Splitting the Norse Religion

[Dave]

They said in their twitch stream that in the next DLC, Charlemagne which most of us are looking forward, they will not have a split of the norse religion into a scandinavian branch and a german branch. I think it would have been nice to have that sort of a split not just because you have different names for the different gods but because there were differnces and it would create a lot of itneresting events, for example uniting the two religions or having them go apart even farther with additional possibilites to change the religion, it would also be quiet nice to get the patron deities from the Indian DLC for all the other pagans or even for the christians in the form of saints.... I would like to hear your opinions about it.

[Evil Crusader]

The first part? Wishful thinking (aside from the obligatory 'mend the schism' to appease the Byzantinophiles and an option to reform the non-hierarchical faiths, they avoid messing around).
The second part? Nice and interesting, but I'm not that sure it would happen as that would reduce the mechanical uniqueness of each religious group.

[Langkard]

I wouldn't mind seeing more development of the pagan religions. Multiple deities for the pagans, at least. CA managed it for M2:TW with the branching temple tech tree for Lithuanian pagans, with Dievas and Perkunas and one other whose name I've forgotten. Right now the non-Abrahamic religions are less robust and could use some meatiness, more than just having a few mechanics compared to Islam and Christianity.

[Wraith_Magus]

Honestly, I'd like to see more thought put into the reformations of the pagan religions.

As it stands, you just get some book written with your religion, and somehow that makes Norse paganism the same thing as a Monotheistic faith...

In reality, there were numerous philsophical differences that had a great impact on the cultural structure of the peoples living under the faith that aren't addressed at all. How, for example, does a bunch of norse pagans go from a religion based around entry to "heaven" being determined by whether or not you die in battle to one that can support Rennaissance-era technological and philosophical ideas? Are they still slave trading captives across Europe? Do they keep the Baldur-as-Jesus and Loki-as-Lucifer motif that was historically the corruption of their religion by Christianity, or do they hold Loki as the more traditional trickster anti-hero?

[VIRTUEC++]

I love you man, you are a correct thinker!

İlk olarak wraith_magus tarafından gönderildi:

Honestly, I'd like to see more thought put into the reformations of the pagan religions.

As it stands, you just get some book written with your religion, and somehow that makes Norse paganism the same thing as a Monotheistic faith...

In reality, there were numerous philsophical differences that had a great impact on the cultural structure of the peoples living under the faith that aren't addressed at all. How, for example, does a bunch of norse pagans go from a religion based around entry to "heaven" being determined by whether or not you die in battle to one that can support Rennaissance-era technological and philosophical ideas? Are they still slave trading captives across Europe? Do they keep the Baldur-as-Jesus and Loki-as-Lucifer motif that was historically the corruption of their religion by Christianity, or do they hold Loki as the more traditional trickster anti-hero?

I can answer most of those questions.
Will take Norse, both as an example and kitchensink of all Indo European Slavic, Celtic and central european Paganism.
The reason I do this is becouse Norse peganism is the most welldocumented prechristian
european polytheism we have.
This is becouse modern scandinavia is still very scarse populated and have at large a peasant society with many patterns(towns of same size and at same places) that haven't changed since scandinavia agricultural stone age.
This means we have endless supply of archeological findings plus constant new informations from rune stones.
What we know today of the Norse, actually that the Norse was already very similar to christianity in the sense that it was cultived and learned.
Christianisation was very nominal and contact and influence with Rome and Catholic church has been exagerated. In fact you can model much of Pegan sweden on early christian sweden.
In fact Norse myths thinking patterns didn't really go away untill Scandinavia turned into Protestantism and later with the age of reason where entire communites where exterminated.

Baldur as Jesus is not a corruption from Christianity, rather the Christians made
Baldur seem more like the "greek" jesus.
The great difference between Christianity and Norse is polytheism
and their nine days of the week instead of seven in a week.

1.
The norse believed in 12 special elite Gods, ( the zodiak and the twelwe months),
The Christians believe in 12 apostles representing the zodiak.
The norse believed in a quasi omnipotence and omnisentience of Odin
but couldn't believe Odin was actually totally omnipotent and immortal
becouse of logical fallacies and they also didnt believe Odin to be moral.
The Norse believed Wotan or Odin to be just like Early christians and Jews believed God,
a cruel but wise God in the skies capable of good and evil.
Oden was represented by 3 actual Gods who together where Odin,
Christians believed in 3 abstract persons of the same God, way more abstract and confusing.
Christians believed in salvation and sin,
Norse believed more that Odin brough wisdom and civilisation and the physical dangers of the world. Language studies shows that unlike the christians the norse made no difference between physical skill and abstract "learning".
Which means the rough physicaly strong but uneducated pagan is a myth.
Norse believed in four special Gods representing the arms of the cross and the four directions, and four seasons.
Christians believed in four apostles.

2.
The idea of Jesus similar figures have been around in Europe both in scandinavia and greece
long before what we consider the first official christians.
Many of the priests, temples and religious symbols where believed to be christian missionaries and their work ( but not all) are actually Norse temples and symbols.
For example the famous christian Coins with Tors hammer on one side and Cross on the other, the Cross is for Odin and the Hammer for Tor.

Norse Pagan priests have been found and documented in mercenary warbands
who visited christian countries.

The norse used the Cross as a religious symbol long before the christians, we have found Norse crosses from the iron age.
We know from sites, the norse had the same mathematical and astrological knowledge as the greek.

3.
You have got one thing wrong.
Warrior societies where not malevolent or violent just becouse they where not as peaceful as Christians. Recent studies about norse warrior culture, indicate
that the norse warriors priced and trained in selfcontrol, discipline
and dispiced military violations of civilisans.
The impulsive viking who "rape and burn" without condemnations from his military superiors is a myth. In reality if the offender was part of anything else than a small viking warband
he would be flogged or whipped or otherwise reprimanded by his superior officer.
Most pegan scandinavians where peaceful peasants and not vikings.
In fact far from all of the warrior aristocracy where vikings.
The vikings where a small procent of warriors and peasants
who went pirating.
Mercy, agreeability and empathy is not a absent in Norse.
Its not abscent as virtues in runestones, in snorris edda, in folk stories
and its not absent from the major myths.



The problem is that there are little evidence that early Christians( meaning EARLY) where any more peaceful nor less.

The Norse didn't believe that dying in battle was the only thing that allowed you to go to heaven.
How you died makes you go to heaven with different gods.
The Norse had two religions, the Asir and Vanir belief.
Asir was the cult of Kings, for the warrior aristocracy
and Vanir was the cult for peacefull people, farmers or traders.
People who go to Hel, the underworld and are good but not good enought, have a a slightly booring afterlife.
People who doesn't die in battle and are ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, goes to a horrible place in hel.

If you died as good peacefull benevolent person and worshipped the Vanir
you could still go to vanirs heaven, vanaheim.

[VIRTUEC++]

To the first post.

About separate German Norse Pagan.
Yes, its a great idea with German Pagan. But dont call it "German".

The easiest way should be to call it Asir or Germanic Pagan and put all Asir pagans
from the rest of europe outside of Scandinavia in it.

Make Norse completly a seperate Pagansim.
Becouse both Norse Pagan and Germanic Pegan would be part of the (wierd) pagan religion_group their kinship can represented by being in the pagan religioun group.
This way Norse and Germanic Pagans would like eachother more than members of other religions.
Another even easier and slightlyy more realistic way.

Have Germanic Pagan replacing the Norse Pagan in all europe
and start with that.
Later turn the germanic pagans in scandinavia to Norse.
When Germanic Paganism is extrerminated in Germany and eastern Europe,
Scandinavian pegans turn into Norse Pagan.

This has one advantage, it prevents the old germanic pagans from auto capturing all their ancestrial holy places and reforming their religion.

Also we really need to Germanic Christiantity, Gothic Christianity and Arian Christianity
since it actually was this native branch of the religion that actually replaced the german and frankish cults of the asir gods, and NOT THE CATHOLIC version.

I agree with you that we need different types of Norse Pagan.


The Asir (Norse) is a indoeuropean religion that existed all over europe, its not Native to Scandinavia, that is why the same cult the same Gods existed all over Europe.

How do you deal with paganism really,when the current system is very broken.

Norse Pagan means at the best, North European Germanic Pagan
and at worst it means Scandinavian Pagan.

[Wraith_Magus]

I suppose we have a modern-day pagan in our midst, then...

I'm not trying to argue, however, that the Norse were "more malevolant" than the Christians of that era. (Who were utter psychopaths who claimed their status from how brutally they could kill people, themselves.)

The question I have relates to culture and philosophy, which are far more consequential than the often-overhyped religious traditions that just happened to go along with them. (The only practitional religious difference between Shia and Sunni are how they hold their hands when they pray - a laughably insignificant difference to explain the real cultural bad blood between the two sides.)

Basically, the lack of distinction between physical and mental(spiritual) worlds is actually one of the more important changes in society, as that's at the core of the Platonic shift in philosophy. The conceptual difference between mind and body, and the "Ghost in the Shell" concept we share today are so fundamental to our viewpoints, it's bizarre considering viewing the world any other way. It was also a direct result of, and rejection of, the values of the Greek and Roman empires, where might made right even in a theological sense.

The Roman Empire collapsed so spectacularly from within because loan sharks had successfully put 90% of the peasant population so far into debt that they were slaves. There's a reason every single one of the Monotheistic religions are so utterly against "usury", or personal loans, and why religions that rejected specific economic policies all suddenly bloomed at the same time around the world, and came to utterly dominate this time period. The Norse were not one of those. They didn't have prohibitions on finance to sneak around or corrupt as the Templar did, they openly traded in slaves (especially women, sold as unwilling wives) from their raids. That is a far greater difference in how a nation is run than how many days there are in a week!

Worse than all that, however, is how none of this is really explained in any real, meaningful way. You just conquer 3 arbitrary holy sites selected for no reason explained in-game to get religion power-ups that have no historical context. (And I certainly haven't found any reason why Braunschweig is a holy site outside of "it will trigger crusades if you take it" - especially when Braunschweig wasn't even FOUNDED until around 900, and so couldn't be that holy to Christians OR Norse when I take it in 890...)

WHAT changed that made it possible to switch out succession laws that were previously unavailable?

WHAT changed when I went from a small warband that followed the oldest male warrior aristocrat to becoming an empire managing half of Europe where I can set my daughter up to be Fylkir and Empress by feudal elective?

WHAT changed when I went from a pagan culture that had no technology but boats to being the most technologically advanced nation on the planet besides, presumably, China? (Not that it's certain they would give China the technological advantages it deserves, India seems pretty technologically backwards, and this was supposed to be the Islamic Golden Age...)

Honestly, what I'd really like to see is some sort of Norse equivalent of a Council of Nicea when you have a reformation, where you can decide just how much actually changes when you reform. Reformed Norse is just some new heresy that gets plopped down that has no context other than saying that some book was added, and now you're the Norse Pope. (Or rather, Caliph...)

I could see players trying to do something where they go in a more-Monotheistic/Platonism route, which might come out with their religion actually being a heresy of some existing Monotheism, rather than a "pagan" religion, but which has all the powers of something like Christianity or Islam, but with saints replaced with pagan deities.

Alternately, you could have a more overt rejection of Monotheism/Platonism where you keep more of the unreformed pagan superpowers like subjugation, but have many of the same vulnerabilities.

There could be some sort of pairing of advantage and weaknesses, like the way that the crown laws work, so that players can slide reformed religions in how much they have actually reformed. (In general, though, the reformed pagan religions need far more weaknesses or less advantages than they have...)

Further, you might have some capacity to call the council again at some later date to adjust the specifics of the religion (or it might be called by a sufficient number of your priest class...) You could fold in some of the mechanics of the papal elective, to boot.

The big problem I have is that these reformed pagan religions are just completely devoid of historical context, and then on top of that, have utterly no context, even within the game. They're just another blob of color eating up land. The meaning of what's going on inside that blob of land is completely lost.

[Dave]

İlk olarak swedenplus tarafından gönderildi:

To the first post.

About separate German Norse Pagan.
Yes, its a great idea with German Pagan. But dont call it "German".

The easiest way should be to call it Asir or Germanic Pagan and put all Asir pagans
from the rest of europe outside of Scandinavia in it.

Make Norse completly a seperate Pagansim.
Becouse both Norse Pagan and Germanic Pegan would be part of the (wierd) pagan religion_group their kinship can represented by being in the pagan religioun group.
This way Norse and Germanic Pagans would like eachother more than members of other religions.
Another even easier and slightlyy more realistic way.

Have Germanic Pagan replacing the Norse Pagan in all europe
and start with that.
Later turn the germanic pagans in scandinavia to Norse.
When Germanic Paganism is extrerminated in Germany and eastern Europe,
Scandinavian pegans turn into Norse Pagan.

This has one advantage, it prevents the old germanic pagans from auto capturing all their ancestrial holy places and reforming their religion.

Also we really need to Germanic Christiantity, Gothic Christianity and Arian Christianity
since it actually was this native branch of the religion that actually replaced the german and frankish cults of the asir gods, and NOT THE CATHOLIC version.

I agree with you that we need different types of Norse Pagan.


The Asir (Norse) is a indoeuropean religion that existed all over europe, its not Native to Scandinavia, that is why the same cult the same Gods existed all over Europe.

How do you deal with paganism really,when the current system is very broken.

Norse Pagan means at the best, North European Germanic Pagan
and at worst it means Scandinavian Pagan.

I think another point would be to give the holy sites more meaning, a little bit story special buildings you have there or that you can build there, okay the Jews can build the third temple but that is it. For example muslims could build a great new mosque in mekka, zorastrians a giant fire temple, pagans could build the temple of Upsalala. Germanic pagans clearly need other holy sites than scandinavians, I also strongly doubt that Iceland - the land of ice and fire has no holy site. It would also be quiet cool if we could influence the holy sites for example the first completly christian region in germany (if they give us an earlier starting date) becomes a holy site for christianity like cologne is right now. I know it is called crusader kings but honestly I hate playing muslims or christians (byzantines are funny because you can sresotre rome but thats it). I love playing jews, zoroastrians, pagans, hell right know I'm even playing a Hindu conquering the world.
My point is, and I think many people will agree I love the underdogs, why for example can't we dcide from 3/4 possibilities how our reformed paganism looks like? Or actively keep the old ways ( I know we cna do it now but it makes no sense)?
I'm just not interested in that soap-opera part of the game. I want to play the underdog and form my onw realm with my own ideas.