I made a lame joke about the Archdiocese of Vaduz, I would never have guessed the torrents of verbiage that it would unleash!

I shall have to come up with funny joke, and see what happens...

@James

Even if your attempt of ridiculing me weren´t that lame it could not substitute a sound argument.

So try again, please:
Are you able to justify your interpretation?
Are you able to show that the reasoning I presented is wrong?

Read back my argumentation on 15 pages.

I don't have time for your twisted conclusions in ignoring the facts:

A NPC is a NPC, not a PC. The game is made to play your knight, you cannot use a NPC instead who do not submit to the game mechanics and do not evolve into a successful knight, as the game was intended. A NPC don't bear the responsibilities of his actions, it could be conveniently dismissed any time, while dismissing your knight in normal conditions would terminate the game and you'll have to start all over again.
That's why using a NPC to interact and compete with PC knights characters would be unfair.

Your NPC's are using the identity of your PC knight character when posting in the board. If the game would be intended for a character distinct of your PC knight character to play with, a distinct identity would be provided to such characters. As long as your NPC's are using the identity of your PC knight character, they are related to your knight.

Hoern says it's possible to play two knights per player. If somebody wants to make two characters, that would be the solution, both of the characters submitted to the game mechanics and purpose of the game and having equal chances to compete with the other PC knights characters within the game.

This is nothing new, I explained those already and don't know why you keep ignoring.

How long do you want to keep this up? There are two opinions in this game and this post will not change it:
1.) The pope is the title given by Hoern for the Papal States king. Then it must be a real player.
The core issue is that a mundane leader might behave different than a spiritual one and a counter pope must then also be king?

2.) The pope as spiritual leader is a role in the game given the power players want to give to this role. Then a NPC can be spiritual leader, like for all other religions

In my opinion both can be valid in certain time, but as long as people prefer dogmas instead of game play, it will go nowhere and we will have no meaningful catholic RP.

We had a NPC pope who serve the interests of Burgundy, "elected" by 3 nations in a tavern. No real separation between pope NPC and PC knight, Duke of Burgundy as expected and not very active either.
It was a failure that proves one more time there isn't such thing as "independant" NPC.

The same for the religious leaders of other religions, no real separation between NPC's religious leaders (self-appointed) and the PC knight king or chancellor.

Evian de Terre wrote:

QUOTE:
How long do you want to keep this up?

Try to stay polite, dude. As long as explanations was asked and there are arguments in favor of an opinion, I see no reason why I should not respond. It bothers you that your opinion is demoted with arguments, showing that you're wrong?

About game-play, we had "enough" game-play with the absent NPC pope and his low credibility. It's not even worth to compare with Gregory, a PC knight as pope: tons of religious RP, christian nations rallied behind the church, debates about new ranks and College of Cardinals, religious wars and so on.

Dude, the NPC's have no identity other than the knight identity, that doesn't ring any bell to you? But it seems that you're unable to have a debate with arguments and keep saying the same story all the time.

James wrote:

QUOTE:
...

Dude, the NPC's have no identity other than the knight identity, that doesn't ring any bell to you? But it seems that you're unable to have a debate with arguments and keep saying the same story all the time.

Please keep your bell ringing to yourself!

Frankly, campanology disturbs me and makes it hard to sleep!

Not as long as you use a false "independant" NPC (who isn't a NPC anymore!) to play with as your second in-game character and interact with PC knights submitted to the game mechanics in an unfair way!

You was so mostly surprised and "revolted" in Hoern allowing to play 2 knights, two characters submitted to the game mechanics, but what's the difference between this and playing two characters, one knight and one fictional character as Playing Character?

You are playing two characters already, dude! That don't disturb you and makes it hard to sleep?
The only difference is that a fictional character not submitted to the game mechanics gives an unfair advantage over PC knight characters and that disturbs me and makes it hard to sleep!

By the way, when you're out of arguments, you're using insulting comments instead? Is this a proper behavior for a tech-moderator?

We were just talking, it wasn't proposed any ban or sanction, just draw your attention that playing two characters, one of them a fictional character is unfair and against the game purpose.

James wrote:

QUOTE:

By the way, when you're out of arguments, you're using insulting comments instead? Is this a proper behavior for a tech-moderator?

...look who's talking...