> The real problem is that the insight
> contest worked because the Jrusteli recognized each others oracles as
> valid and use it to resolve contradictions. Quoting the Revelations of
> Ashara to a Rokari on the other hand is about as convincing as quoting
> the New Testament to a Rabbi.
That's quite insightful, forgive the pun btw ...
I would personally imagine that those who engage in these sorts of contests in any sort of habitual manner, ie those who may have received formal training for these affairs, would actually be cognizant of the main theses and doctrines of the usual opposition, so as to be able to more skillfully and resoundingly refute them.
It is typical in the RW that those who attack some sort of religious/philosophical opponents will quote their opponents' religious/philosophical views, the problem they generally encounter in their arguments being of course that the knowledge they have is often *quite* superficial ; and indeed *why* would a good orthodox Rokari be going round with any sort of in-depth knowledge of the Revelations of Ashara ?
A point of interest concerning this, from RW debates during the Middle Ages (and throughout the wide mediterranean basin btw, not just restricted to Christianity), was that demonstrating too much knowledge of an opponent's heretical doctrines, even for the purpose of denouncing and combating them, could quite easily lead to accusations that you yourself cleaved to these heresies. Indeed, this could be used as a last gasp defense by your opponent, who could, say, accept your points of view, hug you as a brother, and make gushingly approving noises concerning your insightful knowledge of the mysteries of Ashara... which might not sit very well with your hierarchs ;)
In roleplaying terms, I'd say that the audience is the key, because the contest would be to sway their opinions -- and if you imagine them as a bewildering mix of the orthodox, the paranoid, the socialites, the bored-out-of-their-minds silent majority, the nit-pickers, the supporters of either team, God Himself, whichever extra otherworld beings might be "helpful" towards providing "serene" debate, the ultra-dogmatic, the odd independent intellectual, the catering staff, the magicians, and anything else tickling your fancy ; whilst bearing in mind that in a typical non-modern debate, the audience are likely to intervene themselves whichever way, then you can likely build a quite satisfying background structure for your gaming ; rather than just some dry, abstract dice-rolling and limited 2-way debate.
Julian Lord
Powered by hypermail