Remove ads

Warhammer Fantasy: Divided Loyalties - an Advisor's Quest

Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
Voting will open in 3 hours, 2 minutes
Reader mode
Glau said:
Well, sure, but evolutionary pressure over the mere 10,000 years or so we've had cities isn't enough to drive selection really- any changes in humans we've seen since then are almost certainly driven by sexual preferences rather than elimination of the less fit. Means there's no consistent impetus behind the stuff evopsych tries to explain. (Poorly, IMHO.)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
What? 10,000 years is plenty of time to drive selection. That's several hundred generations of humans.

For reference, here's what can be done in six generations of strongly directed selection.


The horse was only domesticated about 5000 years ago and that's already been bred into variations so far apart they're technically species in the sense they can't interbreed, not for genetic reasons, but because they'd need a stepladder during sex if you want a 50cm horse to get it on with a 200cm horse. ;)

BurnNote said:
I think you misunderstood. The point of the post is that it's been too short for evolutionary adaptation to cities. But that means that cities and modern life in general is something we're not adapted to.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Oh, I think it's worse. Cities have been 'population sinks' for much of human history. People who liked cities went to cities and disproportionately died without issue. Romanticising country life probably is our adaptation to city life.
 
Exmorri said:
What? 10,000 years is plenty of time to drive selection. That's several hundred generations of humans.

For reference, here's what can be done in six generations of strongly directed selection.


The horse was only domesticated about 5000 years ago and that's already been bred into variations so far apart they're technically species in the sense they can't interbreed, not for genetic reasons, but because they'd need a stepladder during sex if you want a 50cm horse to get it on with a 200cm horse. ;)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's true that evolution can happen really quickly, but that requires extermely high pressure and trait/survival correlation. Something like dog breeding is one extreme example, where some trait is both necessary and (nearly) sufficient to ensure procreation, because it's enforced.
But I think the pressure on humans isn't at that level. Though, it's not that we haven't changed. Lactose tolerance for example is something that only really helps if you actually keep animals. And I've heard that white skin is partially driven by the fact that farmers get less vitamin D than hunters.
Exmorri said:
Oh, I think it's worse. Cities have been 'population sinks' for much of human history. People who liked cities went to cities and disproportionately died without issue. Romanticising country life probably is our adaptation to city life.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I thought about cities, but I'm honestly not sure it applies. Yes, cities kill more than are born. But on the other hand, that would provide relatively strong pressure to adapt to the lethal issues of cities (though this is mostly disease, less the mental problems that kicked off this discussion). I wouldn't be surprised if some families who had a long history of city life are more disease resistant. It's just that proving this is a goddamn nightmare.
 
BurnNote said:
It's true that evolution can happen really quickly, but that requires extermely high pressure and trait/survival correlation. Something like dog breeding is one extreme example, where some trait is both necessary and (nearly) sufficient to ensure procreation, because it's enforced.
But I think the pressure on humans isn't at that level. Though, it's not that we haven't changed. Lactose tolerance for example is something that only really helps if you actually keep animals. And I've heard that white skin is partially driven by the fact that farmers get less vitamin D than hunters.

I thought about cities, but I'm honestly not sure it applies. Yes, cities kill more than are born. But on the other hand, that would provide relatively strong pressure to adapt to the lethal issues of cities (though this is mostly disease, less the mental problems that kicked off this discussion). I wouldn't be surprised if some families who had a long history of city life are more disease resistant. It's just that proving this is a goddamn nightmare.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
"Don't move to the city" counts as an adaptation to lethal issues of the city in an evolutionary sense.
 
The fact of the matter is that until the industrialization 95% of all humans live as rural subsistence farmers. While I will accept that sedentary lifestyle in general exerted evolutionary pressures, city-living were to few and had too little offspring to cause any noticable changes.

(In a twist of fate, I had a geography (university) class yesterday exactly about urbanisation. Suffice it to say, the graphs tracking city-living populations only get off the ground when the industrialization kicks in around 1800)
 
Last edited:
HungryHamadryad said:
I agree with the spirit of this statement, but I think it's also worth bearing in mind that modern peoples living in modern cities are in a, from the perspective of evolutionary psychology, totally alien environment. You have no instinctual priming on how to cope with a crush of people so far in excess of what humans are actually wired for (see: Dunbar's number). From a less psychological perspective, it's fundamentally the same mechanism with rising cancer rates; it's not just a matter of more accurate diagnoses and longer lifespans (though it is that, too), it's the presence of potentially harmful, artificial carcinogens and radionuclides which mammals have undergone essentially zero selective pressure to adapt features which allow them to safely filter them out (See: lead crime hypothesis). I could ramble for a long time on the nitty gritty, but my point is that it's very likely that as human society has moved further and further away from the environment which ancient humans existed in, and were shaped by, that atypicalities of both the mind and body will become more common, at least barring some kind of treatment. Though, given the abundance of uh, easily accessible trauma in the Empire, things probably more than balance out.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Very few people write stories where the entire cast are peasants that spend their entire life on a farm and are never meaningfully exposed to a community larger than the local village, so if you're writing anywhere between Catalhoyuk and now, a very similar exposure to an 'alien' environment exists, right down to the new and exciting pollutants. Today it's microplastics, yesteryear it was leaded gasoline, before that it's smog and mercury and tanneries and arsenic-based makeup and lead acetate sweetener and oh so many other things. A lot of these 'modern' problems really aren't.
 
Ultrackius said:
thinking about it, she really is kinda torturing him. At least she could give him a book to read or something
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Alkharad's view on the matter appears to have been that he wouldn't be conscious until his eventual return:
Boney said:
"Why are you so casual about this?" you can't help but ask.

He smiles. "I'm a Vampire. Sure, you'll keep a close eye on my remains. Will your children? Your children's children? For me, tomorrow will be a new world, full of new beasts and new magics and people that have forgotten what I can do."

Branulhune cleaves through neck and spine, and does nothing to remove the smile that remains on Alkharad's withered lips.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Given how relaxed he acts there, I'd not be surprised if this was a process he'd experienced before, and in any case it seems safe to assume he's pretty well-informed on the subject. So I'm inclined to take his word for it.
 
Exmorri said:
What? 10,000 years is plenty of time to drive selection. That's several hundred generations of humans.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah, if you accept the driver being sexual preferences, not increased survival chances. Species change a lot depending on who gets to reproduce, as we've discovered with selective breeding, but we don't actually know if the things that lead to reproductive success now actually increase or decrease survival chances.

Most of the weird and counter-productive stuff evolution produces is related to competing for mates, not survival.

So we're changing, yeah, but there's no directed impetus for it. It's just increasing variety.

BurnNote said:
And I've heard that white skin is partially driven by the fact that farmers get less vitamin D than hunters.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Not really true. Pretty much everyone started as Asian phenotypes when we left africa- the only big examples of moves away from that are IN Africa where skin gets substantially darker, and in northern Europe, where skin gets lighter.

An interesting hypothesis I've seen is that this is driven by male preference for unusual mates- when resources are right and who gets to reproduce is driven by male choice, skin gets lighter. In areas where resources are easily available to gather, the resources aren't controlled by men, then female choice of partner dominates and skin send to get darker.

Not sure how solid it is, but it fits a lot better than UV light differences driving skin changes due to reproductive fitness over a mere 50-100k years.
 
The last big shift in human physiology took place as a result of agriculture - we adapted to better digest things like rice and dairy, we became finer-boned, and there's some other things I can't recall at the moment.

That said, if the majority of humans continue to live sedentary lives in cities for, oh, 10,000 years I'm sure a new crop of adaptations will emerge.
 
I would argue that modern humanity has surpassed evolution for the most part, and hopefully eventually we can defeat it entirely
 
A_Somebody said:
Yeah I think I remember reading something about this specifically for Autism. It's went something like while living as a Medieval peasant would've sucked, it doesnt necessarily suck more for Autistic people than non-Autists/theyd be equal in the hazards of peasant life. A lot of triggers, such as bright lights, too much noise from people, certain smells, etc etc - - just wouldnt exist back then. And a lot of typical, repetative farm tasks--churning butter all day as an example--would be pretty mentally satisfying for a bunch of autistic people.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I read an interesting theory - only a theory, mind you! That the folkloric motif of changelings emerged as a way to explain people with autism.

Your child acts strange - nonverbal, unusual reactions to stimuli, hyperfixations - because they've been swapped with a faerie creature.

A common motif in the changeling narrative is that the human child is being raised by the faerie folk, and whatever happens to the changeling happens to the human child - creating extra incentive to treat the unusual child gently and kindly.

Well, maybe just a theory, but it sounds nice.
 
ScottishMongol said:
I read an interesting theory - only a theory, mind you! That the folkloric motif of changelings emerged as a way to explain people with autism.

Your child acts strange - nonverbal, unusual reactions to stimuli, hyperfixations - because they've been swapped with a faerie creature.

A common motif in the changeling narrative is that the human child is being raised by the faerie folk, and whatever happens to the changeling happens to the human child - creating extra incentive to treat the unusual child gently and kindly.

Well, maybe just a theory, but it sounds nice.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I agree that changelings were often used an an explanation for Autism, although the myth I usually here is that you have to put them on the fire/in the oven, and if they live the real child has returned, and if they die it was a changing anyway, so no great loss

of course if they survive and then show symptoms again back in the oven (or other beating) they go
 
CA released a campaign map flyover for Total War Warhammer 3:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvkjtbJjwac

Not only is it an interesting visualisation of what the World of Warhammer might look like from a visual perspective looking over a more organic map than the usual flat visuals of 2D maps, it provides a few new details and also gives us our first proper look at Cathay the nation instead of just cities or details. Two new places mentioned in Cathay, the Wastelands of Jin-Shin past the Warpstone Desert and the port city of Hanyu. Also, Cathay is pretty damn green with lots of rivers, as would be expected of a nation that has to support so many people. It was a fun video, recommend you guys check it out.
 
[x] Trauma
[x] Skaven
[x] Other (write-in): Grief, but note that it certainly looks like Skaven would fit and such an explaination would paint the order in a better light.
 
I was going over the Storm of Magic supplement so I could compile something for Boney in case he ever needed it (which he might if we ever get into a Storm of Magic), but as I was building out the beginning of it I came across something that might interest the thread. I know that the thread loves to theorise about the Winds of Magic and what it all means and give out all kinds of rationales for why things should be this way or that so I thought it might interest you guys to have a full explanation of the Wheel of Magic as presented in canon.

This is the Wheel of Magic:
I'm sure we've all seen it before. The question is, have you noticed that above each of the eight basic lores of magic, are three Glyphs? You will see that the centre glyph on some of the lores on the wheel match the centre glyph on others. Some are facing upwards, some facing downwards. The two glyphs surrounding the center glyph are different, but they match on some of the other lores. It actually means something.

In Storm of Magic, you had a Wheel of Magic available in the back of the book that you could physically spin during "Magic Flux". This is a mechanic that determines that some Winds are going to be stronger than others in this turn, so you spin the wheel to see which "Lores are in Ascendancy". Lores are split into Primary, Secondary and Tertiary, and the bonus you get depends on where you are on that scale. Primary has a 1/8 chance of being Ascendant, but gets a +5 bonus to casting, Secondary has a 1/4 chance of being Ascendant, but has a +4 bonus to casting, Tertiary has a 1/2 chance of being Ascendant, but has a +3 bonus to casting.

The Primary lores are the Eight Battle Magic lores, the Secondary lores are all the Lores of Magic that aren't High, Dark or the Eight Basic Lores, and the Tertiary lores are High and Dark Magic.

Life, Shadow, Fire and Light are connected to the Tertiary Lore of Dark Magic.

Beasts, Metal, Heavens and Death are connected to the Tertiary Lore of High Magic.

Lore of the Great Maw is connected to Beasts and Light.

Lore of the Wilds is connected to Shadow and Beasts.

Lores of da Big and Little Waagh are connected to Heaven and Fire.

Skaven Lores of Plague and Ruin are connected to Life and Fire.

All Chaos Lores are connected to the Lore of Heaven. Nurgle is connected to Life, Slaanesh to Shadow, and Tzeentch to Metal.

Lore of Nehekhara is connected to Light and Death.

Lore of Vampires is connected to Death and Metal.

A reminder that balance considerations were likely taken when making this wheel, so it might not be fully accurate to the Lore for gameplay reasons, but it is fascinating nonetheless. Some interesting combinations in there.
 
Yeah, I've played around with trying to read deeper into all that, but it really seems like it was made with only mechanical considerations in mind, not revealing deeper secrets of the underlying metaphysics. They tried their best to make the combinations make as much sense as possible, but they were working within the very tight constraints of having to connect everything to two Winds and having a reasonable spread.
 
Boney said:
Yeah, I've played around with trying to read deeper into all that, but it really seems like it was made with only mechanical considerations in mind, not revealing deeper secrets of the underlying metaphysics. They tried their best to make the combinations make as much sense as possible, but they were working within the very tight constraints of having to connect everything to two Winds and having a reasonable spread.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That is true, but some of those combinations I did like. Lore of the Wild with Beasts and Shadow seemed to fit to me, Chaos with Heaven seemed an interesting concept, Nurgle, Slaanesh and Tzeentch hit the right notes. Nehekhara made sense since those are the Lores they had access to and it fit their harmonisation and death themes, and I suppose Metal can fit into Vampires if you think of Metal like "the Programming Wind" where you set logic chains and "if then" statements into your zombies so they can actually function.

Some are harder to justify. Maw and Beasts sounds like a good fit, but I feel like I'm reaching to explain how Heaven ties into it. Fire makes sense with Waaagh, but Heavens is yet again an odd inclusion. Skaven Lores fit as an inversion of Life, but I feel like Heavens fits Ruin better than Fire. I'm also a bit confused at Life and Light being in Dark Magic and Death being in High Magic.

Although I suppose you might be taking more of an objection over what they chose to not include rather than what they chose to include, in which case the absence of some connections would be a bigger deal.

EDIT: I forgot about this, but the Great Maw was created by a gigantic meteor summoned by a Coven of Astromancers. I can see the Azyr connection now. The best I could think of in regards to Greenskins is that 6th Edition Lizardmen says that they came to the planet from spores that were clinging onto the Old One's spaceships. They come from outer space.
 
Last edited:
Codex said:
Maw and Beasts sounds like a good fit, but I feel like I'm reaching to explain how Heaven ties into it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Maw actually seems like it'd fit pretty well with Heavens on account of the part where it's a space rock from space. Unfortunately it appears to actually be connected to Light, which uh...yeah, that's a bit trickier.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Voting will open in 3 hours, 2 minutes
Remove ads
Back
Top