It has been rather quiet, hasn't it? So I hope that no one minds if I kick up
a little dust....
With the development of interstellar travel, it seems likely that we would be
seeing a lot new societies forming as various factions and splinter groups
claim their place among the stars. So far as I know, however, the only power
(official or not) that we have seen that is
entirely new is the Alrishi Empire--everyone else seems to be basing
their creations upon a current or former power. We've seen Romans (oh, GOD
have we seen Romans...), Israelis, Imperial Russians, and the like, but not
too many original creations. Well maybe the Antarcticans (I keep thinking that
their ships and vehicles should use
a black-and-white Penguin camo, but that's probably just me).
I dunno...maybe I'm weird, but when I think of basing a new empire
upon something, it tends to be things like H.P. Lovecraft's Mi-Go.
Now there's an interstellar power for you! And the Sa'Vasku ships are Cthuloid
enough to work, too....
I've just never been a history person, that's all. The closest that I've come
to such a power is the Hanseatic League, and, interesting though their history
might be, my only real use for them is a scenario tool. I think that it's
because I do research, among other things,
for a living--I'm not particularly enthusiastic about doing it for fun
any more.
Please don't think that I'm complaining or anything--I like hearing
about other people's creations, no matter what form they take. But I'm more
likely to create my empires out of whole cloth, or to base them upon some kind
of whimsy (witness the New Bavarian Republic), than to model them on something
from history. This give me the freedom to design whatever kind of forces or
society that I desire, wothout being restricted by what these people *really*
are (or were, as the case may be) like. I know that I'm not unique in this,
but it seems to be the exception, rather than the rule, on this list.
Is it because of the "realistic" nature of the rule systems and background, do
you think? Does this encourage a more historical mindset, perhaps? Again, I'm
not advocating one approach over the
other--they both seem equally valid, as far as I'm concerned. I'm
just curious as to one predominates over the other on GZG-L.
Any opinions?
G'day John,
> freedom to design whatever kind of forces or society that I desire,
First a disclaimer, I'm not paying out on anyone's nation here, I admire the
hard work and imagination that has gone into everyone's efforts, I'm simply
stating an opinion (having said that I shouldn't say anything that upsets
anyone, anyway, but just in case...)
Can't say for sure what causes the proliferation you mentioned, but I had
noticed it. In fact one of the strongest reasons I didn't pursue "Persians in
space" from the start (and I'm not going to now, but thanks to all those who
encouraged me none the less) was because I really can't see future nations
being "reincarnation of period x in space". Admittedly history has a HUGE
impact on what we see today (which is what makes it so much fun to think about
what if such and such had won the war not the guy who did etc.), but its
because it has shaped what we are, not because we necessarily set out to
recreate some past civilisation.
Maybe part of the issue with using the past/present when creating your
own future histories is the same as the problems with creating future
technology/weapons and even aliens, you feel safest bulding from what
you know. For instance, I have a real problem with the idea of biological
space
entities because my training makes the idea uncomfortable/irritating,
but I keep my peace because when it comes down to it I can't say for
absolutely
sure that its totally impossible - hell if a tardigrade can survive
vaccuum, maybe something else will figure out how to do it while awake and
on a grand scale. Comfort-zone-wise things in ships is just closer to
what I can accept (easily), though I'm not advocating a zillion species which
are humanoid with bumpy noses (I'd love to see more "hortas" or little
critters that go round in swarms of single man ships, or some kind of alien
that isn't inherently bad/good but just thinks so differently its
incompatible with our reference systems etc etc etc).
Maybe another reason people just stick with what they/know can find out
is because we're going to present these ideas to other guys we play with and
they have to swallow it.
Anyway better stop chewin' the cud and get some work done.
Have fun,
Beth
> Maybe part of the issue with using the past/present when creating your
(snip)
> . Comfort-zone-wise things in ships is just closer to what
I suspect people design empires the way they do for two main reasons: a) wish
fulfillment. I'd love to be able to move to a place as
laissez-faire as the Alarishi Empire. Designing the political systems
gives me a chance to think about the way I think things ought to be done, and
the ramifications. b) insufficient imagination. I would not, on my own, come
up with a lot of the things which human societies have: practicing ritual
cannibalism; signing up to be a royal guard when you know you'll be beheaded
and buried
with the king when he dies; self-castration due to religious frenzy;
fasting; the Ghost Dance societies of the Plains Indians; and many more.
I
think about all most of us can do is take elements we know and combine them,
hoping for an occasional flash of inspiration to strike. Most of creative
writing is not inspiration, it's working out the details and implications.
> Laserlight wrote:
> I suspect people design empires the way they do for two main reasons:
> b) insufficient imagination. I would not, on my own, come up with a
I plead guilty with the Ou to the second. It seemed to me that given the
initial "Oceanic Union" concepts, it would have to be a loose federation, with
2 main interest groups: a Mostly Desert Continental
land Mass, and a vast agglomeration of island-states.
Australia is currently a number of City-States perched precariously on
the edges of a vast wilderness. I live in the largest (by far) inland city,
which has a whopping 300,000 population. That's a lot more than in
the whole of the Northern Territory, an area larger than Texas + New
Mexico + California (Or France + Germany + Benelux if you prefer).
This makes it rather easy to "transport" holus-bolus into an
interstellar background, because essentially in the Tuffleyverse, there's been
about the same amount of colonisation of various planets as there has been in
our neck of the woods.
> From looking at my past posts, the general effect is more like late
OTOH it's very difficult coming up with a system of society that hasn't been
tried somewhere, sometime. A Technological Participatory Democracy? Just look
at ancient Athens. Militaristic Christian
Whacko-Fundamentalism under a certifiable loony? Have a look at the
Chinese Tai P'ing.
When I started thinking on this level I worked on building an alternate
universe (or cut-off corner of the current one) with several major human
powers, and a couple aliens (indpendent and allied). Part of the principle was
that some expansionist aliens could still coexsit with humans in different
systems due to extremely different biological requirements. At a
given level of advancement, resource extraction becomes non-competitive.
I put all that aside after reading the FT timeline and becoming fascinated
with New Israel, though. That's another reason so many people are working on
FT powers that are part of or closely related to, the game universe. The FT
universe is split enough for people to find a group or nation that they
resonate with personally and wish to pursue.
Perhaps some time I'll go back and works some more on the other stuff, but I
really like Kieth Watt's Solar Thrust, and the ESFB alternates. It would take
me a long time to come up with anything so independent and detailed.
> On Thu, 15 Apr 1999, John C wrote:
> So far as I know,
well, by and large people have simly been filling in detail on powers that
were named in the official future history. the only totally new ones i am
aware of are the NRE, the NCS, the CCS, the alarishi, the bavarians
(and,
yes, i'm aware you made fnord them up as a joke :-), new jordan, the
UBW, the SFSFW, the scots, the PRM, the IAS and Texaco. that's 12. of those, 6
are historical, four original and two probably comical.
> Is it because of the "realistic" nature of the rule systems and
i think the fact that the official FH is shaped along historical lines has
influenced us a lot. if jon t had thrown everything out of the window and gone
for the the Pacific Technocracy, the Mediterranean Alliance, the European
Union and China, we'd have thought differently.
Tom