Re: Chaotic governments

Subject: Re: [GREYTALK] Chaotic governments
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 22:16:25 -0500
From: The Watcher
Reply-To: The GREYtalk Discussion List

Haile and Fair Greetings All,

>Noel "Has a Crush on Queen Yolande" Graham wrote:

My tastes run a bit younger.

>Olvenrealm works. And no, Coronal is not catching on...

Bet y'all think I'm going to change the Pocket Guide, don't you ::smile::?

>I can see three interpretations for the Geographic Alignment map in the
'83 boxed set. 1) The Alignment corresponds to the ruler only. 2) The
Alignment corresponds to the majority of the populace. 3) The Alignment belongs
to the land itself. No ruler or government not of that Alignment will be
successful in that region. The third one is a radical interpretation I had
suggested once hypothetically, but don't prefer. Currently, I'm leaning towards
the first, but I never seem satisfied on this point.

Well, I can see a fourth. That being the perceived alignment of the land. As written, the Catalogue to the Flanaess is a work compiled (presumptively) by one who lives(-ed) there. That being the case, the opinion of the recorder can be questioned. Even if we presume noble and academic motivation, the less information available on a place, the more likely conclusion becomes based upon sparse evidence -- thus increasing the variable for inaccuracy from presumption based on some ancillary data (in this case the accepted behavior of a race).

>Perhaps the distinction can be made that the drow have no laws, but
>only punishments?

Only? No.... You can't have a "punishment" (by definition) without an infraction. But building upon the spirit of your suggestion, perhaps it's closer to say the drow place emphasis on punishment ahead of crime. Which is to say, they determine punishment for "behavior" first, deciding as they desire which "act" and by whom meets that behavior. Deception carries a severe punishment in drow society. Lying to one's mercantile partners, associates, thralls (the list goes on), misleading as natural course -- these things are parcel to life amongst the drow.
But behaving as affronts a superior female, any priestess of Lolth, or a Matron Mother (esp. one's own) is absolutely forbidden.

Whether your act in any form of these cases requires punishment depends upon such things as who you are, whether you're in the graces of someone in authority, you're value (skills, whatever), or whether the simple threat of punishment makes you a useful tool.

Hmm... sadists....

>This intrigues me, because if elves truly chose their leaders like that,
then there is really no reason for the next ruler, or even the last ruler, to
have been of any relation to Yolande whatsoever. Losing the idea of a
hereditary monarchy would make the elven culture stand out more. But since Celene
isn't a republic, a new monarch wouldn't be elected by the people, but would
have to claim the throne with a show of power to fend off rivals. Elves
probably don't lose their monarchs of old age very often, but when they do,
>perhaps their chaotic natures lead to bloody civil wars.

I *did* say it was a simplistic portrayal ::smile::. And I don't recall saying Yolande's clan has been the only one to rule Celene. On the other hand, her clan does have a certain wealth of experience regarding rulership of this particular realm and dealing with these specific neighbors (along with the opportunity for the most wisdom related to the job). Unfortunately, that fact is what's causing her so
much trouble recently.

As well, don't forget succession. While I'm not going to say there's no potential for conflict over rulership, keep in mind that successfully seating one's self upon the throne doesn't gain anything of itself. If you took the crown by slaying your rivals, the peoples of Celene may tend not to like you. Therefor, you have no power to rule (the "office" is not empowered of itself). There's significant
possibility either all beyond your retinue abandon you, your realm collapses, or the people rise up in arms (figuratively as well as literally) to depose you. In the end, it seems more natural that an out-going leader selects or endorses the next one in order. This is what I was attempting to show the human government of Verbobonc mimicking.

As a caveat, I'm not taking the time to explain this in other than a positive light. You are correct that things could get ugly; but because of the way it would have to work to get as high as the monarchial chair, it's not like anyone with one eye won't see it coming from way off.

>I don't know...just because someone is Good doesn't mean that they have
the Wisdom to make good decisions. Besides, I'd rather see an elven
bloodbath once every few centuries...

Precisely why clans end up being known for some specialty amongst all the fields its members pursue. When you have a line that shows a preponderance toward fairness and wisdom of leadership, they tend to be trusted with leadership. But more, just because you're trusted to make good decisions and have a track record of such, doesn't mean you are incapable of massive blunders. Just because one springs from a line of wise beings doesn't make one personally wise.

Remember that situational ethics also means that while history gives you context for comparison, you still judge by the evidence at hand. Experience, knowledge, and the wisdom therefrom are your guides, but the choice is still about someone or thing in the here and now. It's *not* an easy thing to understand the ways of the olvenfolk -- which is not to insult anyone or claim superiority. But rather, if the ways of the olvenfolk were readily quantifiable and de-constructed by humans
(including *us*), they wouldn't have that air of... well, enigma about them. Then they really *would* be no more than old, pointy-eared humans.

Soft Winter and Sweet Flowers,
Watcher

Re: Chaotic governments

Subject: Re: [GREYTALK] Chaotic governments
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 18:50:50 -0500
From: The Watcher
Reply-To: The GREYtalk Discussion List

Haile and Fair Greetings All,

Oops. Sorry; I've been clearing out alot of back mail and missed this thread altogether until Keldreth edited my name to the page top.

Scott "Master Yakker" Volstagg writes:
>Now, where does that leave the Chaotic Good "Queendom" (?) of Celene?

Try "Olvenrealm" of Celene. I guess "Coronal" (in the stead of "Queen") is never going to catch on, huh?

>Celene's neutrality during the Greyhawk Wars may be inconsistent with
>what her neighbors wanted, but other than that, Celene does not seem to
>be very
>Chaotic at all. Any suggestions on how to make Celene seem more
>Chaotic? Dare
>I ask you, Watcher?

::Stifled chuckle:: Well gosh, I hardly ever think about Celene. All foolery aside, mostly it's a general problem with perception. I just can't quite figure why folks want to see CG as CHAOTIC(g). The kind of chaos where you sentence a prisoner to death and release him on his merry way is a peculiar (insane) form of CN.

I certainly can't speak for anyone else's view, but I've yet to find a problem with Celene acting out of "alignment" -- particularly since a nation doesn't have one. Do keep in mind that the CG ascribed to the olvenrealm is the majority (I won't say predominant) alignment of its populace, not necessarily how its gvt. is run. But that's a caveat.

Keldreth replies:
>Uh huh, and the CE drow...I have seen ugly flamewars over the vault of the drow.

The fact remains they do have a goverment with certain rules (laws, if you want) which must be followed else suffer consequence. Only, their's is predicated more on getting caught than the doing.

>I think of Lawful vs. Chaotic governments in part (well at least LG vs
>CG) as
>"the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one" ordered society,
>feudalism, yada yada. vs. a chaotic govt. that is more of a
>confederation or a real libertarian attitude towards society. [C]all me
>crazy.

Your crazy. But you do have the most basic elements in mind. In the case of Celene, the "leadership" doesn't function to mandate how all elves will floss their (lack of canine) teeth. I don't want to hammer down the specifics of political life in the Olvenrealm here (too many words that'd be better read in the context of next year's Pocket Guide to Celene), but let me see what I can do with a few (me -- a
few -- right) words.

Consistency of merit is likely more important than slavishness to law. Ok, which is to say, the olvenfolk realize there is no law which adequately addresses every situation and each being. There is a basic code of civil (*not* as in municipal) behavior, with punishments meeted out according to the "crime". One of the best ways to describe this is "situational ethics", but most folks seem to want to read those words with a negative connotation (usually because it was used against them).

On the whole, those in leadership achieve those positions because they showed merit for it -- and gain the respect of "follower", who are in turn more willing to follow the individual's lead.... Yolande and her kin have held the Coronal role because they proved most worthy to direct the interests of the olvenfolk with other realms, showed the capacity to identify with the needs and viewpoints of her peoples, etc.. Her words of wisdom (whichever ones those are) are respected (on the whole), so her olvenfolk believe her when she indicates some course is the best, and so
on.

I suppose the best way of explaining it here, is to say that generally the "office" someone holds is not particualarly self-empowered. One does not secure or be assigned the post of coronal, chief constable (truth seeker, formost), or military commander; one becomes or is these things and is so recognized with resources and endorsement and so on. Yes, this is by far a simplistic representation of how it works in Celene, but I'm attempting to impart the basic concept at work. As humans, the "office" exists unto itself where for elves an empty post is nothing but for who fills it.

To read this, one might be inclined to conceive this "nation" one quite easily on the verge of collapse or disbandment from internal foment and disagreement. That's certainly a potential, but the practice ends up being opposite. What happens is because folks have the capacity to thumb their noses at a poor decision or ostracize an inept leader, it becomes incumbent for those parties to be worthy of their role. In turn, because they display (however) that worthiness, the inhabitants are more willing to help their fellows in the way suggested.

Each being (I could get lost saying "elf", but there are other races) brings from within itself the desire to support the homeland and society by what means at their disposal. The poet writes inspiring and lifting phrase, the craftman does his best, the weaponsmith forgest weapon for defense, the learned teach.... All contribute in the way they do and each with a mind for betterment, because without them there is no Celene. It exists not unto itself, but of its members.

Now, admittedly, this seems idyllic in explanation -- and just so. In my estimation, true olven society bears it's human counterpart as a pale shadow. In turn, they have their dissenters: the sylvan who only moderately accept the will of Enstad (but prefer the respect from there over humanfolk), the grugach (amid their number) who accept no rule but their own (but would yet see aid to fellow elves over others), folks who just disagree fundamentally with current practice, and criminal elements (you don't *really* think all the olvenfolk are goodly types, do you?).

Each are dealt according to their nature, not by their "crime". In the US, it's a crime to disagree with the government if that disagreement is one of legal demand. For the olvenfolk, there are codes of behavior based upon respect for fellows and personal honor, but few absolute laws as such. Clan/family affiliation is still important, for instance, to be dishonored in addition to oneself. Still, a dissenter
must (rationally) be given the opportunity to see the "error" of their way before condemnation. It's as possible the argument sways the "official" (not always so formal) gone to talk. Theoretically, this could change the way Celene deals with similar issues, not as a matter of law, but from a new wealth of experience. The clan could be wrong (ie., just because the majority believes/agrees doesn't make them correct in so doing).

Similarly, it no crime to (say) walk about naked, as it's hard to offend those who have the option of not looking, are bipedal themselves (sympathetic form issue), etc.. They may think you a fool, esp. if it's snowing around you, but their response is one of not dealing with you over "punishing" you for offending "them". If they don't like you, they don't have to sell to you, buy from you, etc.. But caution, the
olvenfolk are mostly beyond petty displays one might expect from humans under similar condition. As is well pointed out, they have both the years to learn that falicy and the wealth of their elders who've attained such wisdom (when they pay attention).

In final, "chaotic" in this case should be seen as "no interest in law for its own sake" over some non-ownership socialism. The "good" half of that alignment defines itself (gosh, I hope). Folks still buy and own, but of a mind for what they do (let's not cut down the 300-year oak to build a house *just* there). You're there because you want to be. It's easy enough to leave.

Look beyond the surface of what is seen externally. A realm, theoretically on the perpetual verge of collapse, which can be seen to react inconsistently to similar events, and chooses when it cares about issue -- that doesn't seem chaotic enough to y'all?

Soft Winter and Sweet Flowers,
Watcher

Greyhawk Corruption

Subject: Re: [GREYTALK] Greyhawk Corruption (Was:What to do with evil?)
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 17:25:54 +1200
From: P Schmidt
Reply-To: The GREYtalk Discussion List

Draco and Co wrote and replied..
> > I find that having members of the thieves guild sit on the directing
> > oligarchy give the city much flavor.
> > Really? Assassins and Thieves in charge of the greatest city in the
Flanaess is what gives Greyhawk its flavor?
> > I find if oppressive and unjust. It offends my personal sense of Ma'at
and changes Greyhawk from a "Free City" to an "Apparently Free City".
>

Anything that can add drama to game by definition adds - flavour. The real questioin then is is it a flavour you like. When you think it through an arrangment as tilted as the current ruling oligachy gives a lot of scope for some clever roeplaying, conflicts of interest and intrigue - surely the flavour you want..

You then go on to say...
> If people get sent to the labor camps for minor offenses just because
Greyhawk is low on labor, and if fines are increased to finance operations (or so
I've read COG box set, GHTaB. etc.), while at the same time the thieves guild
sucks up more and more revenue from the city, it seems certain to me that
>Greyhawk is headed for disaster.

The problem here is what you consider to be justice. Rememer we are playing in a pseudo-medieval genre. The laws and punishments as described are remarkably ENLIGHTENED for their times, something the folk of Greyhawk are probably well aware of the. The problem is one of relativisim - we live in an eglitarean democracy. But medieval society, even high-pseudo-medieval is short brutal and nasty. Two comparisons might help - in Roman times people escaped their own countries and rulers to try and live under Roman Law, even when they weren't citizens. The law, brutal by our standards was still the best law around - and people knew it. In a more modern comparison, the former head of the KGB was asked why the USSR had always allowed Romania such a free hand within the old communist sphere. He replied, tongue in
cheek, that Russia had a problem with Romanian peasants espcaping to Russia to live and work. Knowing how bad things were in Russia, the Soviets concluded that Romania must be even worse run than Russia and so could hardly ever present a threat to them.
The same rules apply for Greyhawk. By comparison to neighbouring states and by the standrds of the times, the laws are fair. A quick one-off Law: The Olde English Law of the Four Footed. "Kill or steal a mans hound, goat or cow and ye shall be put to death" Why? Becuase without a dog, cow or goat a peasant would starve over winter. What's fair is all a matter of realtive wealth.

> Instead robbery will be committed in a government regulated way.
> I'm not impressed by these fringe benefits.
> I don't think the population would be either, if they knew about it.

Hmmm... try reading the trade histories of the Hessiantic League, the Papal States (Romagna), Macao or of Florence. Its, sadly a common way of doing business. And VERY profitable. The hard thing is getting the mix of sanctioned crime vs trade just right...

> > Finally with thieves in control of the city they labor to create an
> > environment where the city is flourishing, so that they can always draw
> > new wealth to the city to steal.

Correct... look at crime vs protection vs the english silk industry - a perfect example...

Pope Ug