This is 184AD and not 1840.
That way of thinking is older than you think.

Heh, even the Qin Dynasty didn't last two generations, it was replaced by another with more ability.

I have now tried two times to explain to you the importance of filial piety, and you completely ignore it.
I know it is important, but it should not be to the degree it is that people would advocate for the slaughter of the kin of criminals.

How do you know Ge Lang was the only one involved?
Liang Shu doesn't but Gaz told us he was the one who did it.

Furthermore, that punishment was not considered extreme for the time but a common punishment for certain crimes.
Quoting wikipedia: The occurrence of this punishment was somewhat rare, with relatively few sentences recorded throughout history. The Han Dynasty (202 BC – 220 AD), although it inherited the concept of family execution, was more moderate in inflicting such severe punishments. In many cases, the Han Emperor would retract the sentence, and so family executions were much rarer than under the Qin Dynasty.

...It's reading like the Emperor's the one with tribal extermination authority.

His duty is suppressing banditry, finding chief instigators and punishing criminals.
So you'll be fine with Liang Shu carrying out the sentence of cutting the flesh or snapping the necks of those men, women, teens, children, babes, and grannies? Or having others carry that out for him?

Your point about the YT is just...wrong.
From a modern perspective, that information is known. What is known to most of the nobles is that the peasants are terrorizing their betters with riotous mobs and banditry.

The most famous example was Cao Cao putting to torch the province of Tao Qian for murdering his father.
Was it recorded how many fathers and their families he exterminated in that campaign?

Just because you apparently dislike a part of another culture does not mean its morally wrong or responsible for so much that is wrong in the Han Empire. (...) Your cultural bias shines massively through.
It is an empire, what's wrong with a bit of imperialism? Lame joke aside, on several occasions Liang Shu has seen the world as it is and found it wanting. He wanted it to be better, but talking of how he wanted it to be better would be useless, so he acted. Despite what is expected of his status, he provides the county with all the help he can muster even if that's really the prefect's job, he befriends those of the lower class and those of the outcaste, he helps out merchant clans, he views marriage as an institution of love, he appoints women as officers in his army, and despite living up to the example his father set as one should, he dreams of being an emperor himself, and does his best to live up to that too.

And then it comes down to him to exact vengeance... does he do that the traditional way, or has he already achieved filial piety by living up to his father's example and can put forth his own example?

You say the world at this time is the way it is and it should not be changed. I say it could, and should.
 
Last edited:
That way of thinking is older than you think.

Heh, even the Qin Dynasty didn't last two generations, it was replaced by another with more ability.


I know it is important, but it should not be to the degree it is that people would advocate for the slaughter of the kin of criminals.


Liang Shu doesn't but Gaz told us he was the one who did it.


Quoting wikipedia: The occurrence of this punishment was somewhat rare, with relatively few sentences recorded throughout history. The Han Dynasty (202 BC – 220 AD), although it inherited the concept of family execution, was more moderate in inflicting such severe punishments. In many cases, the Han Emperor would retract the sentence, and so family executions were much rarer than under the Qin Dynasty.

...It's reading like the Emperor's the one with tribal extermination authority.


So you'll be fine with Liang Shu carrying out the sentence of cutting the flesh or snapping the necks of those men, women, teens, children, babes, and grannies? Or having others carry that out for him?


From a modern perspective, that information is known. What is known to most of the nobles is that the peasants are terrorizing their betters with riotous mobs and banditry.


Was it recorded how many fathers and their families he exterminated in that campaign?


It is an empire, what's wrong with a bit of imperialism? Lame joke aside, on several occasions Liang Shu has seen the world as it is and found it wanting. He wanted it to be better, but talking of how he wanted it to be better would be useless, so he acted. Despite what is expected of his status, he provides the county with all the help he can muster even if that's really the prefect's job, he befriends those of the lower class and those of the outcaste, he helps out merchant clans, he views marriage as an institution of love, he appoints women as officers in his army, and despite living up to the example his father set as one should, he dreams of being an emperor himself, and does his best to live up to that too.

And then it comes down to him to exact vengeance... does he do that the traditional way, or has he already achieved filial piety by living up to his father's example and can put forth his own example?

You say the world at this time is the way it is and it should not be changed. I say it could, and should.
Spaghetti posting is against the rules of this forum, I think it is better for you to cease doing it.

Meme posting is a pathetic way of arguing and non-sensual. The differences between these two sets of philosophies are deeper and far more complex than an idiotic meme could portray. Considering that the Han dynasty is the successor of Qin and lasted far longer and is based on filial piety and Confucianism makes the whole point ridiculous. I could go on and include the many other dynasties that followed the same principles, but considering the low level you portray in that argument I don't see the use of it.

I have already explained how they would react to the death of their patriarch, I have explained the law, I have explained the expectations of the time and given examples. All you did is saying you don't like it. Then I think this setting is not for you.

Gaz also said only Ge Dejun was for sure not involved in the plot. He did not absolve anyone else. It would be weird for Ge Maiyu to be involved in the Leng Jun plot but her father to be put aside. The same goes for the other plots, it is normal for the father to involve his son. In this age it is far more likely for the son to take the blame upon himself than the other way. Opening the option for the son to confess to these crimes to save his father, if he was not implicated himself.

Wikipedia is a horrible source for detailed information and in this case is wrong if your conclusion is truly what was stated there. Michael Loewe and Rafe de Crespigny have written about the rights of the emperor and nowhere in these text is that punishment mentioned as being the sole right of the emperor. Honestly, I probably spent more time looking for this than was needed, but yeah wrong again.

Ah, we are now at the ad hominem arguments. Sorry, these kinds of things don't work on me. First this is fiction, second this is a historical setting, third you are the one bringing this punishment forward, fourth it's a pathetic argument, fifth they would do the same to us, sixth executioners are a thing, seventh for Ge Lang I would want him to swing the sword, ninth they are guilty of a heinous crime, tenth dura lex sed lex. We are going to play a warlord. To think our hands would stay clean is mind-boggling. War is terrible. Take your moral high-ground and stand there, I don't care.

Once more wrong, this is known at the time, and they are not exclusively harming the nobles not even close to it. This is not a rebellion against nobles, but a coup to replace the emperor. Many nobles joined the YT in their strongholds, they even ignored some famous nobles and left them alone. There is no example of them doing to the same to a simple village. Just stop talking about it, it is obvious you have barely any knowledge about this. Your interpretation is massively skewed by a clear-cut personal bias and a dislike of nobles all-around.

Considering the estimates of the persons killed range easily reach the 100.000s I would be surprised if complete families did not perish. I mean an army looting and plundering a region. Do you think they stopped when they killed one part of the family and raped the other? This does not even include how many died through famine or losing their homes. He set fire to a whole province for the murder of his father! An army marched in and started killing, looting, raping, and you believe what? They stopped at every home to just kill one person and leave one alive.

Ah, and now we are at the strawman. Do you have a checklist? Seriously the list is mostly wrong. Nobles are expected to help out the government. To help the people. It is even an aspect of Confucianism. A superior gentleman would do that. Liang Shu is not doing something out of the norm for a noble man, we have the in quest example of Zhang Xia doing the exact same thing. I haven't seen Shu befriend any slave, but sure 'lower class' and "outcasts". In no way did he befriend the able and like-minded. Shu himself is barely above a commoner as Mi reminded her sister in one of the early chapters. I have no interest to continue, but just to make it clear once more no this living up to his father is not enough to fulfill filial piety.

Where have I stated that I am fine with the corruption? Where have I stated I am fine with abuses of power? Where have I stated I like the emperor? Where have I stated to want the power of the noble families to remain on this level? Where have I stated the frontier is perfect? Where have I stated that there is nothing to do for Shu? Where have I stated this world should remain the same? Nowhere, take your strawman and try it with someone else.

All I said is filial piety is a core part of Chinese culture and Shu going against it is OOC, trying to destroy this part of the culture is a pipe dream and founded in your massive cultural bias against it. You misattribute a multitude of things to it and are only showing your lack of knowledge about it.
 
Spaghetti posting is against the rules of this forum, I think it is better for you to cease doing it.
Thank you! Hadn't caught that one, thanks for informing me. Won't happen again!

I hope you don't mind if I respond to that, even if it will be seen as a pissing contest...
First, I'm trying to get immersed in the story, I'm going to care what the protagonist gets up to. If I can't relate to him from a moral standpoint, my interest will decline, even if they have a different set of values. Second this is historical, meaning things can change over time. Third, you insist on promoting this gruesome punishment. Fourth, thank you. Fifth, the Ge Clan wanted to use the Liang Clan to their advantage so the same should be considered. Sixth, yes, that would be a foul deed, one need not carry out the slaughter when they have servants to do so. Seventh, my mistake, unless it would be really gratifying to carry that justice out, and I didn't even bring up the old man. Eighth, uhhhhh. Ninth, two of them are guilty of respective crimes, only one of which Liang Shu has definite proof of. Tenth, Roma's a few thousand li that way, what does that mean? I'm not gonna know what a bunch of latin is, and I'm scared to Google those words in particular. Eleventh, wars involve soldiers, not civilians. Atrocities are atrocities no matter what era.

Confucianism puts the cart before the horse. One of the tenets of that philosophy espouses that virtue will lead to orderly nature. False. Order leads to virtuous nature. Without a good upbringing from his family, Liang Shu wouldn't be nearly as cool. And Zhu Fang had to be talked down from killing someone so that justice could be achieved and known, another example of order leading to virtue. The Nobles are expected to be out doing what Liang Shu does because of Confucian beliefs. They ain't. They have to be ordered by the Han itself to get off their asses or else.

Without rules there to put the fear of repercussions into people's backbones, people would revert to taking what they want without care for other people. Legalism espouses that people are naturally terrible and it is the threat of punishment that makes them nice. Breaking the law to ensure one's own justice is just a person taking what they want without care for other people.

Those people such as Zhao E who went and avenged their loved ones turned themselves into the police knowing they had committed crimes. It was thanks to the judges' fiat that they were commended. Those killers fully expected punishment, even if they were acting according to filial piety.

Well, you argued that I shouldn't be so negative about an ancient society's values because those values are essential, but I think that from his experiences, Liang Shu would see Legalism as better for A Society than Confucianism. It's just that Confucianism has him in the ol' Hamlet Headlock and Legalism would recommend an extermination. Still, he's been liberal in many other aspects, so it wouldn't surprise me if he was more merciful in his judgment as judges can be.

I'm sorry my arguments fell into fallacies and sources weren't the best. I had fun discussing it with y'all tho.
 
Last edited:
That's certainly an interesting take on the Ge Clan. Certainly a precedent for former foes and criminals to join in the period. When you never grant amnesty it sends a message to all your enemies and prospective enemies that doesn't go over well. Still; its one thing to resist someone you regard as an enemy; its another to flat out betray someone who regards you as a friend.
 
Last edited:
Also, sleepyanon is a nerd, fuck you. Also Gaz, you should play some three kingdoms with me sometime so we can mengdepost. (Disclaimer, while sleepy is actually a nerd, I hold no ill will, I know him from somewhere else.)
 
We got a rival quest!

forums.sufficientvelocity.com

Mandate of Heaven (Three Kingdom Quest) Alt. History

This is a quest in the historical period from 184 AD onwards in China. It includes the Fall of the Han Dynasty and the era of the warlords. Finally, ending in the so-called Three Kingdoms era. If it stays the same depends on you and your choices. You will play a character in this time. He will...

More is good no?
 
Definitely wouldn't say rival quest either. Karl who's started it is one of the most frequent contributors in this thread.
 
We got a rival quest!

forums.sufficientvelocity.com

Mandate of Heaven (Three Kingdom Quest) Alt. History

This is a quest in the historical period from 184 AD onwards in China. It includes the Fall of the Han Dynasty and the era of the warlords. Finally, ending in the so-called Three Kingdoms era. If it stays the same depends on you and your choices. You will play a character in this time. He will...

More is good no?


"Rival" is probably not the best word although I am envious of some of the books Karl has access to which I do not but I would urge everyone to check Mandate of Heaven out! I personally am very excited for it and interested indeed in Karl's more historical approach compared to my own "kitchen sink fuelled by alcoholism " approach.
 
"Rival" is probably not the best word although I am envious of some of the books Karl has access to which I do not but I would urge everyone to check Mandate of Heaven out! I personally am very excited for it and interested indeed in Karl's more historical approach compared to my own "kitchen sink fuelled by alcoholism " approach.
ITs mole, your the Romance while they're the Records
 
"Rival" is probably not the best word although I am envious of some of the books Karl has access to which I do not but I would urge everyone to check Mandate of Heaven out! I personally am very excited for it and interested indeed in Karl's more historical approach compared to my own "kitchen sink fuelled by alcoholism " approach.
Uh i wrote rival as a joke, or is was´t clear?
 
Complicated
LU LINGQI -

Uh huh, this war's like this
Uh huh, uh huh, that's the way it is
'Cause life's like this
Uh huh, uh huh, that's the way shit is

Alright Shu, what are you worryin' for?
Relax, the bandits' are done before our swords
Let it go, let it all be, you will see
I like you, don't ever change
So shut up, just break that cage
And when we rout them, the bandits become

Cowards if best
Not up to the test
Just some thieves
Relax they're beat
You lead us
You're my husband to be
Tell me

Why did the Ge make shit so complicated?
I see the way they try and act innocent
Gets me frustrated
Just wanted to fight
We could strike and bite and show our might
You lead and take what you get and you oppose
Faux honesty, promise me you'll never take her word again
No, no, no

My dad comes south unannounced
Like a beast, about to pounce
When you and I, are perfect he can see
With me
We make quite a pair
No matter what
Memories we will share
Show him how you stand
You will prove to him
Standing up to him

You're a bird boy
Acting all coy
I've got your back
Try and relax
Just try and look cool
I know when you act the fool
For me
Tell me

Why did this all get so complicated?
Girl meets boy, don't act in a way
That gets me frustrated
Life's like this
We'll charge and we'll fight and we'll duel
And we'll win what we can, and you'll turn it into
Honesty, promise me you'll never give up
No, no, no
No, no, no
No, no, no
No, no, no
No, no, no

Shu relax, just try and chill
The enemies left, I will kill
I just want you to spend your life with me
We will see

Traitors and more
Rebels and more
I've got your back
Try and relax
Just try and look cool
I know when you act the fool
For me
Tell me

Why did marrying you get so complicated?
Did all we could, granddad turns up his nose
Gets me frustrated
I want to share with you
Even if you fall and you run
I'll be by your side always and
Even a struggle'll be fun
Yeah, yeah
Why did marrying you get so complicated?
Did all we could, granddad turns up his nose
Gets me frustrated
I want to share with you
Even if you fall and you run
I'll be by your side always and
Even a struggle'll be fun
Yeah, yeah
 
Back
Top