>> By wanting intelligent and socially developed populations of =
>> non-humans you are in effect wanting them to become more human.
> In a sense yes. Since we are humans ourselves, our references
> are human societies. And since we never crossed with non-human
> cultures, we have to try to invent them based on what we know,
> our own.
but, when it comes to human societies themselves...
> There is a very thin line between creative inspiration and
> uninspired copy.
So we should base our alien cultures on human ones, and our human ones on...? This starts seeming weird to me.
Sergio goes on digging:
> The former version of the Lunar Empire was a mixture of romans
> and arabians. The present version is only based on ancient Persia.
Where on earth did you get that idea? Where have you found this "present version" of the Lunar Empire (the "ancient Persian" one)? It wasn't in "Life of Moonson", or the "Glamour Guide" we brought out there, or Greg's "Rufelza" pamphlet, or the Lunar Special issue of Tales, or "Tarsh War", or any of the RQ3 products which included Lunars...
And the "version" in these includes other elements, which aren't included in your "mixture of Romans and Arabians". There's a very heavy Grecian presence (think: hoplites, philosophers, temples, vase artwork); a definite tip o'the hat to Byzantium (rule by a singular divine Emperor who stands in a special mediating relationship between the people of the Empire and their deity); more than a dash of the feuding Great Houses of Frank Herbert's classic "Dune" (the "Dart Wars" between noble families of the Heartlands, which can lead to extinction of entire bloodlines, disgrace and exile); a taste of India (especially in Greg's recent philosophies); and a whiff - excessive to some - of the British Empire, Revolutionary France, and the Soviet Union, to name but a few recent Evil Empires.
This can't in fairness be summarised as "Romans and Arabians"; it's frankly hilarious to dismiss even those two prominent analogies and say "Persians, nobody else".
> Before, nomads combined greek with non-greek elements. Now they
> are basicaly dark age peoples.
Er, I don't really see what you mean. The Pentan and Praxian nomad cultures are based on real-world nomad cultures, yes. Why try to deduce from first principles what a horse-dependent people would look like, if you can go to a library and pick up a book to tell you? I never felt there was any significant "Greek" element in the Prax nomads: you may be misled by assuming Sable Riders' gear is home-grown, when it's almost certainly surplus from the Lunar Army. The Sable Riders' specialty is flexibly adapting to change.
But the Pentans (including Char-Un and Grazer offshoots) still combine an admixture of traits, from the Scythians of Herodotus and Sarmatians of classical Antiquity, through the Parthians (eternal foes of Rome), Attila's Huns, the Avars/Magyars/Bulgars, Timur's and Ghenghis Khan's sundry hordes, the American Plains Indians, the Oghuz Turks, the Cossacks of the Russian frontier...
The Praxians are not only *not* horse-bound (hence the detailed work Sandy Petersen has put into the cultural affinities to the animal species of tribes), but they also draw more inspiration from "classic" desert peoples of the Sahara and Arabian Deserts, as well as the obvious American Plains Indian and Australian Aboriginal influences.
If you can really pick up and read Tales #14, Tales #15, Drastic Resolutions: Volume Prax, actually take in what's printed there, then put down the sources and say, "But these are basically Dark Age people" ... well, if you can do that, you must be insane. Or pig-ignorant. I would prefer to assume you've never seen these publications, which reflects badly on nobody (though it does mean you're shooting your mouth off without thinking very hard, and doing it in BLOCK CAPITALS, TOO, WHICH ALWAYS LOOKS RATHER DAFT IN A DAILY POST (almost as bad as people who dont think that punctuation matters in their posts god how i hate that it makes everything so much harder to read and at the end of the day i have to say it usually turns out not to be worthwhile after all not that i always read everything in the digest but you know what i mean im sure or if you dont someone can explain it to you).
And if you read Tales #16 and came out of it saying, "Gosh, I hate all these Persian references to Senators and Tribunes and the cult of the Emperor and the rights of Citizens and the duties of local Magistrates -- bring back the old Roman model, that's what I say," then someone at your school must have been having a nasty joke at your expense. For which I'm sorry. But maybe we can make up for it here?
Changing the subject, Sergio replies to my Voltairian stand:
>> I disagree with *huge* tracts of the guff that Peter, Joerg, >> Stephen, Sergio, Martin, the False Davids, and various >> others may post. But I'll defend to the death their right to >> post it. If we can't indulge ourselves talking about Glorantha >> here, then where the hell can we?
> Message received (and accepted. I'll try to comply to your
> recomendation *in the future*).
To "comply", all you have to do is self-indulgently talk guff here on the Daily. That's never been difficult for you in the past, has it now? :-)
::::
Nick
::::
Powered by hypermail