Remove ads

Tales of History - A Civ-Builder Quest

Reader mode
Korporati said:
Also @Azel, with their low power and terrible mod, is the hunter in any shape to reject a deal or is it that they are essentially powerless right now?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
There's not a lot they can do to prevent a deal right now, especially with the Fishes having recruited two Pops of clansmen hunters. Like the Serfs, they are mostly going to fall in line with one of the bigger factions over the coming turns, potentially rapidly if someone sways them and offers them a good way out of their social isolation.
 
Yes it seems to me that the main issue lies with the fishers since they are still unhappy.

The artisan seems content and might be willing to recreate the council in their new more influential state, although some changes must be maintained in the new status quo such as lake rest.

The question lies in the fishers, how do we make them content enough so that they would be willing to rejoin a new council? What change or issue can we concede to them in order to do so without angering the artisans

Arguments can be made to soothe the fishers first this turn before making the council, but returning unity quickly also have many benefits
 
Maybe we could double down on the idea that Lake Rest is a containment area for barbarian influence? We can claim it serves as the last line barbarians can peacefully cross keeping them out of Greenvalley itself, first line of defence of the valley ensuring the recent incursion into Greenvalley itself wont be repearted so easily and somewhere outsiders can be civilized like the Fishes ancestors once were. I think we need to force the Fishes to remember their barbarian ancestors so they have to aknowledge that value does exist outside Greenvalley.
 
Azel said:
I'll say this much:

You can reform the Council at this point, but you would need to have a plan how to do so without favouring the Fishes or Artisans, or how the sell the loser of that deal on it.

If you think this is too risky, it would be better to keep swaying factions in preparation of the future, riding the Succession Crisis in the hopes of beneficial societal change.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Azel said:
Artisans
Description: Having their support chiefly among the miners and artisans of Cliffside, Crackhome and Greenvalley itself, this group is second in prestige only to the hunters and more numerous too.
Size: 6 (Average)
Influence: 7 (High)
Mood: 6 (Content)

Main Issues: Stability, Ressources, Trade
Secondary Issues: Diplomatic Ties
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Azel said:
Fishes
Description: Named after a joking answer to the question who they support, the fishers of Laketop have slowly drifted apart from the rest of Greenvalley to form their own distinct group. While wielding little direct influence in Greenvalley, the amount of food they contribute to the valley gives them still some leverage.
Size: 6 (Average)
Influence: 6 (Average)
Mood: 4 (Unhappy)

Main Issues: Peace, Stability, Segregation
Secondary Issues: Isolationism
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Azel said:
Bone Tenders
Description: While they generally try to stay out of political affairs, the Bone Tenders wield quiet some influence among the population and are known to try and keep the peace among the people in times of strife.
Size: 1 (Tiny)
Influence: 7 (High)
Mood: 5 (Content)

Main Issues: spread of Faith of Bones, honoring the Ancestors, Neutrality
Secondary Issues: Peace
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
As we can see, the Artisans has gotten a bit more influence, but their mood has also turned into content.
The Fishes has gained segregation as a main issue, while isolationism has been pushed back into a secondary issue.
I believe that we ought to take advantage of the new village founded by the Artisans and by our succes with granting the Fishes the segregation value to make a compromise that pleases the Fishes and does not actually hurt the Artisans by agreeing to segregation.

Then we will need to distribute the three seats on the High Council, where the Artisans and the Fishes will need to have one each. The third seat will then I my opinion have to be given to an third party, which would be either the Bone Tenders, the Hunters or the Serfs.

The Serfs would probably not have any member respected enough, that the other factions would truly respect him, but on the other side both sides would believe they stood a chance to get such a member to support them, so that might balance out in my eyes.

The Hunters are not respected to the degree that they used to be, but they probably have members who are thought more worthy of the positions than the Serfs. Giving them a Seat might give their faction a return to prominence or it would speed up attempts by the other factions to gain their support.

The Bone Tenders are equal with the Artisans in influence, while actually not having any pops under their control, plus it has a lot of respect from all factions, so the biggest problem with giving them the seat would be its conflict with the Bone Tenders desired neutrality. They could of course attempt to play it of as mediating between the other two factions, but there will most likely be times, where a decision would have to be made, which would mean that they had to pick sides.

Of course to start with we only have to decided what factions to invite to the negotiations, where we could choice to simply invite everybody, but it might also be simpler with only those we want to grant a seat to.
 
Big question right now seems to be, do we go for a council this turn or go for one next turn? Personally I think we should spend this turn influencing the factions again, rather than immediately hitting the council button, the majority of our civ still isn't calling for reunification yet. Could we perhaps influence one of the factions into supporting traditional values and such more? Seems likely to help preserve cultural values and make them more likely to press for a new council within their faction.
 
Maybe we shouldn't bring back the council? At least not in it's previous state. It's shown it's weaknesses and inability to handel crises(our entire government collapse after being faced with one issue), and honestly I don't trust ourselves to balance the wants of three different factions at the same time. We need a system that can curb their influences, so they can't just break the civ up when they inevitably through a hissyfit again; a situation like this is the perfect chance for those reforms
 
Kirron 999 said:
Big question right now seems to be, do we go for a council this turn or go for one next turn? Personally I think we should spend this turn influencing the factions again, rather than immediately hitting the council button, the majority of our civ still isn't calling for reunification yet. Could we perhaps influence one of the factions into supporting traditional values and such more? Seems likely to help preserve cultural values and make them more likely to press for a new council within their faction.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If we really want to wait another turn, then perhaps convincing the Artisans of the idea of some sort of unified trading monopoly, to avoid valley traders outbidding each other, as a way to convince them of
segregation?

I do personally think that we would have a good chance of restoring it now, since I already think that there is no issues that are directly clashing against each other right now.
Notcreative said:
Maybe we shouldn't bring back the council? At least not in it's previous state. It's shown it's weaknesses and inability to handel crises(our entire government collapse after being faced with one issue), and honestly I don't trust ourselves to balance the wants of three different factions at the same time. We need a system that can curb their influences, so they can't just break the civ up when they inevitably through a hissyfit again; a situation like this is the perfect chance for those reforms
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well, part of the Mandate of the Ancestors is that we need to have a Council of Three at the top of the system, and I doubt we can change that.
If we want a easier time dealing with three different factions desires at the same time, then I would avoid the Hunters and either give the seat to the Serfs or the Bone Tenders, since they are less likely to make a fuss in the future

If we want some sort of reform, then I do have a suggestion, that might help a bit with future conflicts.
Azel said:
- Priests
-- The priests must maintain an advisor to the High Council at all times, who will be allowed to listen to and advise any decisions.
-- The priests may send one advisor to any Low Council, who will be allowed to listen to and advise any decisions.
-- The priests must preferentially raise their new initiates from the orphans of the People where available. Where there are more orphans than need for new initiates, they will be chosen by lot.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Amongst the rules for our government, we already have a advisor from the Bone Tenders already, but what if we turned that into some sort of neutral moderator for the Council of Three, who had to ensure decorum and whom had the authority to deal with disputs involving the Council of Three, like overseeing elections and perhaps sanctioning members of the Council, if they misbehave.

If we wanted to do this, then we would not be able to give the third seat to the Bone Tenders of course, but part of me thinks that a neutral moderator position mainly focused on ensuring that the rules are obeyed, suits the Bone Tenders better, than being amongst the people actually making the decisions.
 
Azel said:
There's not a lot they can do to prevent a deal right now, especially with the Fishes having recruited two Pops of clansmen hunters. Like the Serfs, they are mostly going to fall in line with one of the bigger factions over the coming turns, potentially rapidly if someone sways them and offers them a good way out of their social isolation.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Hmm, Bone Tenders might be able to give them a purpose. Gathering sacrifices to the Ancestors and food?
Like, offer and burn the finest cut, the rest shared amongst the people.
 
veekie said:
Hmm, Bone Tenders might be able to give them a purpose. Gathering sacrifices to the Ancestors and food?
Like, offer and burn the finest cut, the rest shared amongst the people.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
To continue building my idea of the Bone Tenders as neutral rule enforcers, then granting the last Hunters the role of the Bone Tenders muscles might be a decent idea.
 
One thing we might reform is to decentralize and form provincial councils with the low councils in Greenvalley and Lakerest answering to those councils. This might allow the two factions to agree and while it may decrease the power of the Council of Three it may provide a better source of stability. This does mean we give those two provinces more autonomy but it is better than having Lakerest secede because the fishers are too obstinate to the artisans' wants in the High Council. Another is to completely gut the Hunters' political power by barring them from office but instead forming a Hunter's Council with two representatives from the High Council in the form of the Vice-councillors in need of political experience in a rotating basis, two hunters chosen within the ranks, and a mediating Bone-Tender who will facilitate and be the final deciding vote. We might also need to reform the Bone-Tenders with the increase of roles and powers given to them.
 
ALanos said:
One thing we might reform is to decentralize and form provincial councils with the low councils in Greenvalley and Lakerest answering to those councils. This might allow the two factions to agree and while it may decrease the power of the Council of Three it may provide a better source of stability. This does mean we give those two provinces more autonomy but it is better than having Lakerest secede because the fishers are too obstinate to the artisans' wants in the High Council. Another is to completely gut the Hunters' political power by barring them from office but instead forming a Hunter's Council with two representatives from the High Council in the form of the Vice-councillors in need of political experience in a rotating basis, two hunters chosen within the ranks, and a mediating Bone-Tender who will facilitate and be the final deciding vote. We might also need to reform the Bone-Tenders with the increase of roles and powers given to them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
When it comes to provincial councils, I am unsure what kind of power you where thinking they should have, but I seriously doubt that Lakerest is going to secede, simply because of the Fishes making the Artisans mad, since that would involve the Artisans leaving Greenvalley, which I doubt they would do voluntarily.

When it comes to the idea of a Hunters' council, what should it be able to decided, since I presume that the High Council would continue to decide things like whom to go to war with?

I decided that it was time for someone to try making a plan. My plan is to simply to try to restore the High Council, aiming to give the third seat to someone representing the Serfs and to try to give the Bone Tenders some sort of
moderator role. I decided to exclude the Hunters, since I do not want to give them a seat at the High Council, so I think inviting them would be unnecessary.

[] Bringing the Band back together
-[] Organize a meeting to try and establish a new High Council.
--[] Invite the Fishes, the Artisans and the Serfs
-[] Change the focus of the Pilgrim Village.
--[] Encourage own culture. (+1 Valley People Culture in Greenvalley) - Current focus

@Azel Just to be sure, how farfetched would it be to grant someone from the Serfs a seat at the High Council?
I presume that the Artisans and Fishes ses them followers rather than leaders, but that they might like someone who they believe that they could convince to follow their ideas.
 
Last edited:
Mortenkam said:
When it comes to provincial councils, I am unsure what kind of power you where thinking they should have, but I seriously doubt that Lakerest is going to secede, simply because of the Fishes making the Artisans mad, since that would involve the Artisans leaving Greenvalley, which I doubt they would do voluntarily.

When it comes to the idea of a Hunters' council, what should it be able to decided, since I presume that the High Council would continue to decide things like whom to go to war with?

I decided that it was time for someone to try making a plan. My plan is to simply to try to restore the High Council, aiming to give the third seat to someone representing the Serfs and to try to give the Bone Tenders some sort of
moderator role. I decided to exclude the Hunters, since I do not want to give them a seat at the High Council, so I think inviting them would be unnecessary.

[X] Bringing the Band back together
-[X] Organize a meeting to try and establish a new High Council.
--[X] Invite the Fishes, the Artisans and the Serfs
-[X] Change the focus of the Pilgrim Village.
--[X] Encourage own culture. (+1 Valley People Culture in Greenvalley) - Current focus

@Azel Just to be sure, how farfetched would it be to grant someone from the Serfs a seat at the High Council?
I presume that the Artisans and Fishes ses them followers rather than leaders, but that they might like someone who they believe that they could convince to follow their ideas.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


inviting the serfs will insult the rest
 
[X] A new council
-[X] Organize a meeting to try and establish a new High Council.
--[X] Invite the Fishes, the Artisans and the white clans
-[X] Change the focus of the Pilgrim Village.
--[X] Encourage own culture. (+1 Valley People Culture in Greenvalley) - Current focus
 
I don't think the current vote is a good idea. Like Azel said, whatever opinions we want to change, we've got to change before the meeting happens. And right now, without making careful changes to the faction demands, trying to reunify the Valley People might just blow up in our faces.
 
Mortenkam said:
@Azel Just to be sure, how farfetched would it be to grant someone from the Serfs a seat at the High Council?
I presume that the Artisans and Fishes ses them followers rather than leaders, but that they might like someone who they believe that they could convince to follow their ideas.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
@Azel I think that you overlooked my question.
Satar said:
I don't think the current vote is a good idea. Like Azel said, whatever opinions we want to change, we've got to change before the meeting happens. And right now, without making careful changes to the faction demands, trying to reunify the Valley People might just blow up in our faces.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well, what demands do you think are still clashing with each other?
 
Mortenkam said:
Well, what demands do you think are still clashing with each other?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think that the Artisans are going to want diplomatic ties with the lowlands, if not full-on alliances, which is obviously not going to play well with the Fisher's desires for isolation or separation. They may not be as committed as the Fishes or Bone Tenders are to maintaining Valley People culture and religious integrity. Furthermore, they're riding high in terms of numbers and influence and may not feel inclined to play nice and share power with the Fishes. At the very least they might demand an Artisan/Artisan/Fishes council, which the Fishes are obviously not going to accept.

I'm going to post a plan that does three, in my opinion essential, things:

1. Leads the Hunters out of the wilderness of social isolation while tamping down their desire for reckless glory.
2. Convinces the Artisans that maybe they ought to share power with the Fishes and Hunters instead of making a play for Artisan Hegemony
3. Convinces the Fishes that maybe they can trust the Artisans to not bully them and respect their wishes vis a vis maintaining cultural unity and avoiding "entangling alliances"

That's at least two to three Culture worth of groundwork that has to be done before the broken trust between the Factions can be mended and a new High Council established.
 
Last edited:
[X] Plan Promoting Containment.
-[X] Spend culture
--[X] Try to influence a faction.
---[X] Fishes
----[X] Push the idea that Lake Rest is a place that allows the Valley People to teach barbarians how to respect the ancestors, like the Fishes own ancestors were once taught, without relying on the Hunters and it keeps Greenvalley free from the presence of outsiders whilst doing so which the Hunters failed to manage.
-----[X] Spend 2 culture
-[X] Bonetender action
--[X] Gain +1 Culture to spend this turn.

Tried to throw a plan together, the idea is to push the Fishes into acknowledging that civilising outsiders definitely has benefits, such as the Fishes themselves, and arguing that Lake Rest can do this without leading an army of outsiders onto their doorstep.
This is to try to get the fishes to forget isolation and focus on successfully segregating before trying to reform the council.
 
Rationale: Kinda like the Swiss, huh?

[X] Plan The People Yearn, Unification Beckons
-[X] Try to influence a faction.
--[X] Hunters
---[X] Remind the Hunters of the days when their actions brought them acclaim and not ridicule. The Wolf's raids on Brushcrest, from whence the secret of farming was said to be learnt. The sacking of Softhill, from whence the People learned how to herd and make cloth. What separates these days and deeds from those of the so-called "Great" Deer? Only the same evil that lead an elderly man to name himself equal to the greatest heroes the Valley people had ever known-- a certain vice, a certain hubris, the lusting after glory for the sake of glory. In the days of old, the hunters acted in concert with the others of the tribe. The Great Wolf raided Brushcrest and brought back seed, not baubles; so that Serfs might work to feed the Hunters, Artisans, and Fishes alike in the days to come. She thought not of her personal valor but of the way the designs of the whole tribe might be realized by her courage and the strength of her spear-arm. There is a glory that is born of vanity; and there is a glory that is born of the love and acclamation of one's fellow villagers. If the Hunters might set aside this vainglory, and, like Great Wolf before them, work alongside the Artisans and the Fishes as the strong spear-arm and the defenders of the Valley People, then surely in time they will once again walk in the footsteps of their great forefathers.
----[X] 1 Culture
--[X] Artisans
---[X] Speak to the Artisans about Broken-Shell of Brushcrest and the Makar. The Artisans were wise, of course, to realize that the hunters had become overcome with a lust for glory, and also to have recognized the necessity of trade, but the lowlanders have been violent and treacherous before. As the seasons turn, the wind may blow another way. Once again great hosts may clash in the lowlands, and if the Valley People pledge their troth in alliance with one party or another, blood will be spilled and trade ruined. Would it not be wiser for the Valley People to be to the lowlanders as they are to the Clansmen: neutral parties with whom all trade, all respect? And if something like the Makar arise again, or others turn greedy eyes to the wealth of the Valley Peoples, would it not be wise to be armed and strong in hunters so as to defend their interests? The Artisans have a unique opportunity to unite the tribe, but they should avoid being like the vainglorious hunters before them, running roughshod over all others in the Valley. If the Artisans will but be a little generous at the onset, as a trader might be with a new customer, then they might, over time, receive a wealth of gratitude in return. (Artisan: Diplo Ties -> Trade Ties but No Permanent (Entangling) Alliances, Rehabilitate Hunters as Defenders, Don't Force Hegemony).
----[X] 2 Culture
[X] Organize a meeting to try and establish a new High Council.
-[X] Artisans, Hunters, Fishes, Bone Tenders (as Mediators)
 
Last edited:
Satar said:
I think that the Artisans are going to want diplomatic ties with the lowlands, if not full-on alliances, which is obviously not going to play well with the Fisher's desires for isolation or separation. They may not be as committed as the Fishes or Bone Tenders are to maintaining Valley People culture and religious integrity. Furthermore, they're riding high in terms of numbers and influence and may not feel inclined to play nice and share power with the Fishes. At the very least they might demand an Artisan/Artisan/Fishes council, which the Fishes are obviously not going to accept.

I'm going to post a plan that does three, in my opinion essential, things:

1. Leads the Hunters out of the wilderness of social isolation while tamping down their desire for reckless glory.
2. Convinces the Artisans that maybe they ought to share power with the Fishes and Hunters instead of making a play for Artisan Hegemony
3. Convinces the Fishes that maybe they can trust the Artisans to not bully them and respect their wishes vis a vis maintaining cultural unity and avoiding "entangling alliances"

That's at least two to three Culture worth of groundwork that has to be done before the broken trust between the Factions can be mended and a new High Council established.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I question, that about them truly riding high on their own succes, they only have 1 influence more that the Fishes and I doubt that they did not notice, that the Fishes have actual hunters on their side now.
Of course you are right that they are not calling for a new Council, though they do already have a desire for stability, that one could argue would get filled by having proper rule again.

I disagree about how essential redeming the Hunters are for restoring the Council, but I already know that the disagreement is more about how much need there are to secure some way of being warriors again.
Therefore all I am going to say is that it worth remembering that one vote is not enough to be sure the Council will actual approve of raiding or war.

It the end, I am not against trying to doing some more groundwork with the Artisans and the Fishes before trying to restore the High Council, since that might turn out to be needed.
Satar said:
Rationale: Kinda like the Swiss, huh?

[X] Plan The People Yearn, Unification Beckons
-[X] Try to influence a faction.
--[X] Hunters
---[X] Remind the Hunters of the days when their actions brought them acclaim and not ridicule. The Wolf's raids on Brushcrest, from whence the secret of farming was said to be learnt. The sacking of Softhill, from whence the People learned how to herd and make cloth. What separates these days and deeds from those of the so-called "Great" Deer? Only the same evil that lead an elderly man to name himself equal to the greatest heroes the Valley people had ever known-- a certain vice, a certain hubris, the lusting after glory for the sake of glory. In the days of old, the hunters acted in concert with the others of the tribe. The Great Wolf raided Brushcrest and brought back seed, not baubles; so that Serfs might work to feed the Valley People, Hunters, Artisans, and Fishes alike in the days to come. She thought not of her personal valor but of the way the designs of the whole tribe might be realized by her courage and the strength of her sword-arm. There is a glory that is born of vanity; and there is a glory that is born of the love and acclamation of one's fellow villagers. If the Hunters might set aside this vainglory, and, like Great Wolf before them, work alongside the Artisans and the Fishes as the strong sword-arm and the defenders of the Valley People, then surely in time they will once again walk in the footsteps of their great forefathers.
----[X] 1 Culture
--[X] Artisans
---[X] Speak to the Artisans about Broken-Shell of Brushcrest and the Makar. The Artisans were wise, of course, to realize that the hunters had become overcome with a lust for glory, and also to have recognized the necessity of trade, but the lowlanders have been violent and treacherous before. As the seasons turn, the wind may blow another way. Once again great hosts may clash in the lowlands, and if the Valley People pledge their troth in alliance with one party or another, blood will be spilled and trade ruined. Would it not be wiser for the Valley People to be to the lowlanders as they are to the Clansmen: neutral parties with whom all trade, all respect? And if something like the Makar arise again, or others turn greedy eyes to the wealth of the Valley Peoples, would it not be wise to be armed and strong in hunters so as to defend their interests? The Artisans have a unique opportunity to unite the tribe, but they should avoid being like the vainglorious hunters before them, running roughshod over all others in the Valley. If the Artisans will but be a little generous at the onset, as a trader might be with a new customer, then they might, over time, receive a wealth of gratitude in return. (Artisan: Diplo Ties -> Trade Ties but No Permanent (Entangling) Alliances, Rehabilitate Hunters as Defenders, Don't Force Hegemony).
----[X] 2 Culture
[X] Organize a meeting to try and establish a new High Council.
-[X] Artisans, Hunters, Fishes, Bone Tenders (as Mediators)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Honestly my biggest issue with your actual plan might be that it will most likely create a large culture deficit, but if it succeed then that might very well be worth it.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top