|
|
Post by Zidagar Dinoman on Jan 28, 2004 17:50:47 GMT -5
As promised, I am here to work on a world in this subsector. I looked through the ones you have outlines, and none really peaked my interest more than the others. So, Kage, which one would you like me to do?
-Dinoman
|
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jan 28, 2004 20:25:07 GMT -5
If none peak your interest, then come up with something else... Perhaps combine some of the aspects of the others into your own unique blend or whatever. It is up to you! Kage |
|
|
|
Post by Zidagar Dinoman on Jan 29, 2004 10:27:52 GMT -5
Thorp
17/20/12 - M-V - C567535-7 Ag 425 IM 630
Concept: Civilised world (sub-class, Medieval).
Got some ideas for this, put nothing to concrete.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jan 29, 2004 16:07:37 GMT -5
Go for it, then! ;D Any conceptual help or specific with regards to the world building process then, well, don't hesitate to ask. Kage |
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jan 30, 2004 18:45:41 GMT -5
A detail of interest;
Worlds with up to post-black powder technology is defined as Feudal worlds. I suppose TL 5 and above would classify as Civilised worlds.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jan 30, 2004 20:21:47 GMT -5
Nope... They're all 'civilised'. Everything else is a sub-class...  Kage |
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jan 31, 2004 5:29:06 GMT -5
So, now we're ignoring GW's world classification system? I don't think that's a very good idea...  |
|
|
|
Post by zholud on Jan 31, 2004 6:22:19 GMT -5
So, now we're ignoring GW's world classification system? I don't think that's a very good idea... I guess Kage talks more about general need of sub-classes, such as proto-Hiveworlds, Industrial Worlds, etc. from what we see, clear Feudal worlds aren’t that important in 40k universe unless they are similar to Caliban, where techno-barbarian knights with TL10 artifacts and TL6 own production. |
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jan 31, 2004 6:57:55 GMT -5
Importance has nothing to do with it! Worlds are classified based on their technology, society and value, so that when someone from the administratum is looking at the file of a civilised world, he knows that this is most likely a valuable world with a contemporary technology-base, and not some medieval world.
I will really object to alterations to GW's classification system. Improving it, like we did by adding the factory world sub class to the Phi-class (forge worlds), that's one thing. Removing the Mu class worlds (feudal worlds) and making them a sub class of gamma class worlds (civilised worlds) is going too far, and not neccessarily making things more logical.
|
|
|
|
Post by Minister on Jan 31, 2004 8:20:13 GMT -5
I support Cels on this one. Civilised worlds are defined as those reasonably self-suficient, of sustainable population and with a contemporary technology base. This does not include feudal worlds.
|
|
|
|
Post by zholud on Jan 31, 2004 9:32:35 GMT -5
I support Cels on this one. Civilised worlds are defined as those reasonably self-suficient, of sustainable population and with a contemporary technology base. This does not include feudal worlds. I agree. I only show that exists a thin line between true Feudal worlds, where situation is close to actual medieval Earth and fake worlds where techno-marvels exist as in abovementioned example of Caliban. Just re-read and then answer to which category you will set Caliban with knighthood and chainswords in the same time. For me Civilised world is often reference to ‘we don’t know where to put it’ type of problem.  Importance has nothing to do with it! Worlds are classified based on their technology, society and value, so that when someone from the administratum is looking at the file of a civilised world, he knows that this is most likely a valuable world with a contemporary technology-base, and not some medieval world. I never said that Feudal worlds don’t exist, I only point to the fact that true feudal planet cannot give much to the Imperium, even in terms of solders, I don’t speak about production. Is it a little bit clearer? |
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jan 31, 2004 9:47:22 GMT -5
The statement that 'feudal' is a sub-class of 'civilised' is true to the extent that I think you would find it hard to reasonably argue that a feudal world is not 'civilised', or 'self-sufficient' or whatever. GW's classification - which we are using, BTW - is flawed in that it doesn't mean what they think it means. It is in many ways childish... but we're stuck with it. But I also suggest that we don't feel constrained by their inability to to recognise the short-fallings of their system! Kage |
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jan 31, 2004 10:26:26 GMT -5
The class of feudal worlds is not exclusive to worlds with medieval technology and a feudal form of government. The criteria for feudal worlds is that they have at least medieval technology, with "establishment of wide surface cultural and political organisation". As Minister said, a "civilised world" has to have contemporary technology and be generally self-sufficient. My point is that even though these criteria are very vague, I think it is up to us to add to them, not directly alter them, if possible. For example, we could add more criteria to the civilised world category, such as alternatives for type of government, a certain devotion to the Imperial cult, etc. Oh, and zholud, I would put Caliban in the Death world class, on account of all the dangerous beasts. As the fluff sayeth, the Lion should by all rights have been killed within minutes of his arrival. Nice try though |
|
|
|
Post by zholud on Jan 31, 2004 10:57:54 GMT -5
Oh, and zholud, I would put Caliban in the Death world class, on account of all the dangerous beasts. As the fluff sayeth, the Lion should by all rights have been killed within minutes of his arrival. Nice try though The nobility and knighthood don’t go well with the true Death world IMHO, and I cannot remember a lot of mighty beasts or cruel viruses to consider it true death world akin to Catachan or the original Harry Harrison books. If only small part of population are specially taught solders then the everyday danger is quite low. Maybe just Watchers in the Dark kill all newcomers ... and this s the reason of DA xenocidal tendencies – justgood teacher. On the Altarra – the world actively uses fuel for government and has ‘modern’ energy-generators. Flying Vultures are common sight from what I get. So I would say now that way; Feudal world, with higher tech limited availability. |
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jan 31, 2004 11:35:43 GMT -5
In accordance with tradition, zholud, I disagree with everything you've said ;D Deathworlds are deathworlds, regardless of government, technology level or the type of danger that makes it a deathworld. A jungle world like Catachan could be a deathworld, but a world with lots of volcanoes can also be a volcano, as can a desert world with dune worms. Caliban was a deathworld, on account of the creatures that had been warped by chaos. According to C:AoD, "mere day-to-day survival was a constant struggle". That sounds like a deathworld to me... Altarra has close to contemporary technology and a democracy. In my book, that spells Civilised world. The name Feudal world, to me, means that they resemble the Feudal age on earth (ca 9th to 15th century). |
|
