Denis de Fecamp wrote:

QUOTE:
Jt a comment:
Denis de Fecamp is not equal to Urban III. They are different people with different targets.

If you play different people on different game servers that's no problem. If you play your main character and some NPCs of no particular account in the same game that's fine, too.

If you are trying to play two demanding and possibly conflicting roles at once, say Pope and Grand Mufti, you will have to forgive people for wondering how on earth that's supposed to work, if you won't be getting crises of identity and if you really can resist the temptation to use knowledge and benefits you acquire as character A to the advantage of character B.

Vatican is a nation like the other 50 in the game. There is no rule, that the pope has to play as the Vatican's king or in this nation. The pope is what the players, the community make of him in RP. If you want the pope to play in the Vatican, then find someone who is willing to join this nation and to declare himself as pope in RP. Time will tell, if players like to follow the old or the new pope.

If the new pope is weak and has no military power, then he won't find many followers. He has to convince other players by rp and diplomacy. There is one huge advantage, that he has the throne of the Vatican nation and many players think, the pope should play in Vatican. But this is not a must.
We can also have two or more players who declare themselves as pope.

You can critize the pope like any other player as well. Again, if he is strong enough, no one will, but if he is weak ...

The last attempt at Papal roleplay ended with someone being catapulted in via a window - a curious echo of the defenestrations of Prague...

Nevertheless it was indeed a conclave in the technical sense.

OOI wrote:

QUOTE:
Vatican is a nation like the other 50 in the game. There is no rule, that the pope has to play as the Vatican's king or in this nation.

There is history, there is in game titles (leader of the Vatican bears the title pope).

Should the majority of people decide it's all more of a bother than you want, then declare that nation in Italy Genua or Venice or some other medieval Italian nation and have the admins change the names into anything not Vatican.

However the majority of players who spoke up in this thread seemed to be in favour of a pope in the Vatican.

OOI wrote:

QUOTE:
The pope is what the players, the community make of him in RP. If you want the pope to play in the Vatican, then find someone who is willing to join this nation and to declare himself as pope in RP.

Well though you are from RH, you might not have had an interest in what the Vatican was doing there, look up the last Konklave thread in the RP.

@Denis de Fecamp
To get more concrete on the problems of being king and pope in my view: I have no idea of the history of Burgundy in this game, but supposing Denis de Fecamp, king of Burgundy was at war with Christian nation X and Christian nation X went running to Pope Urban for support against the unfair aggressors - what would you do then and how on earth would and could you retain an impartial position and not act to the advantage of Denis de Fecamp only?

Smelgar wrote:

QUOTE:
The last attempt at Papal roleplay ended with someone being catapulted in via a window - a curious echo of the defenestrations of Prague...

Nevertheless it was indeed a conclave in the technical sense.

Why didn't you chuck him back out?

O yeah That RP. It was hilarious xD. A cardinal that wanted to participate so badly that he let himself beeing catapulted throught the window

OOI wrote:

QUOTE:
Vatican is a nation like the other 50 in the game. There is no rule, that the pope has to play as the Vatican's king or in this nation.

There is no rule?

QUOTE:
Profile of Abel Syarco

nation Papal States
charge Pope

Of course the game is permissive enough that you could play Veps and ask the king of Veps to be also called "Pope", but I guess you won't find many players to support the idea.

All in all, the in-game convention about electing a pope who will act as Vatican leader was fruitful and one of the poles of interest in the game. Why proposing other things only to be "more catholic than the pope" then?

Remember Petrus Secundus, Gregory.. times when the game was very interesting and full of events. Remember Ronin's thread, the longest in KH history or "Pax Vobiscum" of Gregory.

So far the tradition was the pope is elected with 60% of the envoys votes. The envoys cannot be Cardinals, because only the pope could bless cardinals, but simple clerical representatives of catholic nations will do (clergyman, bishop).
If the percentage is not reached, the envoys will be locked up until they agree about one of the candidates, exactly like in real history.

@Smelgar:

QUOTE:
Nevertheless it was indeed a conclave in the technical sense.

In technical sense or biblical sense yes, but not a canonical conclave with the right to elect the pope,
or else every 3-4 christian nations could arrange such a conclave and elect several popes.
The point is such plots of secular rulers are out of the church organization, therefore not canonical and could only state opinions, not making laws for the church or elect high clerical ranks as the pope.

I have no idea what is happening in RP here. I just follow yours and James orders. But my speech concerning pope and Vatican was general talk.

There is no rule that the Vatican's king has to be RP pope. The ingame title does not count as official RP title and there is no rule to follow. You can call yourself "allmighty son of all heavens, the chosen one and protector of all what is beautiful" but this will not change the ingame title given to you.
When Vatican king decides to play as a Muslim and his nation members support him, then there is no reason not to do. But probably most catholic nations will try to prevent this and fight against a Muslim Vatican nation.

I agree most players want the pope to play in Vatican. And if they really do, they have to fight for it or do whatever it takes for this in the game.

In order to have some use of Pope, Papal State should have strong military power and Pope should present authority to other players.

What sense there is if Pope is weak and no one gives a f**k what he sais? And curently, Pope can't have strong influence on anything since every King will go for himself. It is a great idea to have a Pope but this is a big problem.


Example (and I apologize for bringing nations and names in this) :

Pope orders Burgundy to do something and Burgundy refuse. Pope excomunicate them. Then what? Great, excomunicaton brings nothing to anyone. Why should rest care if Burgundy is excomunicated if they have good relations with them?


Or some situation like this:

Pope excomunicates Burgundy and call for Crusade on them? Why should any nation that has good relations with Burgundy lets say Saxony answer call for Crusade when there are only few nations that can harm them and they know it?

Once there is a pope it will be the job of the pope to work at regaining some power for the office.

The trick to getting people to do what you want them to do, is usually not to make any outrageous demands that they absolutely under no circumstances want to fulfill.

Negotiation - the art of getting what you want.

Great idea, too bad it wont work since Papacy and Pope have nothing to offer back...