Choice of Rebels: Stormwright (XoR2 WIP)




2 Likes

I think you’d be interested in my ‘Saruman’ build, though FYI, my version is more geared towards an Arrogant Aristo personality MC (compared to your helot).

Cool choice of art, by the way! It gives off plenty of “under new management” dark empire vibes!

1 Like

Thanks I also fans of lord of the rings build.:grinning:




2 Likes

Such a policy would be very useful for discouraging kleptomaniacs (and “small time” repeat offenders in general); good thinking!

Would you preserve the existing Game 1 archonty borders of Shayard, Wiendrj, Nyryal, Erezza, and Karagon, or perhaps instead split those provinces into even smaller provinces? (and then “spread out your conquered enemies/nomads amongst your soldiers so that banding together against you is more difficult”)

For me personally, I’m eager to find out if my envisioned “monarchical koinon” (aka a koinon/“Great League” led by a hereditary de Syrnon “High King/Queen of the Alliance”) can successfully combine the strengths of both an administration AND dynasty.
(Or if it’ll end up becoming a “jack of all trades, master of none” mess that ends up shooting me in the foot in the long run)

Noted. And FYI, @cascat07’s earlier proposed “herbivorous cecum” idea (which caught Havie’s attention/interest) will most likely come in handy for those of us who are determined to pursue a “self-sacrifice Theurgy only” path.

Game 2 Chapter 3’s synopsis flat out describes how the Syntechnia’s “Shayardene Guildmasters are growing increasingly unhappy with the restrictions imposed by Karagon,” so in addition to the merchant goodwill that can be acquired in Game 1, I’d say your character already has a head start at winning over/co-opting the existing Syntechnia!

Noted! And since you’re taking cues from Sauron, I’ll recommend “infiltrate Grand Shayard’s nobility” as your Game 2 (and beyond) plan for becoming King of Shayard. (since Sauron, too, is a cunning figure who primarily relies on deception/charisma, right until he unveils himself at the very last minute to rain destruction on his victims/enemies)

1 Like

Like the caste system of the Hegemony.

7 Likes

What about theurgy forge to create weapons,armor and powerful artefact like sauron’s Ring!/?:ring:

2 Likes

And if possible can we change religion to a different god like Khorne the god of blood, battle and murder?

4 Likes

Mind you, one problem with nonviolence was the one Gandhi brought up. It doesn’t work against an oppressor that considers you an animal. He mentioned that he wouldn’t have advocated ahimsa against the Nazis, because the Nazis don’t mind exterminating entire nations.

So nonviolent resistance to a regime who already plan to kill every one of your people is likely to be challenging.

10 Likes

It is understandable that a totalitarian regime like the Nazis would try to do that. But whether it is possible is another question. In fact, Jews, Roma, and Eastern Europeans still exist today. Also, most dictatorships are authoritarian rather than totalitarian. Either way, I don’t think we can make any conclusions about this game without more detailed information about the game world.

Also, where did you source your information about what Gandhi said to the Nazis? sorry l never saw that before.

Also, I don’t doubt you
But ,It seems that Louis Fischer’s The Life of Mahatma Gandhi contradicts your assertion that Gandhi should have done a non-violent movement against the Nazis.

2 Likes

Yes, because the Nazis were beaten. Rather violently.

8 Likes

However, the question of whether totalitarian regimes can survive in the long term is a different question from whether it is possible to overthrow them through violentism. Also, even if we have to resort to violence, I don’t think there is a need for all-out war. Totalitarian regimes are fragile because they rely on direct violence and charisma unlike their appearance. Indeed, after Stalin, Mussolini, and Mao Zedong left, the system they built collapsed. Rather, a loose dictatorship of an authoritarian system will be more difficult to overthrow in the long run.

1 Like

Mussolini was shot in the head and paraded through the streets and his government was largely torn down during the war by the resistance groups and the allies.

5 Likes

Yes, but given that Mussolini was once arrested in Italy and the later Soviet operation Amin in Afghanistan, a successful decapitation operation against the dictator is possible. And that is what I see as one of the moral compromises between all-out war and total non-violence.

3 Likes

The source I saw it in appears to have vanished. I have only his comment that

“I do believe that where there is a choice between cowardice and violence I would advise violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what he should have done, had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908, whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defended me, I told him that it was his duty to defend me even by using violence.”

(That may be Gandhi’s views changing over time.)

4 Likes

In the source I saw, I think that the words with the following meanings were written after this word. “But true non-violence is forgiveness given by those who have the courage to protect what is important even by resorting to violence.” So your source is not lying about what Gandhi said. Maybe there is a misunderstanding.

2 Likes

Now, based on everyone’s discussion, I would like to briefly summarize my thoughts at this point.

In conclusion, both full-scale war against the state and absolute pacifism are more flawed as strategies than as tactics, and the hybrid movement can compensate for those flaws.

The reason I think so is that neither killing the enemy before they kill you nor killing yourself before the enemy kills you is justifiable.

The justification of those acts affirms genocide and leaves a negative moral legacy.

In contrast, a hybrid movement that is well calculated and devoid of opportunism and extremism leaves a moral legacy of good moderation.

Finally, of course, I’m not trying to impose my views on you, and I’m looking forward to your feedback and counterarguments.

2 Likes

I have thought very little about what my character plans to do with the Hegemony beyond getting rid of helotry but I just wanna say I am absolutely both dropping Cerlota’s nuke on Grand Shayard and crashing the Floating Palace hard on Karagond.

Here’s hoping there’s a horrific act of terrorism the player can absolutely engage in in every entry.

7 Likes

The dream of a non-violent, non-state equal society is ideally beautiful, but there are problems raised by Johann Gartung and js Mill. In other words, it is necessary to consider that replacing direct violence with social pressure or structural violence will not solve the problem.

In other words, my view is that political reasons should not abandon attempts to minimize harm to an individual’s life, body, liberty, or property.

Whether it is done in the name of the nation or in the name of peace and humanity, it is the logic of total war and totalitarianism.

And if there is a way to achieve that while preserving the principle of harm minimization and moral consistency, I would accept absolute pacifism. But frankly I doubt that such a method exists.

1 Like

I think I can easily morally refute the three reasons you listed. The claim that the idea that God’s love and equality is given to all and the idea that the world is compatible with the idea that there are morally superior priests and sinners who should follow them is not a Christian claim in any sense. But your argument in effect says that it is the most Christian argument.

2 Likes

Hey, @11110, I took the liberty of editing down your quote of my post to make it more readable-- let me know if I zeroed in on the wrong part.

I’m not sure I see where this:

is implied in what I’ve said anywhere-- could you maybe unpack that a little for me?

2 Likes