Centralization went from 3 to 2...for some reason???

Ugh, that definitely moves New Trails up on the priority list. Yeah, I don't want another turn of fighting this challenge.

[X] Look around for more reasonable people (Main Sailing Mission)
[X] Main provinces (Chance of stability loss, +2 Econ)
[X] Challenge the validity of the Sacred Forest (???)

Ultimately, I think I like the benefits of potentially challenging Sacred Forest. It's a nice belief, but it's one we haven't touched in a while and I'm curious what kind of cruft has accumulated.
 
Last edited:
[X] Main provinces (Chance of stability loss, +2 Econ)
[X] Challenge the validity of the Sacred Forest (???)
 
[X] Look around for more reasonable people (Main Sailing Mission)
[X] Main provinces (Chance of stability loss, +2 Econ)
[X] Challenge the validity of the Sacred Forest (???)

Sacred Forest is easily provable - we stop doing it in one of our forests, the forest clearly suffers for it, our faith is reaffirmed. We might even improve the process.

Too Far is just purely blind guessing next turn - so we lose a turn on actions we don't know will even help, and risk failing the Challenge.

It would take generations for the tree blight or pox to become widespread again. Meaning that any empirical test would see that if you stopped, and after a few years nothing happened it's just superstition.

I'd rather not risk our ritualistic albeit highly useful practices be dismissed duo primitive empiricism
No, the tree blight is always there. Look back at when we invented it - it's a system of give and take.
 
[] Suppress this new movement (+1 Stability, WotG removed, Challenge failed)
This is the option to pick if you want to remove the belief and not touch Sacred Forest and Warding. Everybody stop picking a step too far or it'll make our last two turns be for nothing.
 
@Academia Nut Why did we lose centralization? Was the prestige gain from the trade deal or from the war mission? Have our people seen any Blight in neighboring forests (or i guess even our own) in the past few generations?
 
Don't worry. Give them enough time and they'll always try to raid us. They're nomads. It's what they're hardwired for in their lifestyle.
Well yes this is an inevitability as it is. That is as it is, it might be possible to get permanent Friendly Nomads it'd probably just take a lot of work and changing how everything works but I'd assume it would work. In my mind the only way it would work would be to completely absorb said friendly tribe and intergrate them all the way into our culture in a weird way where they are still Rouge figures that travel in roving bands with roguish members dispensing Outlaw justice as they tend to their cattle but still friendly... so kind of like cowboys. Not likely given we don't even have the the required cultural traits to even attempt it and even than the cowboy things are a stretch.

So @Academia Nut would it ever be possible to get permanent friendly Nomads in the form of cowboys or am I really over stretching the concept? Also on a side note if we do take the "taking this too far" will we get a hint to solve it?
 
[X] Remind the lowlands of your wealth and power (Main Salt Gift)
[X] Stallion Tribes
[X] Challenge the validity of the Sacred Forest (???)
 
@Academia Nut Why did we lose centralization? Was the prestige gain from the trade deal or from the war mission? Have our people seen any Blight in neighboring forests (or i guess even our own) in the past few generations?

Things have been kind of blah, general mediocre lower level management? The king can't really tell, there's just a sort of malaise.

So @Academia Nut would it ever be possible to get permanent friendly Nomads in the form of cowboys or am I really over stretching the concept? Also on a side note if we do take the "taking this too far" will we get a hint to solve it?

No more than what you already have.
 
[X] Remind the lowlands of your wealth and power (Main Salt Gift)
[X] Main provinces (Chance of stability loss, +2 Econ)
[X] Challenge the validity of the Sacred Forest (???)

Salt Gift sets us up for a golden age, and makes it easier to take advantage of the incoming lowland clusterfuck(tm), whereas our boats really aren't good enough to make a sailing mission especially valuable
 
Things have been kind of blah, general mediocre lower level management? The king can't really tell, there's just a sort of malaise.
Ahh, so probably either a general problem with oligarchies, and/or general admin roll failures over multiple turns? Either way, annoying, though i guess it'll help convince people to vote for more trails...
 
Anyways. Found the post on what the blight is:

[] Send experts
[] [Secondary] New Settlement
[] [Secondary] Expand Fishing

Fuck. We have tree cankers. There are a couple of different possible causes for this, but one in particular is worrying. Stress. Stress is caused when a tree isn't suited for its environment. And we might be the cause. After all, the update mentions that all of the tribes that used to live in those hills have drained away. The trees though, they were used to the presence of humans, with all of the changes we bring to an environment. Without humans, those same trees just aren't as viable as they once were, and the trees that do fine without humans are a long way out, so they can't repopulate the area as quickly. And the dying trees attract diseases which then spread the blight further. Two pieces of evidence support this. First, we seem to be finding evidence of humans in the initial blight areas. Second, our trees are totally fine. If the only difference between healthy and sick is the presence of humans, well, it kind of says what the cause is doesn't it?

Which is why I want to establish a new settlement. We're always going to struggle against the blight unless we get new people up there or less human dependent trees get established. And if the less dependent trees get established, then we're going to havethe same problem again when we do settle up there, because the environment will have to adjust back to us.

@Academia Nut Have I hit the salient points?
 
Maintaining them to prevent them from growing too much and cutting too wide a swath. Whenever blight emerged, cut down and burn out the forest. Clear plots to farm with black soil for a few years before planting new trees for materials and orchards and manage them. And when those plots grew old or blighted, burn them down to repeat the cycle once more.

That's sacred forest. We interact with blight regularly and reactively.
 
[X] Challenge the validity of the Sacred Forest (???)

If we start doing tests with this we might lose some econ as the blight sets in again, but odds are likely it will instead strengthen it as the Blight is always there.
 
Won't challenging sacred warding involve tackling the belief that tiny 'demons' spread 'curses' and that humans can catch animal 'curses' which makes them more resistant to human 'curses'? So unless the small pox is out and about we can't really prove that the vaccination really works and unless we can find a different animal disease to help us I don't think sacred warding is the thing to challenge.
 
Huh, does look like Sacred Forest is safe to test, because it'll make dead unnavigable forest from failure to maintain stuff.

Though I am concerned we might have a chance of having a "Manage Forest" option forced on us, because Sacred Forest loses it's potency.
 
I have a suspicion that we can test either of these and have a good chance of not damaging it.

Why? Well besides AN's note that this is us looking hard at them again. We need to pick the one with the best empirical evidence.

Well Sacred Forest was created to stop the Blight. The Blight is ongoing and can be found if you look hard enough for it in our current forests. That's what Sacred Forest and Managed Forests is, a continual battle against the Blight. Asking the people who live among the deep forest should show us taht hey, yeah there is a reason we do this and it's a nasty chronic tree Blight. This is always present and why we care for the land.

Sacred Warding was created to stop the Star Pox. It is relatively easy to test. If someone does not take it, then they either die or they don't. If they do of Star Pox it means that the Warding has purpose. If they don't well it means it didn't. The only big problem is that there seems to be no source of Pox out there right now.



[X] Look around for more reasonable people (Main Sailing Mission)
This puts pressure on those craftsmen who might have an idea or two in a generation to put those ideas into practice. Plus new friends are always nice, even if they cannot directly help us.


[X] Main provinces (Chance of stability loss, +2 Econ)
We have the Stability to tank this possible hit. And it prevents a restart on the cultural drift we had in the Stallions. The Econ is also nice.

[X] Challenge the validity of the Sacred Forest (???)
This is important and I think doable because the Blight is always there. We simply need to look for it. From our studies of metal out lined in the update, our people are not going about this haphazardly. They are going to poke this cautiously, like they did the metal and tailings.

Additionally if folks want to not risk Warding or Forest and drop WotG and drop evolving Observance, which I think will come back to bite us and do other bad things, take the suppress movement option. It also strangles ideas, which we have never condoned.
 
One step further?
[] Challenge the validity of the Sacred Warding (???)
[] Challenge the validity of the Sacred Forest (???)
[] This is a step too far (Challenge continues one last turn)
[] Suppress this new movement (+1 Stability, WotG removed, Challenge failed)

AN: Because you'll ask, if you go one more turn, the final requirement will be listed as ???
Also, yes, I am currently putting on my best evil overlord laugh. How much will you risk here? Mwahahahahahaha!
Whoo boy.

Testing Sacred Warding... not sure what would happen. I mean, we'd start suffering smallpox again eventually, the question is how much damage would we do to the wonder before it became obvious that yes, it had been doing something useful, and whether we'd be able to repair it afterwords.

Testing Sacred Forest? The big thing here is the soil erosion that the forests are preventing, right? If there's anything that might end up dropping us short a forest we could commit to supplying charcoal, though, this'd be it. And I really don't want to risk our ability to expand our charcoal sources.

Both of these will take time for their effects to be felt, and losing either of them would horribly suck. Hrm.

The big question for "This is a step too far" is what do we need to do? Justify that it is a step too far? How?
 
[] Suppress this new movement (+1 Stability, WotG removed, Challenge failed)
This is the option to pick if you want to remove the belief and not touch Sacred Forest and Warding. Everybody stop picking a step too far or it'll make our last two turns be for nothing.

I will just note that failing a challenge by suppressing a new movement isn't giving us a good narrative. Like it may lead to cementing tradition and ancient practice as an untouchable topic. WotG isn't the worst belief we can have, metal poisoning for land and life are fairly high on our vulnerability list.
 
So, still being a newb about things:
What does Salt Gift do, concretely?

How does reminding the lowlanders of our strength help when they're gearing up to a war footing? What do you guys expect to gain from this? Is there anything stopping them from deciding to go destroy the elves for their vast salt reserves instead of poking their established neighbors?
Even if it's disproved, challenging beliefs should become a trait.
Why?

Belief and faith actually do work in this universe.
 
Back
Top