One religion to rule them all

[Adjudant-Major]

Greetings to thee,

would anybody have a proposition for the name of one good religion, a couterpart of the Followers of Melkor (catholics), shared by all good factions, including the dwarves and the elves ? I call it "The West" for now, it is "islam", and the aim is to enable the "jihad" for the good factions like in the Tol Acharn submod, yet called not by a "loremaster", but by one unique "imam" - Gandalf who gets a trait giving him enough piety to "form an Alliance" at a proper moment in the campaign.

No Eru Ilúvatar, and no followers or children. Perhaps "enemies of Sauron" or a similar thing would be good, something those factions have or may have in common. What say you?

[alreadyded]

Personally I don't like invasions since they ruin the game for how I like it and seriously screws over the AI so I never worked on such a thing(one of the first things I removed really), if I had I guess I would use something like "Kindred of Westernesse" (this is off the top of my head). It is vague enough to fit them all yet specific enough since the west in associated with "good" and east with "evil". Also the word is used in the books a few times as well so that is a bonus. I never thought Followers of Melkor was apt though, not even sure if those people even knew who Melkor was. So the question I would like to add is anyone have a name better than that?

Edit; you could just call it the Alliance, or the Last Alliance, that is what Tolkien calls it in the book right? Or League of Westernesse, or Union of Westernesse. Pretty sure Tolkien uses all these words in some way or another to describe what you are looking for.

[Adjudant-Major]

Thanks; yes, the crusades and jihad can ruin the game, but they can be limited and allowed under wanted conditions only (with absence of the "pope" or absence/low trait of the "imam"); if they are called frequently, it can get annoying; but from time to time it is nice to see the armies of more than one or two factions doing something "together".

[alreadyded]

I would go with Union of Westernesse now that I thought on it a little bit, simply because in the First Age there was the Union of Meahdros or however it is spelled. It would essentially be a continuation of that so Tolkien would probably prefer "Union of Whatever."

[Ngugi]

I would myself name it "Free Peoples", signifying the diversity as well as independence from (and antagonism against) Sauron.
It is an established lore name, naturally:

'For the rest, they shall represent the other Free Peoples of the World: Elves, Dwarves, and Men.'
- Elrond, FotR

Learn now the lore of Living Creatures!
First name the four, the free peoples:
Eldest of all, the elf-children;
Dwarf the delver, dark are his houses;
Ent the earthborn, old as mountains;
Man the mortal, master of horses:
- Treebeard, TTT

And while at it, rename FPoE into merely Eriador or PoE or what not.


On a second note you could take the opportunity to rename 'Followers of Melkor' while you're at it, since they worshipped Sauron, not Morgoth; that is a faulty misconception from Akallabeth.

[Roma_Victrix]

I would myself name it "Free Peoples", signifying the diversity as well as independence from (and antagonism against) Sauron.
It is an established lore name, naturally: And while at it, rename FPoE into merely Eriador or PoE or what not.

You could even call them the "Free Peoples of the West", although Dale isn't exactly in the west, more the north or northeast.

In either case, there will be one religion to rule them all, and it shall do so from ar-Raqqah!

[Adjudant-Major]

Free Peoples sounds good and makes sens, thank you.

I will keep "Melkor", as Sauron and the Papal State can be destroyed with the destruction of the Ring in my game, and the aim of my extended map is to continue against the deep territories of Rhun and Harad.

[alreadyded]

Free Peoples sounds too vague for me. It pretty much applies to everyone whether they are fighting against Sauron or just not in league with him. For example the Ents aren't on anyone's side. Also the Free Peoples fight among themselves, I consider the Dunlending's to be part of the Free Peoples and their motives seem purely selfish (takes lands back and kill Rohan), they don't seem to care a wit about Mordor one way or another. My point being the Free Peoples refers to the people not any real organization or governing body. Also I find it strange that Ents would refer to themselves as people. Not that I care what you decide to call the religion, just adding my two pesos to the discussion. I may add in a 2nd Age campaign myself sometime (the only one I am missing) so hopefully you can get this working as desired. Let me know if I can help.

As for Followers of Sauron, he never let others use that name so it should be The Dark Lord or something similar, which could refer to either Sauron or Melkor, no need to specify which it is so everyone is happy.

[Ngugi]

If they are governed by Sauron, they are not Free, as per definition by those who use the term (propaganda some Sauron-huggers will call out, but none the less)^^

He brooked no freedom nor any rivalry, and he named himself Lord of the Earth.
- Silmarillion

[alreadyded]

I edited my post above, it is just my perspective I am not saying it is correct. To me Sauron doesn't govern the people he "controls" the governments that rule the people (the people may not even know it). These people go along with it like people go along with what their governments do in real life. I just see the people as different than the governments. Even the Orcs are not completely governed/controlled by Sauron which is hinted at a few times in the books. Rohan itself was not in open opposition to Sauron when Aragorn meets Eomer (though that may be an oversight by Tolkien since their ally Gondor was so Rohan technically should have been), yet they are still among the Free Peoples. This applies to the Dwarves as well.

"The Free Peoples of the World^[1] were those people who were not under Sauron's domination." (from tolkiengateway)

Just because they are not under his domination does not mean they oppose him is how I see it.

[Adjudant-Major]

Sooner or later they would need to oppose him anyway. A question about the M2TW jihad concept : I see from the files that one can join it against neutral faction too; is there a way to prevent this ? I would first have state of war in order to join the "Alliance"

[alreadyded]

One of the main problems with Middle-Earth is that the Free People's don't all oppose him, and they never do up to the very end (ring destroyed). If they did they would win easily long before the War of the Ring and there wouldn't be any Orcs left. Instead they are divided and really only care about their own local problems which lets Sauron grow in power over and over again, and the Orcs (who are ultimately serving themselves) would not regain their numbers over and over again. Really the only two peoples that truly oppose him are the Elves (not even all of them, mainly the High Elves, many of which flee over the sea and leave Middle-Earth to whatever fate) and the Numenoreans (not even all of them, many (possibly the majority still alive in the 2nd Age) were in league with Sauron probably out of personal gain). The Last Alliance was mainly the Elves (organized by the High Elves) and a part of the Numenoreans (the Faithful). Dwarves were on both sides or no sides multiple times, Middle-Men were on both sides or no side multiple times, and the overwhelming majority of the people were not on anyone's side all of the time. The Free People's in Bree didn't even know what the hell was going on until the War of the Ring was over, and even when they found out they cared more about what happened locally. It is a big recurring theme in the books, one of the reasons I like the books since I am not big on high fantasy due to it being simple and unrealistic. Ya it is a fantasy world but the people in it act surprisingly realistic.

As for those peoples that are "dominated" by him, well they are basically serving themselves too. People in Rhun hate the west and have always warred with them, same with Harad. Sauron uses/manipulates them more than dominates them from what I can tell (though there are no details of what life was like for people in Rhun or Harad), much like Saruman using the Dunlending's hatred of Rohan.

Edit; will provide references upon request.

[Ngugi]

In terms of the game [having TATW in mind, perhaps with some additional faction as per MOS], all none-Melkorian factions, here proposed as Free Peoples, are in war with Sauron's hosts, also in lore.

During the war Dale and Dwarves fight (and are defeated by) Easterlings, who also invade Mirkwood, to fight the Silvans together with beasts. Gondor fight Mordor, Rhun and Harad, together with Rohan who fought Isengard and its Dunland allies already. Isengard's thugs fight in Bree and the Rangers fought all creeps who come down from all of the Misty Mountains for a thousand years already. The goblins strike at the Vale and Lothlorien is under repeated siege, which they can hold until Sauron cares to come himself.
They were not united in an alliance, correct, but none the less in conflict to the level of their capacity during the war. Who cares they had not solved their issues through the Age before the game begins if he has this idea that he want to create, this is Total War, not Total Reenactment, hehe. And it's nothing really lore breaking with this from a chosen POV, worse than all our games can be accused of already.

All things aside, why question the name on the assumption AM would give the religion to factions that were not independent from Sauron's dominion, were not enemies of Sauron and whom would not reaosnably listen to Gandalf in the first place?
Because as long as he gives the religon to those factions who were enemies (in TATW: all good factions), it's a perfectly valid 'What If'-scenario to co-operate under the advice of Gandalf. For a game where all good factions can make proper alliances, where even Dale can conquer the entire world, or Elrond's realm can muster massive hosts, where Sauron may win the War, or good factions to win by might of arms, or the player can chose to back stab Mordor as Rhun and ally with Gondor, why oppose the 'What If'-scenario of Gandalf managing with the task to unite the Free Peoples at last? If we don't like it, we don't play that submod fair and square

A question about the M2TW jihad concept : I see from the files that one can join it against neutral faction too; is there a way to prevent this ? I would first have state of war in order to join the "Alliance"

You mean, that if you is not at war with the faction owning a taget that Gandalf calls it at, you should not be able to join? Nope, never heard about that option.

[alreadyded]

I was discussing the lore, I already stated I don't care what name he uses and of course anyone is welcomed to make whatever kind of game they like. I expected more of a thoughtful lore discussion from you of all people Ngugi. Bree is one example I just gave above, they only care about themselves, they don't fight against Sauron or even care about those that do, they only care about themselves. When Barliman is told of the events he doesn't even care, he cares more about the few people that were "killed dead" in Bree (of which Saruman is responsible not Sauron). Simply stated Free People's refers to too broad a group in the lore, and this group was not only not united against Sauron but many simply didn't care about him because it wasn't their problem. Again though, anyone is welcome to use the term Free People's however they like, but it doesn't fit with what I read in the books.

Edit; Sorry for all these very late edits to posts, I am mainly focusing on modding at the moment.

[Adjudant-Major]

Good debate, thank you both;

Sauron's manipulations will be there too, he will be able to change the religion of the good factions. I have to test the "jihad" feature first.

they are basically serving themselves too

They were under the influence of the evil, and what is good for them, in their eyes, is evil for the others. They were corrupted. They think they are serving themselves, but through serving themselves the way they do, they are serving the evil.

not only not united against Sauron but many simply didn't care about him because it wasn't their problem

LOTR is a fairy tale, black and white. A complex one, so there are also seemingly indifferent characters and peoples of different shades of grey; yet when it comes to a decision to be made, there are but two - you turn good or you turn evil. Unlike in the real world, a pure evil exists in Middle Earth, which means that staying apart and do not care is, after all, serving the evil. The evil will subjugate them later, or they will have to start to care. Even the Ents, mentioned in the debate, have finally chosen their side, when they learned the true face of Saruman. Even the hobbits, away from everything except their pumpkins, have chosen their side in the end.

From the game's perspective, all 7 existing "good" factions are in conflict with the "evil" factions (with the exception of Isengard), with the possibility for Sauron to change their religion (to corrupt them; and with Gandalf's ability to reverse it perhaps), it can be a good feature to form the "Last Alliances"...

You mean, that if you is not at war with the faction owning a taget that Gandalf calls it at, you should not be able to join? Nope, never heard about that option.

I thaught so; so the only ways are: 1) to give and to remove Gandalf's traits, to reduce his obedience, which will work generally for all, 2) to change the chosen faction's religion.

[alreadyded]

What about the Hobbits in the Scouring of the Shire? They just got used to being different little by little, they didn't turn evil they just went with the flow until Frodo and company came and made a difference. I can't help but think the same would happen in a lot of places, probably even Bree. The only reason Bree was even still around was because the Dunedain protected it, as Aragorn points out.

Also Sauron wasn't always so influential on Rhun and Harad, he was gone for long periods of time and Rhun and Harad still warred with and hated the west regardless. Conflict is inevitable, it isn't evil.

[Adjudant-Major]

"The Only Thing Necessary for the Triumph of Evil is that Good Men Do Nothing"

Sauron was absent, but the fruits of his previous work were there, the East and the South were corrupted. The thing about the pure evil is that it is evil, it is egoistic, it is faithless, disloyal. Melkor corrupted Sauron, Sauron corrupted the men. They were corrupted, no matter if he was absent for a few thousands of years. To be evil does not mean you are loyal to the Dark Lord. There is no loyality. There is only fear. And corruption. If it is strong enough, the evil men do serve the Dark Lord. When it is not strong enough, it does not make them good.

What actually do you think made the conflict inevitable ? Was life in the eastern or southern settlements and regions beautiful, fair and free ? Was there no slavery, oppression, tyrany. Was it the expansion of Gondor that made the eastern or southern tribes to defend them-selves ?

[IBSXYPNTS]

"The Only Thing Necessary for the Triumph of Evil is that Good Men Do Nothing"

Sauron was absent, but the fruits of his previous work were there, the East and the South were corrupted. The thing about the pure evil is that it is evil, it is egoistic, it is faithless, disloyal. Melkor corrupted Sauron, Sauron corrupted the men. They were corrupted, no matter if he was absent for a few thousands of years. To be evil does not mean you are loyal to the Dark Lord. There is no loyality. There is only fear. And corruption. If it is strong enough, the evil men do serve the Dark Lord. When it is not strong enough, it does not make them good.

What actually do you think made the conflict inevitable ? Was life in the eastern or southern settlements and regions beautiful, fair and free ? Was there no slavery, oppression, tyrany. Was it the expansion of Gondor that made the eastern or southern tribes to defend them-selves ?

I agree. In RL terms we have to consider Gondor as a kind of Roman Empire. While its there and does its thing alot of people attack them, not out of LETS KILL THEM WE EBIL mentality but because its simply their enemy. I know this explanation doesnt jive perfectly with Tolkien but Harad and Rhun are kinda like the Persians and Germanic tribes that constantly hit the Romans. Its not that they are outright evil.

[Adjudant-Major]

To constantly hit someone just because they always do so is kind of evil. The Germans and the Persians had some reason to fight back; their lands were conquered by Rome, partially, and Rome started the conflict by invasions. It's not really the case of Gondor, not even for the mid-3rd age, and certainly not before... as soon as it was founded, it was attacked by Mordor and it's vassals, as Sauron's continuation of his Numenor campaign. Rome often enslaved local conquered populations, Gondor did not. Rhûn and Harad did. They are evil, their cause against Gondor was never just. After the victory of the Last Alliance, the peace ended by an Easterling invasion. And Vae Victis, Gondor has conquered. Yes. But it's cause was just, beyond any doubt

[alreadyded]

Before Gondor was even founded, and before Sauron began to influence them the Numenoreans were conquering large parts of Middle-Earth and basically doing what they want. They treated the locals as inferiors (which they were really) and ruled over them, converted them, never really trusted them. They took resources as well, chopping down most of the trees in Eriador upset the locals considerably from what I remember reading and the locals may have even depended on those forests for food and wood to survive, the Dunlendings were still unfriendly toward them in the late Third Age as result of this. They had pretty much everything taken from them since Eriador, Rohan, and Gondor was theirs originally.

The Numenoreans probably did similar things in Harad as well, and maybe Rhun I can't remember, Tolkien does write something about Harad but I don't remember any mention of Rhun other than the Numenoreans conquering part of it. It probably would have come to blows if the locals stood a chance against the Numenoreans, and may have even so, whether it did or not there is still conflict between them and no one is evil in that situation. Ya it is in Sauron's favor but he didn't make the Numenoreans want to build tons of ships, or make everyone need other resources (like food) to live which is what caused the conflict, the need for limited resources. This is just one example, you also have cultural differences, and quite a few other things that can cause or be influential.

Scientifically conflict is inevitable because there has always been conflict, competition is what makes life possible. Conflict is an essential part of life that will happen, one people attacking another for what it has is no different than one animal attacking another, or one neighbor fighting with another over something they both want to be theirs, or... it just scales up. Everyone can't have everything they want unless they are taking things (maybe even life) from others. The world would have to have infinite resources and no living being would need to kill anything else to eat (flora and fauna) for there to be no conflict, and if such a world existed life would not evolve since there would be no will to live (thirst, hunger, survival, etc.).

Edit; Rome didn't enslave people anymore than anyone else did, it was typical in those days to conquer whatever you could and enslave whoever resisted in every culture I can think of, and many peoples forged empires at the expensive of others long before and long after the Romans. These Germanic tribes fought among themselves and others a lot long before Rome existed and all the way into the late 1800's, when they finally united they started WWI to expand at the expense of others. Same with the Greeks, the Persians, Arabs, Spaniards, Celts, Saxons, Anglo-Saxons, the Mongols, etc.

Not that I am trying to convince anyone of anything, I just find it an interesting discussion, especially since I am currently adding a Far Harad faction so all this is relevant to that.

Ugh I am too toasted to type very well, hopefully this makes sense.