Remove ads

Paths of Civilization

Reader mode
[X][Harmony] No, they could cause further panic
[X] [King]Remain home (Chance of stability gain)
[X] [Refugee] Those with preexisting ties can come in (-1 Stability, +2 Econ, small chance of further stability loss)
[X] [Sacrifice] Medium (-2 Econ, ???)
[X] [Ward] No, it is sacred magic (Small chance of stability loss)

On to the new bandwagon!
 
veekie said:
Done.

Now to try to nap this headache off.


[X][Harmony] No, they could cause further panic
[X] [King]Remain home (Chance of stability gain)
[X] [Refugee] Those with preexisting ties can come in (-1 Stability, +2 Econ, small chance of further stability loss)
[X] [Sacrifice] Medium (-2 Econ, ???)
[X] [Ward] No, it is sacred magic (Small chance of stability loss)

I'll drop back in to shift if the situation changes later.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Honestly? As long as the sacrifice+refugee options has us start with or increase the amount of econ we originally had, and we don't give out warding, I don't actually particularly care what else is voted on.
 
[X] [Sacrifice] Large (-3 Econ, +1 Stability, ???)
[X] [Harmony] No, they could cause further panic
[X] [Ward] No, it is sacred magic (Small chance of stability loss)
[X] [King] Remain home (Chance of stability gain)
[X] [Refugee] Those with preexisting ties can come in (-1 Stability, +2 Econ, small chance of further stability loss)
 
ctulhuslp said:
I can't not be salty because everybody who fucking bothered to read the description of LoO and to think of previous crises (me included) should know that Stability 0 might be 'neutral' for the other civs, but not for us.
EDIT: And, like, we knew that high Stability is 'optimistic people' - resilience to Stability hits. Another reason to be annoyed for chasing everything instead of it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You voted for no stability-increasing actions last turn. You are literally not allowed to complain. As for your edit, that is in no way stated fact, that is merely an assumption.
 
Ok, seriously, I'll vote for that combo if you raise that to som groups rather than pre-existing ties
 
[X] [Sacrifice] Large (-3 Econ, +1 Stability, ???)
[X] [Harmony] No, they could cause further panic
[X] [Ward] No, it is sacred magic (Small chance of stability loss)
[X] [King] Speak with spirits (Twythulmyn dies, +1 immediate stability, +1 Legitimacy, ???)
[X] [Refugee] Some from friendly groups can come in (-2 Stability, +4-5 Econ)

I really just want us to sacrifice our king because of the interesting stuff it'd do to our mythology. Seriously, imagine what'd it to do our pantheon and religious beliefs. Sure Crow is awesome and mentor of the Forest. Sure Gwygoga is the greatest warrior and the crusher of the People's Enemies. Sure Bynwyn is a genius who warded our entire people against plague and death. But Twythulmyn is the guy who walked up into the heavens as the world burned, talked to the Heavenly Spirits, and convinced them to STOP. The distant and uncaring Celestial Spirits were actually convinced by one of the Terrestrial Spirits who sacrificed himself for the land he loved. Now if that's not badass I don't know what is.
 
Vote Tally : Paths of Civilization | Page 667 | Sufficient Velocity
##### NetTally 1.7.4
Task: Harmony
[X][Harmony] No, they could cause further panic
No. of Votes: 23
[x] [Harmony]Yes, the people need to be further calmed (-1 to +2 Stability)
No. of Votes: 20
——————————————————————————————————————————————Task: King
[x] [King]Remain home (Chance of stability gain)
No. of Votes: 27
[X] [King] Speak with spirits (Twythulmyn dies, +1 immediate stability, +1 Legitimacy, ???)
No. of Votes: 18
[X][King] Talk with the Thunder Horse (Applies Heroic diplomacy to interactions over the crisis)
No. of Votes: 2
——————————————————————————————————————————————Task: Refugee
[X][Refugee] Some from friendly groups can come in (-2 Stability, +4-5 Econ)
No. of Votes: 16
[X] [Refugee] Those with preexisting ties can come in (-1 Stability, +2 Econ, small chance of further stability loss)
No. of Votes: 13
[x] [Refugee]Many may enter (-3 Stability, +6-8 Econ, ???)
No. of Votes: 9
[X][Refugee] The People must offer aid (-4 Stability, +8-11 Econ, probable overcrowding issues, ???)
No. of Votes: 5
[X] [Refugee] All who need aid must receive it (-5 Stability, +11-15 Econ, overcrowding issues, ???)
No. of Votes: 1
——————————————————————————————————————————————Task: Sacrifice
[X] [Sacrifice] Large (-3 Econ, +1 Stability, ???)
No. of Votes: 21
[x] [Sacrifice]Everything! (-4 Econ, +1 immediate stability, chance of extra stability, ???)
No. of Votes: 18
[X] [Sacrifice] Medium (-2 Econ, ???)
No. of Votes: 7
——————————————————————————————————————————————Task: Ward
[X] [Ward] No, it is sacred magic (Small chance of stability loss)
No. of Votes: 28
[x] [Ward]] Even less friendly groups should know of the magic (Shares with many groups, chance of stability gain, ???)
No. of Votes: 13
[X][Ward] Everyone, even the Dead Priests! (Shares far and wide for -1 Diplomacy, +1 Stability, ???)
No. of Votes: 4
[X] [Ward] It should be shared with friendly tribes (Shares with a few groups)
No. of Votes: 3
Total No. of Voters: 48
 
tryrar said:
Ok, seriously, I'll vote for that combo if you raise that to som groups rather than pre-existing ties
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Guarantees -2 stability instead of a chance, reducing the odds fraction to 'in 8' or 'in 6'. Final results are 12.5% to end at Stability -3, 50% to end at Stability -2, and 37.5% to end at Stability -1.

Not... too bad... I could agree with it.

[X] [Sacrifice] Large (-3 Econ, +1 Stability, ???)
[X] [Harmony] No, they could cause further panic
[X] [Ward] No, it is sacred magic (Small chance of stability loss)
[X] [King] Remain home (Chance of stability gain)
[X] [Refugee] Some from friendly groups can come in (-2 Stability, +4-5 Econ)

Odds leave it at Stability -2 on a coin flip, with nearly no chance of stability -3. Net +1 to +2 economy, which could be stat neutral to stat positive for restoring stability, to say nothing of action economy.
 
[X] [Sacrifice] Large (-3 Econ, +1 Stability, ???)
[X] [Harmony] No, they could cause further panic
[X] [Ward] No, it is sacred magic (Small chance of stability loss)
[X] [King] Remain home (Chance of stability gain)
[X] [Refugee] Some from friendly groups can come in (-2 Stability, +4-5 Econ)
 
Yeah, I'd have voted for your previous vote if preexisting ties had a chance for econ 3 rather than a flat 2. I'm ok with trading a bit of stability for coming out ahead on econ in this crisis, which I'm pretty sure is FAR better than what our neighbors are doing :p
 
[x] [Harmony]Yes, the people need to be further calmed (-1 to +2 Stability)
[X] [King] Talk with the Thunder Horse (Applies Heroic diplomacy to interactions over the crisis)
[X] [Refugee] Some from friendly groups can come in (-2 Stability, +4-5 Econ)
[X] [Sacrifice] Large (-3 Econ, +1 Stability, ???)

Dealing w/ brain fog right now so can't be detailed but I'll try to give the general gist:
  1. we need stability because of that bloody comet.
  2. I'm not worried the "let's sacrifice the person handling everything and try a leadership transition in the middle of a crisis" option is going to win so I'm going to vote for diplomancing the thunder horse nomads because I really want them to get more of our cultural values and be a counterweight to the dead priest.
  3. I'd rather not do the -3 stability option when we're already at -1 when -4 is a possibility for a collapse but I do want to let folks in.
  4. I'd rather not the precedent of, metaphorically throwing all our supplies off the boat when there's a storm, happen.
Anyhow, I'm going to go back to dealing with my body being in godawful pain.
 
Last edited:
[X] [Sacrifice] Large (-3 Econ, +1 Stability, ???)
[X] [Harmony] No, they could cause further panic
[X] [Ward] It should be shared with friendly tribes (Shares with a few groups)
[X] [King] Remain home (Chance of stability gain)
[X] [Refugee] Those with preexisting ties can come in (-1 Stability, +2 Econ, small chance of further stability loss)
 
Ultimately, this thread is infested with two, major problems that I (subjectively) believe to be problematic

First, there's Strong Opinions on Culture: basically, there is a tendency for us (ALL of us, at one time or another) to believe that our civ's culture MUST advance towards something that WE recognize as "moral". Towards that end, we are EXTREMELY reluctant to let it change in any way that isn't a clear step toward that goal. This has resulted in us passing several opportunities to adapt our culture in ways that would have been historically accurate, and likely mechanically beneficial, because we couldn't conceive how such things could possibly be stable, from our modern perspective.

Second, there's the Opacity of the Quest, Hypothetical Only Informed Decision Making, and Limited Hind-Sight: Basically, we have no idea what the results of any of our decisions are going to be. Sure, we can build logical theories, but those are often informed by Strong Opinions, which means a lot of voters see trap-options when, quite frankly, there are none. Worse, we don't always bug @Academia Nut after the fact to find out what the roads not taken would have done, giving us a better understanding of what some future option might mean.

*Sigh* Although, he probably won't answer any questions that would have an immediate and apparent effect on the voters logic.

For example, I don't expect to get a straight answer to "Hey, what happened at Bynwyn's Magic fight?" Because saying "Lots of lightning!" Would basically confirm magic, and make Burn the King just that little bit more viable, whereas "Well, they cursed at each other a lot" would take away from the mystery of "maybe magic is real?" that I, at least, secretly harbor.

Oh, and none of these problems are really solvable on AN's end, since anything he COULD do would mess with his modus operandi. If we want a more pleasant thread, we have to be more pleasant ourselves.

2984 I wouldn't say no to a PM twlling me the truth though! Please? No? Ah, but I wouldn't tell...
 
Last edited:
Vote
[] [King] Speak with spirits (Twythulmyn dies, +1 immediate stability, +1 Legitimacy, ???)

Getting a channel for non-religious person to talk to Spirits breaks the notion that only Shamans can communicate with Spirits. This allows our polity to have better spread of power between religious and non-religious factions. IE, reduce the amount of monopoly the Shamans hold; ensuring greater cooperation.

The king's selfless sacrifice will also force our current administration to adept to sudden lose of leadership during crisis, providing us valuable insight. This is important due to historical tendency of sending High Chief and Kings into dangerous situation for gains.

Vote for future dice shenanigans
[] [King] Speak with spirits (Twythulmyn dies, +1 immediate stability, +1 Legitimacy, ???)
 
VoidZero said:
Vote
[] [King] Speak with spirits (Twythulmyn dies, +1 immediate stability, +1 Legitimacy, ???)

Getting a channel for non-religious person to talk to Spirits breaks the notion that only Shamans can communicate with Spirits. This allows our polity to have better spread of power between religious and non-religious factions. IE, reduce the amount of monopoly the Shamans hold; ensuring greater cooperation.

The king's selfless sacrifice will also force our current administration to adept to sudden lose of leadership during crisis, providing us valuable insight. This is important due to historical tendency of sending High Chief and Kings into dangerous situation for gains.

Vote for future dice shenanigans
[] [King] Speak with spirits (Twythulmyn dies, +1 immediate stability, +1 Legitimacy, ???)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
There's also the whole chain of logic I spelled out a while ago in thread time (which is, what, two hours?)

King sacrificed to Sky doohickey => Sky stuff being Important Stuff => shamans staring at the sky a lot => basic astrological theory => applied astrological theory: weather predictions, developing naval navigation, proto calendar, better able to handle asteological phenomenon (like, say, comets), and maybe some stuff I haven't thought of yet.

Anyway, screw you all, I'm out (for now).

2985 just have to get my number in here... done! SEE YA!
 
I'll note that the leading votes also have a near minimum of ???, which I feel is sad because it's fun to go out and explore the unknown (when you're able to take a step back and say 'this is a story game, I should relax and not take this so seriously'). Seriously, vote for some mystery options people, let's have some fun!
 
tryrar said:
Yeah, I'd have voted for your previous vote if preexisting ties had a chance for econ 3 rather than a flat 2. I'm ok with trading a bit of stability for coming out ahead on econ in this crisis, which I'm pretty sure is FAR better than what our neighbors are doing :p
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I understand the worries about LoO triggers making low stability a clusterfuck of terrified screeching in-thread, but frankly I'm with you. Stability can take the hit, it's one of the easiest-to-resurge main stats, with a half-way over-focused turn easily bringing it 3 points up, and now that we have provincial actions, we have the action economy to wastefully maintain polity stability.
Sightsear said:
First, there's Strong Opinions on Culture: basically, there is a tendency for us (ALL of us, at one time or another) to believe that our civ's culture MUST advance towards something that WE recognize as "moral". Towards that end, we are EXTREMELY reluctant to let it change in any way that isn't a clear step toward that goal. This has resulted in us passing several opportunities to adapt our culture in ways that would have been historically accurate, and likely mechanically beneficial, because we couldn't conceive how such things could possibly be stable, from our modern perspective.

Second, there's the Opacity of the Quest, Hypothetical Only Informed Decision Making, and Limited Hind-Sight: Basically, we have no idea what the results of any of our decisions are going to be. Sure, we can build logical theories, but those are often informed by Strong Opinions, which means a lot of voters see trap-options when, quite frankly, there are none. Worse, we don't always bug @Academia Nut after the fact to find out what the roads not taken would have done, giving us a better understanding of what some future option might mean.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Eh, I don't particularly care for morality. I just didn't want to make sacrifice a thing because it promotes values I don't want for mechanical reasons (that way lies having to work around a sacrifice value of dubious use). Just like I'm being freakishly amoral in my deliberate holding of the medicine secrets, simply because it means every disease fail from now on doesn't hurt us at all and brutalizes others with -2 or 3 econ, stability hits, etc. (so long as it doesn't come attached to a damn mysticism comet crit). Generally, I haven't focused so much on my personal morality (which is highly egalitarian and libertarian, thank you very much).

Opacity is just AN's thing, though. I don't think I've ever seen him present a single vote that did anything other than create half-blind supposition-based speculation. Where other QM's provide DC's or qualify in a stratified way, AN deliberately obfuscates to maintain the realism of the setting.
 
@Academia Nut
How many dices have you been rolling in this quest? I'm very curios about the environment that generated these kind of interesting situations.

Farm Chief: Will food production suffer due to panicking people?
Spirit Chief: Can we placate population with extra ration or luxuries?
 
VoidZero said:
@Academia Nut
How many dices have you been rolling in this quest? I'm very curios about the environment that generated these kind of interesting situations.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
From the previous update that he revealed to us, he rolls between 15 and 20 d100's for a base turn, plus likely between 5 and 8 more depending on midturns and unusual crits/events.

All in all he probably makes something like 30 throws per 'turn'.
 
[X] [Sacrifice]Everything! (-4 Econ, +1 immediate stability, chance of extra stability, ???)
[X] [Harmony]Yes, the people need to be further calmed (-1 to +2 Stability)
[X] [Ward] It should be shared with friendly tribes (Shares with a few groups)
[X] [King] Speak with spirits (Twythulmyn dies, +1 immediate stability, +1 Legitimacy, ???)
[X] [Refugee] Some from friendly groups can come in (-2 Stability, +4-5 Econ)

*Sighs* No love for adding into the People's mythos?

This thread seems to fawn over references to Gwygotha and Crow, and how these legends morph over time. Why not add another to the god pantheon? Honestly, I'm drawing parallels to Prometheus with the sacrifice and all that for an expressly mythic example.

It's not like we're going to be in a BAD place barring us doing stupid things, which the leading options aren't.
 
Last edited:
[X] [Sacrifice] Large (-3 Econ, +1 Stability, ???)
[X] [Harmony] No, they could cause further panic
[X] [Ward] It should be shared with friendly tribes (Shares with a few groups)
[X] [King] Remain home (Chance of stability gain)
[X] [Refugee] Only let in some (Significant chance of stability loss)
 
[X] [Sacrifice] Large (-3 Econ, +1 Stability,???)
[X] [Harmony] No, they could cause further panic
[X] [Ward] No, it is sacred magic (Small chance of stability loss)
[X] [King] Remain home (Chance of stability gain)
[X] [Refugee] Some from friendly groups can come in (-2 Stability, +4-5 Econ)
Holy fuck people! I can't believe people are going for the econ grab, attempting to kill our King when we need him and thinking that we should risk going into -3 stability territory! I don't need to be mean, but this is going to be a situation where most cultures are going to split... Get far worse or by some miracle, benefit. I truly think if we play this wrong with the refugees and the King, we'll split like the lowlands of old. We'll gain far more by simply surviving this and being an intact polity that has gone without our people going full apeshit than if we go with a risky plan.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top