Choice of Rebels: Stormwright (XoR2 WIP)

Choice of Games games CoG Works In Progress
505

As a consequence, Alya’s Leaguer buddies weren’t (initially) too happy to hear that she wasn’t on board with their “Shayard should become the new post-Hegemony superpower” agenda, but after bribing (whether it be a pension plan and/or an esteemed position in Alya’s court) was conducted, tunes soon started changing in Alya’s favor. :slight_smile:

And as a common sense reminder (and echo of a previous comment on the Uprising thread, whose source I’ve forgotten) it would be wise NOT to harrow the infant(s) of Theurgy-wielding parents, lest your blood collectors get fireballed to oblivion (in retaliation).

1- So I take it that Alya has dumped her current plans to romance Phaedra in favor of courting Cerlota instead?

2- And what is Alya’s logic/argument for getting Cerlota to back her bid as Eternal Thaumatarch? (When Cerlota’s G2 introduction has currently defined as a “Theurge who wants all Theurges (herself included) barred from political office”?)

Again, best of luck to you and your “journey to achieve a romanticized dream” playthrough! :slight_smile:

Though, please do be mindful to keep an eye on the hardline nationalists who may have reason to pick fights with the few foreign nations that you call your allies!

Long live the Xthonic Holy Belt/Coast! (Shayard, Erezza, and (post-Hegemony) Karagon)

Fortunately for you, me, and other alliance-seeking Homelander players, I previously asked Havie (on the Uprising forum) if “soft nationalism can still be a useful glue for Homelander MC to form alliances with non-Shayardene nationalists , right?”

His answer: “Yes, that will be possible! As I’ve argued at length elsewhere on the forum , nationalism isn’t inherently bad or divisive, even if (like all significant sources of social order) it can go very, very bad.”

And as for the potential analogy for “very, very bad” forms of nationalism, do be careful not to escalate your faction into the XoR version of the Axis of Evil (WW2 Germany, Italy, and Japan)!
(unless of course, that’s what you’re deliberately going for in your playthrough!)

Unless, of course, said Cosmo MC has simpler aspirations of being a “by rebels, for rebels” mercenary commander (instead of aiming for becoming a nation builder).

And here’s another relevant Havie quote (from the Uprising thread) for you to consider: “The big independent mercenary band wouldn’t be a viable model in the bipolar superpower war of the present gameworld, nor in a total anarchy meltdown where no one has the money for big armies… but it would probably work out and be a satisfying option for some players in a post-Hegemony world of many little states.”

Will Grand Shayard’s aristo community/locations ever have any opportunities for players to solve a murder mystery? (whether it’s in G2 or beyond)

Sorry if the question came out of left field- I’m still acting upon the “murder mystery involving a dysfunctional cast of wealthy 1%-ers” craving that Knives Out and Glass Onion have stimulated for me (in recent years).

As for how characters of all specs could succeed at such a murder mystery plot, I have the following suggestions:

1- COM characters can do their own pseudo-forensic analysis of bladed weapons and guns (without needing any outside assistance from NPCs).

2- CHA characters can squeeze more information from the witnesses they interview (while also being able to talk down (insert culprit) into turning themselves in, OR arranging a plea bargain to secure (insert culprit’s) confession).
Also, CHA characters should have the ability to detect lies/guilt (based on detecting body language).

3- INT characters obviously have the advantage of determining whether or not a cause of death could be attributed to a Theurgy-wielding culprit.
Also, INT characters should have the ability to point out lies/contradictions (based on piecing together concrete facts beyond body language).

Couldn’t MC address this issue by simply keeping Erezzan representatives in the loop with his “double agent” plan? (publicly work with (and get resources) from Halassur, covertly work with Erezza on the side (to secretly advance Shayard and Erezza’s bigger picture mutual goals), and then later publicly side with Erezza during a later critical battle)

I think it would be a very amusing irony for MC to defend Erezza with the resources he mooched from his past dealings with Halassur. :slight_smile:

Or is the uncertainty of allegiances enough of a thorny issue for the Erezzan representative(s) to cynically accuse MC of deliberately “hedging his bets?” (thus rejecting MC’s proposed convoluted plan, and instead demanding that MC publicly commit to allying with Erezza from the get-go)

Then again, asking for trust from the intrigue-obsessed Erretsins may be a very tall order (by default) to begin with? :sweat_smile:

Might the hunt for the G4/G5 base of operations evoke what happened during Amazon’s pursuit of their second headquarters?
E.g. with Grand Shayard, Corlune, or Aveche “offering billions in tax breaks” to MC? (if MC picks them as his HQ)

Albeit friction that worked against Napoleon (rather than for him).

1 Like
506

Oh, no. Her theurges will be chosen from those who have already given their firstborn or who are committed to doing so (or who are homosexual). If Alya does this, she will want her theurges to be committed to the system she’s made. (In fact, one ethical qualm she has about this is that it favors homosexuals, and herself in particular, when favor should not be given to a particular sexual nature.)

No idea. She hasn’t planned that far yet. (Remember that she doesn’t know who Phaedra even is yet.) :slight_smile:

Alya thinks she has an advantage in negotiation, though, because (A) Cerlota is a hell of a lot like her in general (moderately ruthless, highly cosmopolitan, and while religiously neutral, doesn’t object to Alya being devout), (B) as I said, Cerlota seems both highly amenable to reasoned discussion and willing to compromise in general, and (C) Cerlota came to join her, because she believes to some extent in Alya’s rebellion. Cerlota might be able to get Alya to involve others more in her decision-making; we’ll see.

1 Like
507

Allow me to introduce Umineko When They Cry: “Rondo of Witch and Reasoning”, “Nocturne of Truth and Illusion” — to me, it’s a narrative masterpiece. It’s very hard to discuss without spoilers, and it’s absolutely a game you want minimal spoilers for because the crux of it is thinking, feeling, conjecturing, and finally reaching an understanding of the story being told. The only way to lose is to stop thinking, and you’ll easily find 70+ hours of that. If you enjoy murder mysteries and especially locked room mysteries, this will be a feast.

You can get a taste of it here:

Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled Χoice of Rebels content…

Perspective of a Code-Reader:

“Just 5 factions in Grand Shayard, right?”

“I guess the Leaguers and Laconniers count for two”
“(6 choose 2) = 15 combinations”
“…oh no, why is there a caleaname”

7 Likes
508

By the way, for anyone planning to set Grand Shayard ablaze in Choice of Rebels, my friend Ben has a book coming out that explores a historical arson (probably) by rebels: https://yalebooks.yale.edu/2023/01/31/burning-pitch-telling-a-new-story-of-1776/. Can’t wait to read it!

(And since my old D&D campaign is fresh in my mind, I’ll just note that Ben was in it, playing Nina. He wasn’t the only player who ended up a professional historian; and others founded Sunday Morning Transport and COG. Little did I know that I’d get a lifetime of reading material out of that campaign…)

19 Likes
509

If we dropped the wards, could we still claim it? If no one’s gonna contest it, why not? Just draw lines on a map.

1 Like
510

I mean, in theory the Thaumatarchy could “claim” the Halassurq Empire. Doesn’t really make it something useful to do.

1 Like
511

Sure! Literally no one stopping you. Paint the map.

7 Likes
512

We will be too busy eliminating as much of koine influence in Shayard as we can for them to be concerned… for example, I hope it will be possible to make Shayarin the sole official language.

1 Like
513

Ireland has had a pretty hard time even just preserving Irish much less replacing English despite decades of effort. That’s probably about the size of the problem given the hundreds of years of Hegemonic rule. Our little red neck corner of Shayard probably isn’t very representative of the larger whole. I expect they’re are many Shayardens who don’t even have a conversational familiarity with the language in the big cities.

5 Likes
514

Yeah, we live in the Gaeltacht. I do hope Cosmo MCs can still try to preserve the language, instead of going full assimilationist as the game seems to push them.

4 Likes
515

I’m not sure if that’s necessarily the case. My own country spend around 450-500 years as part of the Ottoman Empire and the Greek language survived sufficiently for a majority of the country to speak the language. We don’t know how many Koine speaking settlers have moved into Shayard or much about how education works in the Hegemony.

Even in a worst case scenario, I think enforcing a ban on Koine/Shayarin as the sole language would be something that I’d wish to pursue in the interest of destroying Karagonds legacy as a whole.

10 Likes
516

Not to mention the Irish Language was quite healthy with a lot of speakers up until the 19th century, it only met it’s demise by the Potato Famine and the following exodus from the island. To me I think the Hegemony only made Koine the official language of government and lingua franca, because forcing the entire Hegemony outside of Karagond to speak one language is a tiresome burden.

517

The Hegemony has directly colonized areas of the provinces with Karagonds in regions called cluruchies too, so like the Protestants in Ireland they have some pretty direct agents for spreading the use of the language

1 Like
518

I don’t know about that, since the native Shayadene drastically outnumbered them so it’s challenging for the Hegemony to force a single language without the native population not being drastically reduced like in Ireland’s case, not to mention Shayard is still largely rural so aside from big cities in the Reach and the ethnic enclaves the vast majority I think still speak Shayarin (and other languages native to the area)

1 Like
519

Thanks for clarifying!
Upon further pondering the topic, I now have faith that your envisioned “carrot” (access to theurgic training/careers) will indeed serve as a more effective option than the Hegemony’s current “stick” (“comply or get killed/Harrowed yourself” policy).
(Though it would be even better if Phaedra’s biotech research eventually pays off enough dividends to outright eliminate (or at least phase out) Harrowing by G5)

Yeah, Cerlota is quite the nuanced take on the ruthless character trope; her personal code of honor prompted her to resign in disgust (towards a false flag operation that killed the Hegemony’s own citizens just to (deliberately) restart the war with Halassur); but at the same time, Cerlota is quite eager to escalate the stakes of the rebellion against the Hegemony (by introducing a Xaos-storm WMD).

Though thankfully flexible enough to work alongside Homelander MCs!
(up until said (extreme) Homelander MCs start hungrily looking at reclaiming Aveche/Avezia as the final piece of their “Shayardene irredentism” campaign)

Except when it comes to the “to unleash or not unleash the WMD on Grand Shayard’s City Ward” debate, apparently.

Still curious to find out what Cerlota will think of MC’s proposed “pragmatically work with Halassur as Erezza’s double agent” plan, by the way.

FYI (for the helot-only players who aren’t as familiar with aristo playthroughs): aristo MCs who were previously attracted to Hector can make a deal with Calea to stop Hector’s raids (on MC’s rebels) in exchange for Calea later collecting an unspecified favor from the MC.

With a “caleaname” faction now known, I think I now know what that favor is: Calea will attempt to insist on aristo MC pledging their loyalty to her own personal faction (separate from the Laconniers that’s she nominally a loyal member of).

Or, if Calea is feeling pragmatic/reasonable, Calea’s favor will instead be a one-time task (that may or may not open the doors for future collaboration between her faction and aristo MC’s faction).

And because Calea’s G1 task (her meeting with aristo MC) involves an INT stat check (have 2 to pass), it’s not too far-fetched to assume that Calea herself is an INT-specializing NPC (thus very likely to be a Secret Theurge in her own right).

Oh dear. How possible will it be that Calea will turn out to become a Theurge who’s leading one of the “Big Three” post-Hegemony factions?
(Thus, Calea’s earlier G1 comment towards aristo MC: “We (the Keriatous) would prefer that you not lose to anybody other than us, your own relatives,” suddenly has new meaning/potential foreshadowing!
Even as early as Game 1, Calea already foresaw that she and aristo MC would survive (and pragmatically ally with each other) long enough to become each other’s future nemesis in the post-Hegemony scramble for power/territory!)

And if Calea is indeed a Theurge, aristo MC’s attempts (to mitigate calls for Calea’s execution into “life sentence house arrest/imprisonment”) will feel much flimsier (since Theurges can often easily escape island imprisonment/exile).

How’s this for a non-empire building G5 end state (for MCs who’ve assembled enough pirate allies/connections): a “Stormraiders”-like faction?
(who eschew settling down in any sort of land-based capital in favor of forever roaming the high seas in a giant “world ship” or giant fleet of regular-sized ships)

(FYI, I refer to the Stormraiders from the Pon Para games on COG; the Stormraiders are pretty much a Viking-ish civilization who lived on a giant ‘world ship’ at the edge of the Pon Para world, prior to invading Pon Para’s mainland setting (the Three Nations) in the present day era)

Not if industrialist-minded MCs have anything to say about it! :slight_smile:

Anyways, on a separate but related note, I’d like to hear people’s thoughts on my LOTR-inspired character build; please answer on the following poll (if interested).

(Saruman de Isengard, middle name “Takenahobbitz”)
a. Homelander Aristo MC
b. Embraces his lust for power/world domination by becoming the equivalent of Saruman the White, who…
b1. revamps Shayard into an industrial powerhouse with Wiendrj’s help/technology,
b2. manufactures a massive battalion of armored, “Uruk Hai”-inspired Plektoi shock troopers (behind the back of his soon-to-be-former Abhuman allies),
b3. later oversees the progress of his new empire from atop his “spiky black fortress tower” in Grand Shayard,
b4. and then forms an alliance with fellow conqueror/“Dark Lord of Mordor” Sarcifer)
c. Courtship intentions: Has his eyes set on picking (similarly ruthless-minded) Teren as his queen consort (who will be an important political ally for getting the cosmopolitan ex-Leaguers to balance out MC’s homelander preferences, in the common interest of holding together a Shayard-dominated new world order)

  • Like/Love the Build! (And No Other Detailed Questions Asked)
  • Eh, I Suppose that It’s an Ok-ish Build? (Shrug)
  • I Like the Build, But would Suggest Certain Changes (Clarify in later Reply)
  • Eh, Not Impressed at All
0 voters
1 Like
520

This feels like a stretch. Not every smart person in XoR is inherently a Theurge, the only reason the MC is able to is because they luck into some basic Theurgic literature and are smart enough to understand it (unlike Ganelon). Considering Kryptasts are supposed to keep a lid on this kind of stuff I doubt Calea ever encountered the necessary materials even if she is potentially intelligent enough to understand them.

(Also, caleaname isn’t a part of the faction code in the first place, I suspect it’s the alias by which Calea will refer to us.)

4 Likes
521

@cascat07 and I had a good conversation about the moral basis for revolution going on a week ago on the politics thread. That thread has decidedly moved on, but I didn’t respond to all of cascat’s comments and challenges, so I thought I’d bring it over here to “my” turf rather than keep it going over there.

Chenoweth’s main book actually leaves out the Civil Rights movement entirely – she’d agree that a campaign of citizens with demands short of regime change is distinct from revolution. She and co-author Maria Stephan are just looking at campaigns seeking regime overthrow, expulsion of foreign occupiers, or secession – and in their dataset of 323 campaigns between 1900 and 2006, success rates are overall much higher for nonviolent campaigns (including decade-by-decade breakdowns, except for 1950-59 when violence slightly edged out nonviolence).

Chenoweth and Stephan make a pretty good case that while there are lots of contributing factors to this, including historically contingent ones like shifts in international tolerance/support for different kinds of resistance campaign, the single biggest contributor is participation. Like we’ve talked about earlier on this thread, non-violent campaigns can more easily draw in massive numbers, because the cost of participation is significantly less.

Could FARC have turned Colombia into a Marxist narco-state using nonviolent means? To me, this partly recalls the “Eurocommunist” debate of the 1950s-1980s. The mainstream Communist parties in most NATO countries moderated themselves and their demands to take part in elections, and in return were loathed from multiple sides – by non-Communist parties who didn’t trust them to consistently play by the rules of the democratic game, and by hardline Communist factions both domestically and internationally who considered them to have betrayed the revolution.

And yet which countries have actually put more of the Marxian critique of capitalism into place–France and Italy, or Colombia? (To say nothing of countries where violent Communist revolution had a far shorter lifespan like Congo-Brazzaville, Malaysia, or El Salvador.)

It’s of course possible for a true believer to disdain the half-measures that were achieved in Europe through participatory engagement. FARC’s specific vision of both ends and means may always have inherently involved violence. But that doesn’t mean that a recognizably similar vision for transforming Colombia couldn’t have succeeded through a non-violent resistance campaign – perhaps sooner, and at a far lower cost in lives.

That’s a fair reaction! My post underemphasised the extent to which I think the ethical imperative to live peaceably with our neighbors leads to an obligation to (a) follow just laws and (b) work for change through peaceable means, starting wherever possible with those allowed within the system.

But at the end of the day, my response to this (eminently reasonable) challenge:

is yes. For the state not to become an idol, that freedom has to remain. Individuals and their consciences have moral primacy over the “powers and principalities,” and an obligation to testify to the truths that those powers tend to sweep under the rug. (For Christians interested in a theology unpacking this, Walter Wink’s work, especially the relatively brief and accessible Naming the Powers, is very good.)

Well, in the post you were immediately responding to, I did – but in the earlier post that started this conversation, I was using revolution differently, and inconsistently. :slight_smile: So any challenge on this point is more than fair. There is a sense, I think, in which any transformation of sufficient scope can fairly be called a revolution – that’s how we use it in other fields – but on brief reflection I think you’re right that in political terms it’s more useful and straightforward if we limit “revolution” to mean “transformation that goes beyond what’s sanctioned by the system.”

Reviewing my post in that light, I would say that when the injustices inherent in the system have reached a level where they can neither be tolerated (as e.g. unavoidable trade-offs, or the “friction” of an imperfect system shared with imperfect people) nor changed (within a tolerable timeframe and cost) through system-sanctioned means, revolution becomes a moral obligation. There are of course still questions about how confident we are in our judgments of what can be tolerated/changed; given the ethical high stakes of revolution, we should triple-check what our conscience is telling us in dialogue with (other) people directly affected. But my ethics isn’t one where The State (or its historical predecessor and, one day perhaps, successor governing institutions) has any inherent moral authority.

11 Likes
522

I’m curious what you imagine a tolerable timeframe is. To paraphrase the good reverend doctor, you can’t put a timetable on another man’s freedom.

Speaking of King and the civil rights movement, I think that like most things a hybrid solution is the most effective. A broad pacifistic movement for the less committed to engage with, backed by a real threat of revolutionary violence if those pacifist demands are not met will make any regime think twice.

I’m curious if you plan for the MC to be able to replicate this dynamic in either role, either as the violent revolutionary aligning with say the religious pacifists we might meet in Irduin, or as the pacifistic preacher aligning with say K’s violent helot movement.

6 Likes
523

Thaumatarch: No you can’t just become an inevitable symptom of the unsustainability of our system!
Happy Holy Homelander Helots: Hehe revolution goes brrrrrrr.

4 Likes
524

Are you looking to turn the Hegemony into a superpower and/or set it up to finally conquer Halassurq?

2 Likes