- Location
- Chicago
[X] Have a personal meeting with the Chosen of Smith
A Sword Without a Hilt: A Song of Ice and Fire/D&D 3.5 Crossover
- Thread starter DragonParadox
- Start date
-
- Tags
- a song of ice and fire a sword without a hilt d&d 3.5 dungeons & dragons 100% high octane dragon fuel ave corvidae battle action dragon diplomacy best sister bureaucromancy delicious soul-stuff dragon dreams come true dragon ta'veren greatest uncle hubris is a coward's word in defiance of gods and men mammon's folly mutually assured mage's disjunction qm murderhobo top tier coatl
- Location
- United States
I hope you don't. We're gonna need you for this.
In an effort to avoid thread salt, I'm going to spoiler my longer inheritance posts so people who want to skip the debate don't need to scroll past the whole thing
[X] Look over the marriage and inheritance laws of the Empire.
If we're going to get into the inheritance stuff again, I think it might do us some good to re-evaluate what exactly we have available; otherwise we'll likely just go in circles again.
I'd specifically like to point out that an afterlife run by mortals changes the equation on death enough that we should consider how it might be leveraged to make people want to stay dead after a reasonable period of years.
Most afterlives work as much as a forge for outsiders as they serve a karmic fate for the people who go there. We're already planning for imperial outsiders, but what if we put more effort into figuring out how to maintain a personality through such a transition?
For most people, death would be a flat upgrade in base condition, and we could position them to move towards important afterlife/imperial affairs on the other side.
One simple mechanism for controlling wealth would be to allow people to "advance" their position in the afterlife by donating to charities. So long as we keep it reasonable, allow other actions to weigh more than money, and actually keep our word, it would incentivize the movement of property out of a single person's hands.
Honestly, whatever our solution is, I feel that maintaining the concept of inheritance in a society of immortals is silly. It's like maintaining the concept of money in a post scarcity society, or how we currently arrange school schedules around agrarian timetables most people don't live by anymore.
If our goal is to stop private actors from controlling everything we should put a regulatory body in place to enforce ownership caps on each industry and trade.
We're going to need to do something like that anyway since the obvious loophole to our inheritance law is to just not have kids,Unless we're planning to obligate people to have children or take almost everything someone owns every 60 years. That would be both screwed up and pointless since it'd still allow dynastic monopoly.
In the near term, the people most likely to take issue with a "delayed" inheritance are also among the people most likely to get access to life extension. If they're too stupid or impatient to use their extra lifespan for something while they wait we're not missing out on much when they get shot down doing something stupid.
I realize that stuff like buy in afterlife upgrades aren't necessarily the best idea, but what I'm mostly trying to get at here is that trying to preserve a lifestyle after the fundamental forces that created it change is a bad idea.
It will cause resentment eventually because it functionally will be pointless for its purpose as stated. Generations that didn't grow up with the understanding that they would inevitably die will resent it because it will be a tradition grounded in something that they won't feel applies to them, enforced by old people that don't get that the world has changed.
We should be looking for new mechanisms to manage a society in the world as it stands, instead of trying to enforce rules to make it emulate the conditions we are used to.
I'd specifically like to point out that an afterlife run by mortals changes the equation on death enough that we should consider how it might be leveraged to make people want to stay dead after a reasonable period of years.
Most afterlives work as much as a forge for outsiders as they serve a karmic fate for the people who go there. We're already planning for imperial outsiders, but what if we put more effort into figuring out how to maintain a personality through such a transition?
For most people, death would be a flat upgrade in base condition, and we could position them to move towards important afterlife/imperial affairs on the other side.
One simple mechanism for controlling wealth would be to allow people to "advance" their position in the afterlife by donating to charities. So long as we keep it reasonable, allow other actions to weigh more than money, and actually keep our word, it would incentivize the movement of property out of a single person's hands.
Honestly, whatever our solution is, I feel that maintaining the concept of inheritance in a society of immortals is silly. It's like maintaining the concept of money in a post scarcity society, or how we currently arrange school schedules around agrarian timetables most people don't live by anymore.
If our goal is to stop private actors from controlling everything we should put a regulatory body in place to enforce ownership caps on each industry and trade.
We're going to need to do something like that anyway since the obvious loophole to our inheritance law is to just not have kids,Unless we're planning to obligate people to have children or take almost everything someone owns every 60 years. That would be both screwed up and pointless since it'd still allow dynastic monopoly.
In the near term, the people most likely to take issue with a "delayed" inheritance are also among the people most likely to get access to life extension. If they're too stupid or impatient to use their extra lifespan for something while they wait we're not missing out on much when they get shot down doing something stupid.
I realize that stuff like buy in afterlife upgrades aren't necessarily the best idea, but what I'm mostly trying to get at here is that trying to preserve a lifestyle after the fundamental forces that created it change is a bad idea.
It will cause resentment eventually because it functionally will be pointless for its purpose as stated. Generations that didn't grow up with the understanding that they would inevitably die will resent it because it will be a tradition grounded in something that they won't feel applies to them, enforced by old people that don't get that the world has changed.
We should be looking for new mechanisms to manage a society in the world as it stands, instead of trying to enforce rules to make it emulate the conditions we are used to.
[X] Look over the marriage and inheritance laws of the Empire.
I will do my best to keep things from turning out that way. I think an important thing to remember in cases like this is that you guys do not need to solve everything at once, you don't need say a solution for when someone decides to ask for a fungus forged baby because they like the idea of a low maintenance infant. What is important is setting the legal tone for further changes in a way that gets things moving in direction that helps the most people without its ripples and reactions doing more harm .
Goldfish
Friendly Spider-Fish Abomination
- Location
- Formerly of the Far Realm
I really hope everyone can keep from getting too emotional when discussing the issue.
For some preliminary discussion, what do ya'll think would be fair for an inheritance tax, or in this case non-inheritance tax, for someone who undergoes a Reincarnation procedure that isn't state sanctioned (i.e. their deaths were in service to the Imperium and they were Raised, Resurrected, or Reincarnated as is SOP)?
So, maybe someone Reincarnated in this instance gets to keep 50% of their wealth, with the rest going to their heirs? Or just keeping 25% and the rest going to the heirs?
And if someone doesn't have an heir, the state imposes a flat 10% tax? Maybe one which increases by 10% per following Reincarnation, up to 50%?
That's a lot, but it's not ruinous. If someone loses 50% of their fortune, they could still be very wealthy and could use that wealth to rebuild what they lost. And after their heirs inherit, whatever the Reincarnated person has left remains theirs (minus the state tax) unless they produce additional heirs following the Reincarnation.
We tend to make things complicated, but this could really be a very simple issue to solve if we can control ourselves.
Last edited:
Crake
I AM THE STORM THAT IS APPROACHING
- Location
- USA
I think another point to look towards is that if you produce heirs in one body, they shouldn't have claim on what wealth you gather or retain in the next body. They have no legal right to it. But heirs you produce in that one would, of course. It's the most sensible way to handle this, and if they want to will any of their possessions to children they sired previously that is their prerogative (though that opens up those people to taxation upon inheriting that wealth which is a separate can of worms).
- Location
- Germany
I think we could keep the decisions on the two topics (marriage and inheritance) to seperate plans.
Ultimatly they are not that related.
Ultimatly they are not that related.
I've been thinking about this a bit lately, and I think we're going about this the wrong way. Inheritance is a societal mechanism for dealing with death and the continued success of one's family. Maintaining societal tools that have no reason to exist any more causes strife because it creates a constant point of legitimate conflict. We should be thinking about how a society of immortals should be maintained, and looking for bridges to take us from here to there.
This a very interesting position, but also a case of looking to solve tomorrow's problem. You guys do not have an imperial afterlife right now so there is no need to figure out how it would slot in now, much less vote on it. The important issues here are:
- How do you deal with people who want to have uncommon reproductive means? The base answer to which is like adoption* (there will be more details about companions oppositions and perspectives in the next update, but I feel like this is best put here so you guys can discuss it)
- How do you deal with immortals, both those who undergo something which might be termed death and the far smaller minority of naturally immortal beings
This is it, you guys do not need to extend the vote beyond that.
- Location
- Texas
- Pronouns
- He/Him
[X] Look over the marriage and inheritance laws of the Empire.
- Location
- United States
Even at our height we're not going to be a society of immortals. Even with the Imperial Afterlife the majority of people will very much be subject to death.
- Location
- Germany
Problem is we are not there yet.
The Imperial Dream is far away and Reincarnation for everyone not really economical yet.
We should eventually design for such a society, yes, and heavily look to the naturally immortal Genie how they manage, but for the next years and maybe decades we'll need a patch anyway, that deals with the current realities.
egoo
Totally Not Creating Problems Where None Existed
- Location
- Russia
Opinions on both as from Shaitan/Djinn/Marid PoV and as Valyrians saw these problems, would be highly appreciated as a part of the update.
also,
3. How to push through "Gay marriage"-like matters without burning half of Westeros and some parts of Essos.
- Location
- Germany
Death is relative.
As he said, the souls of people that enter an afterlife are ultimatly raw material for Outsiders.
If you wish to define that as death fine, but it's not quite the same as it was for people so far, who don't know what awaits them after their first coporeal death.
- Location
- Germany
Related to that, right now only marriage or aknowledgement serve as definition of fatherhood.
Accepting magical proof as legal proof will change the landscape somewhat anyway, and the standing of marriage.
Goldfish
Friendly Spider-Fish Abomination
- Location
- Formerly of the Far Realm
We've been pretty fixated on inheritance laws, but I can't recall much discussion on marriage laws.
Do we even really need marriage laws? If we set a minimum age for it, is there anything else that needs regulating?
- Location
- United States
I do define that as death. They flow upon the river of souls and end up in the afterlife. It doesn't matter that said afterlife would be manufactured by us, it's still an afterlife/pickup stop for Imperial Gods to send envoys to ferry the souls to their afterlives.
True, but we also don't have the base means to create large number of immortals, so the problem is technically manageable for the timespan of the quest. Most of the simple ways to deal with it would create long term problems though. In fact, the issues cause by people thinking they've found a way to hear death, only to be stopped by the state might be worse than the ones caused by people who never had to live with their own mortality.
I think we can manage the impact of immortals by managing the amount of any given market a person can own. We are going to have to do that anyway to avoid dynasties doing what we feel immortals will.
Crake
I AM THE STORM THAT IS APPROACHING
- Location
- USA
Gay marriage just ain't practical, not until we've seen a couple backwards generations pass on and the current generation is overall more progressive (I.E mostly urban). Rural upsets are a problem but they can do less harm quickly than a bunch of ultra-conservatives in dense population centers.
- You will get them don't worry
- You might be surprised on the Westeros and gay marriage front . We see from canon with Renly that being gay is stigmatized yes, but not nearly as much as it would be in medieval Europe. Renly's sexuality is an open secret, Oberyn's actually open. No one has ever proposed hanging either for it and there isn't much religious hue and cry over it. I think we can deduce from this that the stigma is primarily cultural not religious and it's nowhere near as strong.
- Location
- Classified
A dragon empowerment template.
I know we discussed something to do with giving people dragon powers, but I can't remember if it was this template or another one. I believe it was Dragon Vassal.
I know we discussed something to do with giving people dragon powers, but I can't remember if it was this template or another one. I believe it was Dragon Vassal.
- Location
- United States
I have to agree. We're going to have a tough enough time with initial cultural clashes in our conquest of Westeros and the rest of Essos without throwing this gasoline on the fire.
Crake
I AM THE STORM THAT IS APPROACHING
- Location
- USA
Does that imply that the stigma being sourced from religion tends to result in more violent responses compared to shame-based "you have a duty" rationales?
I honestly don't know, I think that people who pursue an agenda of violence tend to have some kind of more selfish reasoning, hence in ASoIaF the Andals invading and seizing the lands of the "heathens" is their 'holy duty' but it almost entirely benefits the warlord at the top of the dog pile to preach that shit and justify their reprisal killings.
- Location
- Germany
I would say it's a pretty minor change compared to our major changes in both power structure and religion.
A little extra that helps a few people and hurts nobody.
As of now the concept of producing heirs to secure a legacy is not bound to a man/woman combination at all anymore. Accordingly the whole practical base to be against gay marriage is gone.
There is no duty to marry a woman/man to continue the lineage anymore, it can be done with any being.
Goldfish
Friendly Spider-Fish Abomination
- Location
- Formerly of the Far Realm
Nice template for dramatically increasing one's Dragonocity. That's a much more extreme alteration than Dragon Vassal, though.