While We Wait: The Next Generation

[Neverwonagame3]

BTW, what would people say were the worst cases (EDIT: Of overly Western nation concepts) I am guilty of?

 

[Abaddon]

Dropping out as soon as you have a negative update

 

[Angst]

Spoiler :

My system developed over time, most haven't they've either stalled, or developed traits which make no sense given the context.



Didn't come to anything did it you could lay that one at the altar of political expediency. I had been betting on LJ doing something like that in the next turn or two. Seriously though who attacks my sole source of gold and doesn't bother to tell me? Especially after I've politely posted diplomacy the turn before stating my intention to defend Neruss come hell or high water.

In any case, my religion has changed since its inception, it has never been static, it's arguably not even the same religion now. Realistically to start with it wasn't even a religion:



The Common Law functions essentially as a guide to how Seshweay should react in most conceivable situations, unlike in most religions it isn't set in stone and tends to change over time which allows for societal flexibility. It's also the only reason I have Priests, they are really just the Judges of the Common Law, they seldom provide more than assistance in resolving disputes, active proselytizing is reserved for individuals and is usually spread through trade and the accompanying benefits it offer(s/ed). It's the earliest example of Ancestor Worship (the Ancestors are myths, but at some stage were people alive and in the flesh); treating the Ancestors as gods was second and only came after their original messages were largely obscured by time and the problems associated with oral traditions.

The Book of Common Prayer is the second element of Ancestor Worship and is effectively a codification of the original teachings of the Ancestors. It isn't by any means uniform, although all regional variants contain common elements which make up the majority of the Book. The regional deviations which have manifested thus far include prophecies by the Siesites - citizens of Sies - about the coming of a great hero to unify the Seshweay in a grand fight against 'the enemy' (which wasn't exactly defined). Suffice to say that Aya'se, who was a Siesite, arose under this tradition, which was then adopted by the other cities as canon. The idea of Matah (its a position as well as a name) was probably derived from the Arkage. The ascension of Aya'se and Matah as gods, probably derives in no small part from the Trilui and Arkage traditions being combined over time and subsumed into a broader narrative. I didn't 'convert' the Arkage, I absorbed their beliefs, which were then partially incorporated and they then adopted other customs over time which more or less made them into Seshweay (in the broad sense of the word).

His Words and Deeds are the most 'modern' with some of them being culled from earlier traditions by Aya'se in the second instance and from his own words and deeds during his current incarnation. They are really just at this stage a a manual for interpreting things from the other sources. They also provide a grand narrative for the whole of the faith which has more or less been accepted by everyone. It's more or less bought all Seshweay (used broadly) into line with regards to the world.

In any case, I think everyone in the NES has mistaken the nature of the faith, it's not top down, its bottom up. It is a set of customs, buttressed with some allegories, backed up by a self reinforcing moral and legal code with after probably a thousand years or so a definitive codification placed on top. It's not something you can erase by destroying the temples or murdering the priesthood, its something that is essentially honored the moment someone gets up in the morning and cleans themselves. You can substitute some other god for Aya'se, but after a while that other god is more or less going to be turned into an aspect of Aya'se. It's also practiced at an individual and communal level, the overarching national level political, legal and moral systems are nothing but reflections of what the people demand in their state.

Again, it's manifestly not a western religion, it owes some things to Judaism - at its earliest stages, Islam - during the early years of Muhammad's life and the accompanying dilution of his message, Hinduism prior to its current organized incarnation - with the Brahmans as intermediaries and carriers of the law and customs, Polynesian Polytheism - for the inspiration of raising mortals to gods and the important role that Ancestors can play along with their waning in influence over time, the conception of Matah and Aya'se also owes a considerable debt to early Christian attempts to explain God to Polynesian Polytheists by essentially plastering it over a Polytheist facade, I also had China in mind when I made up competing and complementary layers of religion and the whole notion of democratic government and paradise lost owes something to Thomas Paine and something to some Papua New Guinean tribes.

There were also few 'absolutes' in Ancestor Worship... I don't think I can legitimately call it that any more. It's the nature of having a system which is diverse by nature and always has been historically, what is correct for one group is not correct for another given that they are likely to draw up traditions that might be significantly different when looked at in aggregate.



Correct, You can't make a convincing culture without detailing the socio-economic structures of the harvest. Why did the Hu'ut use slaves? Did they have a labor intensive crop to harvest that could flourish through the use of unskilled labor? There's lots of reasons for using slaves, but only a few for relying on them.

Sorry I spoiled you, but just wanted to throw two small points out there.

First of all, you would all have been destroyed if not the Faron had intervened. Having two fronts and a lazy elephant nation declaring war to landgrab (As Hu'ut already had two great powers against her) kinda ruined the whole feel of the Hu'ut warmaul.

Secondly, as a general note, the slaves used where one of the bricks that were used in a feudal European system, however the nobles were organized differently: Each farm had a number of slaves. The nobles of those farms (The feudal lords) each had its garrison designated to guard the slaves; therefore the peasants were relying on the nobles to protect them against their own slaves. This of course was one of the reasons why the Hu'ut empire was so damned stable through so much time, and one of the reasons that Hu'ut had a natural large military as well. However, it let them remain in the Dark Age of what you'd call it, since trade was unemphasized and kinda undeveloped. There wasn't much growth in the nation, that is.

So yes, the Hu'ut could possibly remind you of a generic European nation, I merely hope that the unique feudal system would make it different. Initially it was attempted as an Egypt (Which is why so much architecture was developed before the capital was conquered by the ignorant northeners).

 

[Lord_Iggy]

Would you consider returning as the Hu'ut l_j? My period of meddling seems to have come to a close, thanks to a couple of horsemen overstaying their welcome in Faron.

 

[Masada]

First of all, you would all have been destroyed if not the Faron had intervened. Having two fronts and a lazy elephant nation declaring war to landgrab (As Hu'ut already had two great powers against her) kinda ruined the whole feel of the Hu'ut warmaul.

Who made an alliance with the Farou in the first place? You were completely wrong footed to start with. I wasn't the one who fought a war against a neutral power, with a hostile one sitting on its border who had traditionally good relations with the aforementioned neutral power and had another large Empire with limited targets now presented with a massive opening to carve a nice large chunk out of.

Secondly, as a general note, the slaves used where one of the bricks that were used in a feudal European system, however the nobles were organized differently: Each farm had a number of slaves. The nobles of those farms (The feudal lords) each had its garrison designated to guard the slaves; therefore the peasants were relying on the nobles to protect them against their own slaves. This of course was one of the reasons why the Hu'ut empire was so damned stable through so much time, and one of the reasons that Hu'ut had a natural large military as well. However, it let them remain in the Dark Age of what you'd call it, since trade was unemphasized and kinda undeveloped. There wasn't much growth in the nation, that is.

All of those slaves, lords with large armies and an Emperor thrown in the mix is not a recipe for stability. I'm fairly sure Das can run with your Egyptian example and pick some historically appropriate holes in your thesis.

 

[das]

You see, I tried to avoid moral absolutism with the Satar. They did things for semi-illogical and irrational reasons, and their religion is VERY utilitarian, in that their deity satisfies their direct needs as a culture, rather than introducing absolutes that don't yet exist, philosophically.

The Satar are not Western. They are barbaric, cruel, and...steppe-ish. As they should be.

And I approve of them entirely in that regard. I just think the mass suicide of the nobility was a bit too well-coordinated, to say nothing of that cringe-worthy exile-and-return number.

My system developed over time, most haven't they've either stalled, or developed traits which make no sense given the context.

My point exactly. And I am trying/going to try to evolve mine now.

Re: Ancestor Worship: a) that's great and b) honestly I have come to severely loathe the idea of a "religion" stat in NESes except maybe for a state religion when such explicitly exists and is vigorously enforced (not sure if the Cult of the Emperor quite makes it there; I guess Atenism just might, though?). I should prefer to just write the most widespread cults, pantheons and whatnot in the world stats, pointing out their basics and where they are located. Maybe just give them separate cult stats and add a main state cult stat to the states stats (confused yet? ).

I mean, the religions of all countries at all times are multifaceted and difficult to classify with precision. Enough has been written about animistic elements in medieval Christianity and whatnot; and that's a modern, strongly organised religion that actively frowned on such things - now think about how bloated a religion stat for Roman Anatolia must be in order to be even remotely accurate and to cover the most significant data!

The nobles of those farms (The feudal lords) each had its garrison designated to guard the slaves; therefore the peasants were relying on the nobles to protect them against their own slaves.

Peasants? This is not how villa slavery works.

I'm fairly sure Das can run with your Egyptian example and pick some historically appropriate holes in your thesis.

Gladly:
1. There was no large-scale slavery in Egypt. You're thinking of Rome;
2. Instead, there were state peasants, like in China. The difference from China is that the local nobility, led by the nomarch, was strong and stable enough and therefore able to be entirely independent from the state;
3. Whenever the king became stronger - which meant mostly creating an alternative power base so that he could avoid relying on the nobles, who were his worst enemies in most situations - he used peasants through taxes and public works in the kingdom;
4. Whenever the nomarchs were stronger because the king was unable to create and/or maintain an alternative power base, they used peasants through taxes and public works in their nomes. That is not villa slavery and not necessarily feudalism except in the broadest sense;
5. The Egyptian kings actively combated what slavery there was, because slavery is almost always private and therefore benefited the nomarchs and not the state.

Also, what Masada said about your stability and Egypt's stability too. Not even China could fall apart to as many little pieces as Egypt, and certainly it didn't do that as often.

What you are looking at is more like some kind of bizarro Rome where Rome was a city in a large river valley and never even a republic, apparently. There are some ways to get there, but it's all horribly contrived.

I offer that people rarely think through the details of their socio-economic evolution from a Stone Age community to an empire, hence their irrealism.

 

[Masada]

honestly I have come to severely loathe the idea of a "religion" stat in NESes except maybe for a state religion when such explicitly exists and is vigorously enforced (not sure if the Cult of the Emperor quite makes it there; I guess Atenism just might, though?). I should prefer to just write the most widespread cults, pantheons and whatnot in the world stats, pointing out their basics and where they are located. Maybe just give them separate cult stats and add a main state cult stat to the states stats (confused yet? ).

No and I agree.

I mean, the religions of all countries at all times are multifaceted and difficult to classify with precision. Enough has been written about animistic elements in medieval Christianity and whatnot; and that's a modern, strongly organised religion that actively frowned on such things - now think about how bloated a religion stat for Roman Anatolia must be in order to be even remotely accurate and to cover the most significant data!

The River Sesh provides a fun example.

I offer that people rarely think through the details of their socio-economic evolution from a Stone Age community to an empire, hence their irrealism.

I went from Oligarchical City-States, to a Republic ruled by a God... to another Empire ruled by halfbreed Emperors, to a loose confederation of Mercantile City-States....to a Republic again to a Union of Republics and City-States....

Other states are yet to collapse or are yet to see their governments altered substantially by outside or internal stimuli. Mine was far from planned and it came out alright generally, I can internally reconcile the nature of my state with its play-style. Some of the evolutions I haven't controlled made utterly no sense contextually... but oh well.

 

[Neverwonagame3]

Dropping out as soon as you have a negative update

I know about that. See Edit.

 

[Angst]

Who made an alliance with the Farou in the first place? You were completely wrong footed to start with. I wasn't the one who fought a war against a neutral power, with a hostile one sitting on its border who had traditionally good relations with the aforementioned neutral power and had another large Empire with limited targets now presented with a massive opening to carve a nice large chunk out of.

I checked the thread, and never saw that alliance. And Faron attacked since it was NPC'ed; Lord_Iggy is a peacemonger. So booh.

All of those slaves, lords with large armies and an Emperor thrown in the mix is not a recipe for stability. I'm fairly sure Das can run with your Egyptian example and pick some historically appropriate holes in your thesis.

I didn't say I was Egypt. I said that Egypt was the initial intended goal, but I missed the target.

Though the recipe was in general fear of the different houses; The emperor himself had an army, each nobles had a small one, etc. But the nobles were unable to revolt against the Emperor since if they did, the slaves would surely revolt against them, since the nobles had surpressed the slaves for centuries. Technically this wasn't a problem since the nobles could just not care about the slaves; but then slaves would overrun the individual farmsteads and cut the nobles off food supplies, and taxes.

@das: villa slavery, wut? When did I say that? I'm not completely sure whether you are talking about Hu'ut as an unrealistic nation or whether you are simply describing it? I'm open for criticism.

 

[das]

I went from Oligarchical City-States, to a Republic ruled by a God... to another Empire ruled by halfbreed Emperors, to a loose confederation of Mercantile City-States....to a Republic again to a Union of Republics and City-States....

I was talking more about what there was before the Oligarchical City-States; how they came to be and why. Technically the seeds of all other empires, republics and theocracies should be in there as well. It shouldn't be too difficult.

That said, most ancient states were relatively stable as far as the essentials of their political constitution (not the piece of paper ) are concerned.

 

[Angst]

Would you consider returning as the Hu'ut l_j? My period of meddling seems to have come to a close, thanks to a couple of horsemen overstaying their welcome in Faron.

I am still considering it, you're not the only one to ask. But my RL capabilities currently also render me quite unable to spend any proper contribution (Save my own new and shiny NES which doesn't make sense anyways), and I think that NK was tired of having a great power that seemed not to care about his NES. I did, but you know, rl.

 

[Masada]

I checked the thread, and never saw that alliance. And Faron attacked since it was NPC'ed; Lord_Iggy is a peacemonger. So booh.

I didn't advertise it, if that's what you mean, if you were going to make a hash of it, I wasn't going to stop you. It was a quite spectacular own goal on your part to be honest. I mean seriously, if I intervened and the Farou didn't honor their agreement, do you think you would have won? You couldn't have taken the battle to me, I would have simply retreated to my cities and harried you the whole time you tried to siege my cities, the same would have happened with Neruss I would have supplied them by sea. It's also not like I couldn't have built a large army and simply driven you off the turn after and every turn this went on your would have gotten more and more vulnerable and juicy looking to everyone else around you.

I was talking more about what there was before the Oligarchical City-States; how they came to be and why. Technically the seeds of all other empires, republics and theocracies should be in there as well. It shouldn't be too difficult.

They appeared? I had a nice reason why the appeared written up but I don't keep orders.

That said, most ancient states were relatively stable as far as the essentials of their political constitution (not the piece of paper ) are concerned.

Over a thousand or so year period? There's stability and... stability.

 

[Angst]

I didn't advertise it, if that's what you mean, if you were going to make a hash of it, I wasn't going to stop you. It was a quite spectacular own goal on your part to be honest. I mean seriously, if I intervened and the Farou didn't honor their agreement, do you think you would have won? You couldn't have taken the battle to me, I would have simply retreated to my cities and harried you the whole time you tried to siege my cities, the same would have happened with Neruss I would have supplied them by sea. It's also not like I couldn't have built a large army and simply driven you off the turn after and every turn this went on your would have gotten more and more vulnerable and juicy looking to everyone else around you.

Spectacular? I just declared war on you. It was irrational since we were about as strong (NESing wars are usually declared on people you know you will win against, save Sheep), but you are still overestimating your own strength a bit.

 

[das]

Over a thousand or so year period? There's stability and... stability.

What I mean is that all the times it broke up aside, there was not all that much political change in China between Han and Tang (considering the time that passed between them, ofcourse).

 

[Masada]

What I mean is that all the times it broke up aside, there was not all that much political change in China between Han and Tang (considering the time that passed between them, ofcourse).

We have alot of Han-Tang stability then.

 

[North King]

I think people were misinterpreting my "western" comment. You can have as many overtly non-Western ideas in a nation as you like and still have it structured along Western lines, viewing the universe as a western state would, and basically sharing the cosmovision of the West. Only three or four players have even come close to breaking this mold, and even they generally fall back into it when a crisis situation comes along.

 

[das]

Okay then, explain what "the cosmovision of the West" is as you understand it and how is it different from China's or India's.

 

[North King]

What, you want me to write a book? I'll try to get to that later (today? this week? sometime, anyway), but for the nonce I'm a bit occupied with a paper.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Google wasn't much help despite lots of hits.

Main Entry: cosmovision
Part of Speech: n
Definition: a particular view or understanding of the world, esp. the view of time and space and its ritualized representation and enactment by Mesoamerican peoples
Etymology: 1969; < Spanish

Your definition/use of it would be helpful.

 

[North King]

I'm aware of that. Working on it. Kind of busy with said Mesoamerican stuff.