I’m working on a revision of my homebrew setting and I know I will be coming back to this video again and again as I build the framework for different regions :)
Just the act of actually sitting down and writing these out is immensely helpful. Often times I just keep thoughts in my head and "yeah I know this" and then forget it by the time someone asks about it. Having them written down is a way to keep writing uniform. You have the references, the building blocks, right there and ready. Great suggestion to sit down and answer those questions and have them in your notes!
Right?! I can't tell you how many times I've gone "that's such a great idea there's no way I will forget that" then 2.4765 seconds later it's just GONE.
I think this is one of the greatest skills good content makers can possess, especially in a community such as this. Being able to distill vague ideas that lots of people are aware of but can't quite articulate fully into an understandable and easily usable methodology is wonderful.
Ancient Athens the city state is a good example of a direct democracy that worked only because a small body of male citizens were able to vote. Political positions were chosen by random ballot. Competing orators could sway the assembly to vote one way then another could convince them to revoke that vote on the same day. Short-lived and funded by silver mines and protected by walls and a navy. The HRE - Holy Roman Empire - is a good example of a hodge-podge of differing sized kingdoms, noble lands and religious estates that somehow functioned over a long time frame in spite of its weakness. Riven by religious and ethnic disputes with an elected Emperor that still managed to control a large portion of Europe. The Most Serene Republic of Venice is an example of a Merchant City State ruled by many councils and a Doge. By design no one had absolute power amongst the competing merchant families. Survived due to its unique geographical position and a strong navy. Kings and Dictators alike would create a bunch of competing underlings who were too busy scheming against each other to conspire against the King or Dictator. As the King or Dictator has the final say they can stop any one underling from becoming too powerful. Such systems tend to go into crisis during periods of succession.
I love thinking about forms of government for RPGs so this is really helpful! One question I would add is what is the ideology of the rulers, what kind of world do they want to build. Ruling may be the exercise of power, but all prospective rulers start from a vision of how to make the world better (in their view) even if it's simply 'I would be the best ruler'. Another thing to consider for inspiration is different forms of proposed government that have existed but never really taken state power or have remained purely theoretical. On the issue of direct democracy, you could look at anarcho-syndicalist movements or democratic confederalist theory as practiced by Syrian Kurds in recent years both of which are far more modern examples of attempts at direct democracy than Athens. One of my favourite polities in my game is based on Plato's theory of the state combined with technocracy (ruled by Lord Engineers instead of Philosopher Kings), with a rigid caste system and an organicist view of the society. It's just very different from the typical European feudalism or early modern Venice style republics that we often go to (though I do have those as well)
Thanks, dude! I'm glad you enjoyed it. It's definitely a rabbit-hole that you can get lost in. George Martin has said a big drive or making the song of ice and fire was imagining what the tax system of middle earth was.
I’m pondering over making a Dwarven underground society in the desert, that’s a mercantile Kritarchy. Their skin color is deep indigo and all are bald.
I’m currently building a story staged in the area around Westwood and Sword Mountains in 1480 DR forgotten realms. The Church of Helm acting as the law and financial backer (legislative branch) The Order of the Gauntlet as the military arm that wait on sanctioning from the Church in order to act (executive). And a third faction consisting of investigators and inquisitors whom uncover evil schemes and plots with evidence (judicial)
Shouldn't another question to be ask is how do they deal with their enemy because if the don't do anything to deal they will just overthrow them. Plus depening on how they deal with them can cause more problems form them and make them more enemies
That's what the "How do they keep power" question is for. And you're right, the answer to that can cause more problems and make them more enemies, and working all that out adds complexity, nuance, and drama to your game!
At around 2:40 when contrasting monarchy and dictatorship, you say "instead of being concerned with the good of the country they are concerned with their own power". I am not certain if I buy that. If you are drawing from historical references, I tend to think that monarchs were not that different from dictators. Both used taxes to improve their country for the same reason: not being overthrown by the next dictator/monarch/whatsoever.
I find it a bit frustrating the lack of information for worldbuilding in politics. You go to, say, linguistics and you can find tons of ways to construct your language in such a way it could have evolved naturally. Same is true for geography, astronomy, and so on. But for political systems, you don't really get polisci itself, just writing prompts. Which works for most people, but it's hard finding anything more advanced. There was one channel who made this type of content, Supi, but he made exactly three videos on the subject then stopped uploading on that channel entirely.
you kinda screwed up the definition of Anarchy, man. I do agree that for post apocaliptic scenarios this makes sense, but Anarchy refers more to the abolition of state and the organization of laborers in autonomous communities. The best example is Spanish Anarquism before and during their civil war
The definition (at least as far as I've ever known or read) of anarchy is the absence of government, "a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority."
Here is a thought. Seattle WA homeless is total Anarchy, and Government is still there as well as all other resources. Anyways I'll get back to staying at home.
A peaceful community founded by druids with decisions took in common by the elders is anarchist and it's far from being violent. Nothing to do with survival of the fittest.
I hate it when players create democracies or republics. There ussualy so disjoined from the setting it feels so lazy. Most chrakters would never even think about changing the governent that way. Que the cring (game of thrones) line: maybe people the people should have a say. (Que) everyone laughting.
@@danj1101 Democracies and Republics in the modern sense where you have some form of universal suffrage where everyone who lives in the polity have a say in what happens, are very disjointed in my opinion. Historically although we have many governments that could be described as democracies or republics, they looked nothing like modern day post-Enlightenment republics and democracies, with the right to vote typically being limited heavily, political offices often being held by the same people for decades if not for life, and most Republics being rather some form of oligarchy with their stated intentions being to protect the property and power of the upper classes (whether this be the aristocracy, mercantile, or priestly classes) rather than out of any sense of popular will.
I’m working on a revision of my homebrew setting and I know I will be coming back to this video again and again as I build the framework for different regions :)
Just the act of actually sitting down and writing these out is immensely helpful. Often times I just keep thoughts in my head and "yeah I know this" and then forget it by the time someone asks about it. Having them written down is a way to keep writing uniform. You have the references, the building blocks, right there and ready. Great suggestion to sit down and answer those questions and have them in your notes!
Right?! I can't tell you how many times I've gone "that's such a great idea there's no way I will forget that" then 2.4765 seconds later it's just GONE.
I think this is one of the greatest skills good content makers can possess, especially in a community such as this. Being able to distill vague ideas that lots of people are aware of but can't quite articulate fully into an understandable and easily usable methodology is wonderful.
Ancient Athens the city state is a good example of a direct democracy that worked only because a small body of male citizens were able to vote. Political positions were chosen by random ballot. Competing orators could sway the assembly to vote one way then another could convince them to revoke that vote on the same day. Short-lived and funded by silver mines and protected by walls and a navy.
The HRE - Holy Roman Empire - is a good example of a hodge-podge of differing sized kingdoms, noble lands and religious estates that somehow functioned over a long time frame in spite of its weakness. Riven by religious and ethnic disputes with an elected Emperor that still managed to control a large portion of Europe.
The Most Serene Republic of Venice is an example of a Merchant City State ruled by many councils and a Doge. By design no one had absolute power amongst the competing merchant families. Survived due to its unique geographical position and a strong navy.
Kings and Dictators alike would create a bunch of competing underlings who were too busy scheming against each other to conspire against the King or Dictator. As the King or Dictator has the final say they can stop any one underling from becoming too powerful. Such systems tend to go into crisis during periods of succession.
Those are excellent examples!
I love thinking about forms of government for RPGs so this is really helpful!
One question I would add is what is the ideology of the rulers, what kind of world do they want to build. Ruling may be the exercise of power, but all prospective rulers start from a vision of how to make the world better (in their view) even if it's simply 'I would be the best ruler'.
Another thing to consider for inspiration is different forms of proposed government that have existed but never really taken state power or have remained purely theoretical. On the issue of direct democracy, you could look at anarcho-syndicalist movements or democratic confederalist theory as practiced by Syrian Kurds in recent years both of which are far more modern examples of attempts at direct democracy than Athens.
One of my favourite polities in my game is based on Plato's theory of the state combined with technocracy (ruled by Lord Engineers instead of Philosopher Kings), with a rigid caste system and an organicist view of the society. It's just very different from the typical European feudalism or early modern Venice style republics that we often go to (though I do have those as well)
like i said, a series from the beginning with all details... just breathtaking how good this is !!!
Absolutely informative
I'm really glad you think so!
Very informative and unique info! These can be big pieces of a world and are often forgotten about in world building!! 10/10
Thanks, dude! I'm glad you enjoyed it. It's definitely a rabbit-hole that you can get lost in. George Martin has said a big drive or making the song of ice and fire was imagining what the tax system of middle earth was.
I’m pondering over making a Dwarven underground society in the desert, that’s a mercantile Kritarchy. Their skin color is deep indigo and all are bald.
FYI, anarchy is recognized as a form of direct democracy in most political science cases... Also all monarchies are dictatorships by definition.
Thanks!!
I’m currently building a story staged in the area around Westwood and Sword Mountains in 1480 DR forgotten realms. The Church of Helm acting as the law and financial backer (legislative branch) The Order of the Gauntlet as the military arm that wait on sanctioning from the Church in order to act (executive). And a third faction consisting of investigators and inquisitors whom uncover evil schemes and plots with evidence (judicial)
Shouldn't another question to be ask is how do they deal with their enemy because if the don't do anything to deal they will just overthrow them. Plus depening on how they deal with them can cause more problems form them and make them more enemies
That's what the "How do they keep power" question is for. And you're right, the answer to that can cause more problems and make them more enemies, and working all that out adds complexity, nuance, and drama to your game!
At around 2:40 when contrasting monarchy and dictatorship, you say "instead of being concerned with the good of the country they are concerned with their own power".
I am not certain if I buy that. If you are drawing from historical references, I tend to think that monarchs were not that different from dictators. Both used taxes to improve their country for the same reason: not being overthrown by the next dictator/monarch/whatsoever.
I find it a bit frustrating the lack of information for worldbuilding in politics. You go to, say, linguistics and you can find tons of ways to construct your language in such a way it could have evolved naturally. Same is true for geography, astronomy, and so on. But for political systems, you don't really get polisci itself, just writing prompts. Which works for most people, but it's hard finding anything more advanced. There was one channel who made this type of content, Supi, but he made exactly three videos on the subject then stopped uploading on that channel entirely.
I can add a republic to TERAKIN my larpers would love it
you kinda screwed up the definition of Anarchy, man. I do agree that for post apocaliptic scenarios this makes sense, but Anarchy refers more to the abolition of state and the organization of laborers in autonomous communities. The best example is Spanish Anarquism before and during their civil war
The definition (at least as far as I've ever known or read) of anarchy is the absence of government, "a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority."
@@IcarusGames That is correct, Icarus. Political disorder, and the absence of a government. Maybe "Mob Rule" would be a stretch.
Here is a thought.
Seattle WA homeless is total Anarchy, and Government is still there as well as all other resources.
Anyways I'll get back to staying at home.
A peaceful community founded by druids with decisions took in common by the elders is anarchist and it's far from being violent. Nothing to do with survival of the fittest.
@@SwiftAmhe Who said "Survival of the fittest?" That was you, just now, right?
Perhaps there is someone else on the thread that I can't see?
I hate it when players create democracies or republics. There ussualy so disjoined from the setting it feels so lazy.
Most chrakters would never even think about changing the governent that way.
Que the cring (game of thrones) line: maybe people the people should have a say. (Que) everyone laughting.
Democracies and republics aren't unique to the modern day and aren't at odds with historical fantasy settings.
@@danj1101 Democracies and Republics in the modern sense where you have some form of universal suffrage where everyone who lives in the polity have a say in what happens, are very disjointed in my opinion. Historically although we have many governments that could be described as democracies or republics, they looked nothing like modern day post-Enlightenment republics and democracies, with the right to vote typically being limited heavily, political offices often being held by the same people for decades if not for life, and most Republics being rather some form of oligarchy with their stated intentions being to protect the property and power of the upper classes (whether this be the aristocracy, mercantile, or priestly classes) rather than out of any sense of popular will.
540 like