Have sex with X or starve to death is coercion and thus rape. You can argue that the selfsame thing would have happened to them even without the Ymaryn coming along (possibility with the addition of other abuse) but it is still fundamentally rape. the discussion started when someone claimed the Ymaryn never did objectionable things in war by moderns standards.
I figure the morality argument is inherently silly considering we're committing atrocities by Bronze Age standards by functionally performing Damnatio Memoriae systematically on everyone who came against us. We've turned war into labor, there will be no songs or epics immortalizing the battle, only tallies of men killed and lost like grain.

Though I think our Kings generally would grealy prefer if they'd just stop bloody suiciding into us and our allies, then forcing us to warp our social values when we take in their dependents.

Though I would note that there is no institutional(personal aside, because asking the warriors to keep it in their pants without any oversight just isn't going to work) coercion here, the Ymaryn would give them food and a place to live regardless of whether they married our warriors, so long as they are willing to work and are entirely willing to simply adopt them, but by their own culture that's incomprehensible, and so they offer themselves out of misguided desperation.
 
You did. You claimed they never in two millennia of existence killed a civilian nor abused the defeated populace.... I mean, damn that's quite a record.
Your being incredibly naive right now. Do you think the Ymaryn have the notion of marital rape in the Bronze Age? That's something many countries have not enshrined in law even today.

The Ymaryn may be a bronze age society, but in some way they are far more enlightened than even Western countries. They developed many things that is considered ahead of time in our RL history. So, the comparison is a bit silly.
 
You claimed they never in two millennia of existence killed a civilian nor abused the defeated populace
Actually i asked for evidence that ymaryn killed civilians in response to someone claiming we are genocidal.

As for abuse of a defeated populace, could you quickly look up cosmopolitan acceptance and greater justice, and the trait that formed the core of greater justoce was formed by as i recall making a point of being lenient with the wife of a defeated chief for how she responded to a a ymaryn king abusing her.
 
Have sex with X or starve to death is coercion and thus rape. You can argue that the selfsame thing would have happened to them even without the Ymaryn coming along (possibility with the addition of other abuse) but it is still fundamentally rape. The discussion started when someone claimed the Ymaryn never did objectionable things in war by moderns standards.



No, because I'm not crazy enough to hunt it up though hundreds of pages, but I'll do the next best thing:

@Academia Nut could you clarify the matter above?
Oh, come on. You seriously think that taking the widows of men who tried to kill us, and giving them the opportunity to marry the local chief, which by their own standards and values would be a huge social step up, never mind the economic and security benefits for them, is a black mark on our record?
 
Though I would note that there is no institutional(personal aside, because asking the warriors to keep it in their pants without any oversight just isn't going to work) coercion here, the Ymaryn would give them food and a place to live regardless of whether they married our warriors, so long as they are willing to work and are entirely willing to simply adopt them, but by their own culture that's incomprehensible, and so they offer themselves out of misguided desperation.

That's optimistic... not wildly optimistic mind, but do you really think that if after a hard fought battle some nomad woman refuses the chief of the Ymaryn's expeditions' advances she will be taken in anyway? There is probably some institutional pressure although it is a form of corruption not the system working as intended.

Oh, come on. You seriously think that taking the widows of men who tried to kill us, and giving them the opportunity to marry the local chief, which by their own standards and values would be a huge social step up, never mind the economic and security benefits for them, is a black mark on our record?

No I'm claiming it is rape by modern standards. Our record if such exists should not be weighted against such.

Actually i asked for evidence that ymaryn killed civilians in response to someone claiming we are genocidal.

As for abuse of a defeated populace, could you quickly look up cosmopolitan acceptance and greater justice, and the trait that formed the core of greater justoce was formed by as i recall making a point of being lenient with the wife of a defeated chief for how she responded to a a ymaryn king abusing her.

And people never act against social values... like how all knights were chivalrous and kind because that was part of the values they were supposed to embody. Their values make the Ymaryn better than anyone at this level of social development should rightly be, they do not however make them saints.
 
Last edited:
I may have found a slight problem with the idea that Chinampas are going to revolutionize our agriculture: The Aztecs grew maize on them (amongst a few other things which we also don't have).

So those 7 harvests a year? Extremely unlikely as our crops are simply not able to grow that fast. And we do have mild winters, which is still enough to halt growth.

The other civilization that uses something similar are the Chinese, and those use rice.

I honestly don't know if we have any crop that can actually grow that fast. Wheat, under ideal conditions (that means high temperatures year round) can maybe reach 3-4 harvests a year but that only looks at how fast they can actually grow. Sunlight hours matter too as many species control their growth through that to prevent them from germinating in winter.


I also found something interesting for Expanding snail cultivation and a reason to Main it. Sea Silk.

We are in the right climate range for these to exist and we can use it to start on dominating the Fine Textiles trade. And it should synergize extremely well with our dye industry. We source it from the same area and can process it on site.
 
Last edited:
No I'm claiming it is rape by modern standards. Our record if such exists should not me weighted against such.

After one of our first war with a nomad horde hero, we absorbed an entire tribe, and decreed that all women who do not want to be married to divorce and resettle elsewhere.

Since then, our traits evolved into CA and Greater Justice, which made us even nicer and even more generous.

Yes, the Ymaryn are that nice.
 
do you really think that if after a hard fought battle some nomad woman refuses the chief of the Ymaryn's expeditions' advances she will be taken in anyway?

Yes, I do. It's much more likely that her own nomad values would prompt her to leap at the chance to connect herself to someone strong, than that the People would cast her out otherwise.

No I'm claiming it is rape by modern standards.
Well, by modern standards those women were all accessories to attempted murder; should they have been executed instead?

Marriage-for-pragmatic-necessity has been the lot of many (most?) women for thousands of years. That's not the same thing as rape.
 
After one of our first war with a nomad horde hero, we absorbed an entire tribe, and decreed that all women who do not want to be married to divorce and resettle elsewhere.

Since then, our traits evolved into CA and Greater Justice, which made us even nicer and even more generous.

Yes, the Ymaryn are that nice.
I don't remember that...

Let me check.

Edit: ugh, Can you tell me which update?
 
Last edited:
Stop: Magnus-Domon speaketh
Who's to say she won't be working with the Balanced Provinces to do study actions? Who's to say we'll only manage a single study action next turn.

As for the pathetic moralizing... do you even fucking hear yourself? Do you truly think that there's never been a conquest that's been held? Or that the conquered will even care all that much? We're long before national, or even ethnic identities have settled, and city states give far less of a shit about who rules them than a kingdom.

You can spout inanities about all conquest being intrinsically self-defeating, about how it's absolutely never productive and we're magically better people for it... but it's just that- inanity. Why have we been able to function in peace so well and so long? Because the Northern Marches protected us. How did we get the Northern March(es)? Why... by conquering. Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum motherfucker. Those who wish for peace must prepare for war, and part of that preparation is by ensuring when war does come about, it's as decisive and quick as possible. People have claimed that by doing more than the bare minimum we're making the conflict magically worse- but wouldn't it be worse if it went longer and got bogged down? The worst wars in human history weren't the decisive ones, they weren't the ones where one side went in overwhelming force and the other crumpled... it was where the war bogged down, where blood spilled and spilled and nothing was gained.

The turks were from fucking central asia, where are they now? Magyars migrated into the Danubian basin, conquering it from the natives- where are they now? The fucking Celts migrated and conquered their way across the entirety of Europe. Where are your examples? You treat this issue as so fucking simple, as so damn obvious and you never ever bring up citations, you never point to the fantastically powerful pacifistic civilization that by all rights has to exist in order to justify your interpretation. Because at the end of the day, no matter how kind, or open minded, or progress, or just a civ is doesn't matter if that civ get's wiped out. I'm not demanding we renounce our values, I'm demanding we not behave like lemmings and ensure at the very minimum we have our civ's best interests at heart- and that sometimes requires things different than peace, isolation, and teching up.
magnus-domon speaketh
I am sure you can tell them that they're is wrong with less profanities, insults and aggressive tone; it's not nearly enough to merit an infraction, but certainly enough for a warning for marginal behavior, please don't repeat this kind of behaviour.

Have a good day.[
 
That's optimistic... not wildly optimistic mind, but do you really think that if after a hard fought battle some nomad woman refuses the chief of the Ymaryn's expeditions' advances she will be taken in anyway? There is probably some institutional pressure although it is a form of corruption not the system working as intended.
I'm saying that there is undoubtedly corruption and abuse on a personal level, but the system says that once they no longer had combatants they were to be welcomed as refugees if they were willing to stay, or exiled(which meant death on the steppes) if they weren't.

Keep definitions clear:
-Personal abuse = Individuals doing it. This is an inevitable form of abuse in bronze age, or even modern warfare. You have a lot of well armed young men, with a large number of largely defenseless former enemies.

-Institutional = The system encouraging it. The system as it was at the time does not encourage it and originally discouraged it, but the Northern Marches picked up values which did over time even as the rest of the system frowns upon the practice.

So on the scale of wartime abuses:
-Slaughter - Happens but not systematically, unless they keep coming. Our objective is to drive them away to begin with, but you can't really track when a warrior does murder on a hostile population.

-Outright Rape - Happens, but the use of Carrion Eaters(who, remember, are shamans, and thus religious authorities) dampens the practice from becoming acceptable so long as our core cultural values reflect Justice and Symphony.

-Slavery - De Jure illegal. De Facto happens in a limited manner, Nomad chiefs are regularly subdued and their tribes scattered across our population as low status members(since they can't do most of the skilled labor besides animal husbandry). Said former-nomads are the most likely to commit offences which turn them into half-exiles.

-Wife raiding - Happens, even if technically illegal. I believe this actually evolved as an 'acceptable' outlet in general. While the Ymaryn forbids outright raiding for wives, and the attached Carrion Eaters are going to put a stop to the rapes(even if just to stop them from catching diseases), they can follow the letter of the law while violating the spirit by creating an environment where the captive population is strongly incentivized to marry the warriors by leveraging their native culture.

-Looting - Happens, but legally they are required to put all the war loot towards the communal piggy for distribution, which dampens spirits a little for this.

-Torture - Systematic. We actually have our Carrion Eaters rescue enemy warriors for the Blackbirds to torture for intel.

Overall, we're doing...pretty mixed, but we're definitely pissing off all the neighbors for unrelated reasons(especially when our 'nice' treatment means the opposite to their culture)
 
I'm saying that there is undoubtedly corruption and abuse on a personal level, but the system says that once they no longer had combatants they were to be welcomed as refugees if they were willing to stay, or exiled(which meant death on the steppes) if they weren't.

Keep definitions clear:
-Personal abuse = Individuals doing it. This is an inevitable form of abuse in bronze age, or even modern warfare. You have a lot of well armed young men, with a large number of largely defenseless former enemies.

-Institutional = The system encouraging it. The system as it was at the time does not encourage it and originally discouraged it, but the Northern Marches picked up values which did over time even as the rest of the system frowns upon the practice.

So on the scale of wartime abuses:
-Slaughter - Happens but not systematically, unless they keep coming. Our objective is to drive them away to begin with, but you can't really track when a warrior does murder on a hostile population.

-Outright Rape - Happens, but the use of Carrion Eaters(who, remember, are shamans, and thus religious authorities) dampens the practice from becoming acceptable so long as our core cultural values reflect Justice and Symphony.

-Slavery - De Jure illegal. De Facto happens in a limited manner, Nomad chiefs are regularly subdued and their tribes scattered across our population as low status members(since they can't do most of the skilled labor besides animal husbandry). Said former-nomads are the most likely to commit offences which turn them into half-exiles.

-Wife raiding - Happens, even if technically illegal. I believe this actually evolved as an 'acceptable' outlet in general. While the Ymaryn forbids outright raiding for wives, and the attached Carrion Eaters are going to put a stop to the rapes(even if just to stop them from catching diseases), they can follow the letter of the law while violating the spirit by creating an environment where the captive population is strongly incentivized to marry the warriors by leveraging their native culture.

-Looting - Happens, but legally they are required to put all the war loot towards the communal piggy for distribution, which dampens spirits a little for this.

-Torture - Systematic. We actually have our Carrion Eaters rescue enemy warriors for the Blackbirds to torture for intel.

Overall, we're doing...pretty mixed, but we're definitely pissing off all the neighbors for unrelated reasons(especially when our 'nice' treatment means the opposite to their culture)

A very thoughtful analyses and I agree with most of it, but you should keep in mind that the distinction between personal and low level institutional abuse is blurry and that blurry area is corruption which is to say the checks and balances against socially unacceptable practices failing through small group conspiracies. When/if these practices become widespread enough you get cultural change.
 
If we encounter the HK looting the Hat, there is a very good chance that we'll be able to further refine our rules of warfare.
 
Last edited:
Hmm... Prediction. If Rulwyna dies because we brought a 5 year old into a war zone, the King's grief will kick our pacifism up a notch.

Trait evolution: "War is Hell" or "Great Law Of Peace"
 
Hmm... Prediction. If Rulwyna dies because we brought a 5 year old into a war zone, the King's grief will kick our pacifism up a notch.

Trait evolution: "War is Hell" or "Great Law Of Peace"

I don't believe our war hero is dumb enough. Plus, it might result in the King's wrath rather than great law of peace, or whatever.
 
I don't believe our war hero is dumb enough. Plus, it might result in the King's wrath rather than great law of peace, or whatever.
I mean, AN said that the fatherhood vote brings her along with him.
And Hiawatha and Deganawida's Great Law of Peace was in part brought together out of Hiawatha's grief at losing his children
 
Nope. I also think that wars are the best way to make people suffer, whether you call it slavery, half-exile or punishment for them being too barbaric.
And before you try to argue that Ymaryn are better than that: we killed *every* Nomad adult male and took their families at war. And our marches tended to purge nomads that veered too close. We are pretty genocidal and do not give a fuck about civilians unless our warriors can rape them later. Slavery is better than what we do to our enemies.
Really? We predominantly kill only their warriors and take their population as low class citizens. Taking them as slaves would be a direct step down.
Pay them off? I mean, I am not saying it is a good option for us, but it is more moral one than actual war.

RE: citations, I am cuurently at work, will do in approximately 12 hours.
Paying tribute is NOT more moral than war. Giving the bully your lunch money is not more moral than fighting back when he tries to pound you for not doing it. Yeah, more people get hurt in the short term, but it doesn't enable assholery.
Do you somehow Creed's dozen wives taken over the bodies of their fathers and brothers were willing?

Wives taken in war are synonymous with systematic rape.
That's pretty much malarkey. We absorb their populations, and then the exact same pressures (psychological, hormonal and social) which push people into marriage all the time push them into marriage as well.
 
Last edited:
Bringing her along doesn't mean he will bring her on the battlefield.
Spirits be praised that no enemy War Hero would ever manage to attack and sack the army camp with a small group while the army is out fighting. And living on the march will do wonders for her formative years.
 
Back
Top