Imperial population distribution.

[aramis]

Rob:

My view is that the imperium as a government has only one concern: survival. It purports to establish a baseline of human rights because it is good for the government to do so. It purports to support free (but hardly unhindered) trade, yet maintains registries on ships, and a huge and imposing navy.

And no, its only about 99.9999% of High-Pop Worlders who could care less. It is probably about 99.99 of Pop7, 99.9% of pop6, 99% of pop 5, 96% of pop 4, 90% of pop 3, 60% of pop 2, and 10% of pop 0 or 1 who don't care what goes on off world.

Heck, I've set worlds in the Imperium where, outside the starport, the Imperium is not publicly known of... Sure, imperial mandates are fulfilled, but those soldiers sent off world never go home... Officially listed as dying in some bizarre accident involving biological weapons.

The Imperium TRULY does not care about its citizens, save as a means of income. The Nobles care a little more than the bureaucracy, in that they know that they can always be killed by a large enough populist uprising. Worse, there is no immediate help in view.

It's not as dark a view as Herbert's Imperiums in the Dune sequence, but it is close.

And, to be honest, Norris makes me think of Feyd Rautha of Harkonnen as an older man.

 

[rgd]

Originally posted by Anthony:
Shipping costs can be derived from the costs of ships. However, I suspect the real thing holding the Imperium together is a combination of inertia and lack of a strong reason not to hold together.

Hmmm, that doesn't seem plausible to me - staying together for no reason? To me it points to insufficient details about the culture. It's grown and held together 1100 years, to me there must be some reasons (that to the rulers, nobility, if not the populations work). They may not be perfect, or perfectly implemented but give people something to aspire to. I'm not expecting answers to come from canon - it'd be nice though - as that might limit the types of TUs refs can have.

My first thought for comparison was of the mottos and slogans that inspire us Americans. "Land of the free", "life, liberty, pursuit of happiness", etc. But then I thought of all the other countries in the world - those that are far older, without the independent streak of the Yanks. What inspires loyalty in British, French, et al. citizens? Are there credos those of you in those countries are taught from birth that [are supposed to] inspire you to fight for/protect your country?

The Imperium lets worlds get away with so much that it's hard to figure out why most of them would bother to rebel.

Maybe "Taxation without Benefit"? Worlds not adequately protected (in their perception) might resent paying taxes.

But isn't it possible that the conditions that make you think the 3I is so horrible might not hold true in all parts of the Imperium? Maybe not by force of "law" or custom - that may be the same everywhere, but because the environment isn't conducive? It just doesn't happen there? I.e., in the older more developed core sectors, there may not be nearly as many tyrannical despots abusing the people, trade wars may not be (as) violent.

That actually makes the 3I more varied and interesting, "those march sectors are lawless, violent places" (and good for adventuring in), IMHO.

 

[rgd]

Originally posted by Anthony:
Yep, you've described the Imperium.

Yuck. That's not the way I choose to interpret canon. I think other interpretations are possible - so much is unspecified and left to the ref (as it should be). There can be a range of possible TUs - of which your interpretation is certainly a valid one. I just prefer a different, equally valid one.

As I've written on the TML when this comes up there, I could see an Evil Empire campaign being fun and interesting, but it wouldn't hold my interest too long. I prefer games where the PCs aren't always hunted or threatened by a nearly all-powerful evil empire. I've played in games similar to that, with an overall bleak outlook on life and while fun for a change of pace, I prefer the games to at least have the possibility that the PCs could have a "country" worth fighting for and coming home to after adventuring - they should certainly have to adventure and struggle for it, but there should be a good, relatively safe place to get to somewhere. Some place to retire to in style. Inevitable bleak futures aren't fun for long campaigns, IMO. For a throwaway character in a one-shot game, yeah, that's fine and fun. But I enjoy a character that can have a long career adventuring, not one doomed to be crushed under the jackbooted heel of The Empire even if he did fight the good fight. Maybe that's just me.

 

[Anthony]

The Imperium isn't an all-powerful evil empire. It's weak and corrupt. It's perfectly possible to have a 'country' worth fighting for and coming home to. It's just more likely to be a world or an (unusually idealistic) segment of the fleet.

 

[ld80062]

I've always suspect that the Imperium holds together becaue the Vilani and Vilani-influenced cultures want it to. For centuries several trillion people were willing to fight, kill, and die for the Imperium: they enforced their will with Sylean support - and Solomani support as well, so long as a man of Solomani blood sat on the Irridium Throne.

The Vilani choose to put up with a Solomani-dominatd nobility (until Emperor Zhakirov married the Vilani Antiama in 679, 'which broke the power of the Solomani interests at court and ultimately led to the Solomani Rim War...') in order to get what they really want: interstellar unity and trade, in a form they recognise and appreciate.

Insititutional support by megacorporations, major trading worlds, wealthy families, and the Imperial military is useful: but if you don't have at least 20% of the general population supporting a political system, that system can neither govern nor endure. IMTU - and I think the OTU as well - the Vilani and pro-Vilani interstellar cultures provide that bedrock support.

So what happened in the Rebellion? When Emperor Lucan ordered Vland to send her fleets to fight Dulinor, the Archduke refused, as it would have left Vland sector defenseless against the Vargr neighbours. As the Rebellion Sourcebook notes: "The submergence of Vilani pride within the Third Imperium was tolerable when the Imperium worked: when it acted against the Vilani, it became intolerable."

However, even this breech could have been healed, until Emperor Lucan drove out the Vilani ambassador for addressing him in Vilani. Earlier, Emperor Lucan had commanded that he be addressed only in High Sylean, as the other languages are 'spoken by traitors'. When he drove out the Vilani tongue from his presence, he broke the ancient compact between Sylea and Vland, the very basis of the Third Imperium.

(See Survival Margin pg 27,28, with the TNS bulletins for 112-1121 & 142-1121. As for the Vilani/Sylean union forming the foundation of the Third Imperium, I think it is referenced in the T4's Milleu 0 book, which I don't have. If someone chooses to verify this, it would be appreciated...)

 

[rgd]

Originally posted by Plankowner:
I would think the Chinese civilization and the Roman Empire would be good examples of long-term civilizations.

You could make an arguement that the Roman Empire faced many of the same limitations on communications that the 3I feels.

The key to the Roman Empire (IN MY OPINION) was that people everywhere thought of themselves as ROMAN first. Most of them never made it to Rome, but they considered themselves Romans. Even after the Empire had essentially lost all power, the IDEA of Rome was still very strong. Look at Charlemain (sp?). Centuries after Rome had fallen, he used the IDEA of Rome to found the Holy Roman Empire.

And why did they want to be considered Romans? Because the Romans ruled, the Romans had 'civilization', the technology, arts, science, etc. (some of which 'gathered' from other cultures , sure) but they had what everyone wanted.
I think something similar happens when considering other world powers - the British Empire, the USA (probably not in the last decade - or not as much).
The 3I brought civilization back, out of the Long Night. That gave them the edge and then kept it by scales of economy and being the 'world power' of the milieu it seems reasonable that people would want to consider themselves Imperial citizens. Not everyone, no - but that's part of the beauty of their system, you don't have to like them or agree, and can probably find your own world and live the way you want (sort of). And those that dislike the imperial system might be more prevalent in the frontiers and marches anyway, and less so in the core. (Then you can get into the cultural regions of the 3I, which is interesting, but I think overall most citizens would consider themselves Imperial (and citizens of their world - I'm an America, and an Ohioan).

The Third Imperium may be held together with similar ideas. We are IMPERIAL citizens and that idea of IMPERIALISM is what keeps everyone together. It's an US and THEM kind of arguement, but human history has shown it to be a very strong idea. Remember, the Third Imperium had the glorius history of the first two Imperiums to draw on. Was is valid for Cleon to claim the Third Imperium as being a direct descendant of the first two? Probably not, but the IDEA of IMPERIUM was obviously very strong in human space and that IDEA probably holds everyone together.

Exactly!

I suspect that in the ashes of TNE, SOMEONE SOMEWHERE will use the IDEA of the FOURTH IMPERIUM to gather worlds under it's control. Whether they deserve the right to be called the 4I or not doesn't really matter, again it is an idea.

See the new TNE:1248 for exactly that!

And Anthony wrote

Both the Chinese and the Roman empires imposed a common government and culture.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

But seriously, I think the 3I would have to spend some credits on promoting a common culture - spreading news, educational systems, fashion, all the elements of culture - in order to help keep people wanting to be Imperial citizens. But plankowners comment is the other side of that - the Imperium has/had benefits (and just being the power on the block) that made people want to be imperial.

 

[Anthony]

Originally posted by Rob D.:
And Anthony wrote
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
Both the Chinese and the Roman empires imposed a common government and culture.

You say that like it's a bad thing. </font>[/QUOTE]No, mostly I say it represents a difference from the 3I. The 3I doesn't seem to impose a constant government form, nor (given the number of low-TL worlds) does it seem to do much to improve people's lives, so I really have trouble seeing what good the 3I does (reduction in warfare, most likely).

 

[Pickles]

The imperium does impose a common imperial government, as well as a common language. Language especially has to be constantly maintained if it not to drift of into different accents, then dialects, and finally new languages.

One should also not overestimate the degree to which Rome and China homogenised their provinces. Cultural commonality in both tended to become more nebulous the further down the social scale one went.

 

[Plankowner]

When I gave the Roman and Chinese examples, I was responding to a request for RL examples of long-lived human polities. I was NOT trying to say that either of them represented the Imperium.

 

[Anthony]

Originally posted by the Bromgrev:
The imperium does impose a common imperial government, as well as a common language.

A common language is significant. The common imperial government isn't really significant, since most people never encounter the Imperial government (it governs the spaceport. Woo).

 

[mike wightman]

Does it even govern the starport?

According to Libraby data the first tier of interstellar government is the subsector and its duke...

 

[Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen]

It is my understanding that the main Starport (Highport and Downport) of each world within the Imperium (and some outside the Imperium) is "Imperial Territory". Kind of like the "embassy grounds" of a country.

 

[rgd]

Originally posted by Anthony:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Rob D.:
And Anthony wrote
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
Both the Chinese and the Roman empires imposed a common government and culture.

You say that like it's a bad thing. </font>[/QUOTE]No, mostly I say it represents a difference from the 3I.
</font>[/QUOTE]Sorry - I was just making a joke (hence the smiley). I understand what you were saying.

The 3I doesn't seem to impose a constant government form,

At the planetary level. But that was a selling point of the 3I (at least at the beginning of it's history).
"The Long Night is over! We're bringing the Light of Civilization back to the worlds of Charted Space. Join the 3I, get the benefits of trade protection, open markets (maybe), access to knowledge/tech of the whole 3I (for a reasonable fee probably), AND - unlike some other empires we could name, we won't come in and force you to change your internal political system."

Is that perfect? No. How does it benefit 'the little guy' - trickle down, basically. It's not a very leftist/liberal/big, maternalistic government style. Not everyone (PC, NPC, or player) will like that.
But then again, how do you go from what we have today (in terms of the 'popular' government form being 'democracy') to a hereditary oligarchy in a few hundred years? Travalv2 pointed it out - the Vilani influence. The whole coming together of the Terrans to fight the Vilani in the IWs (gotta get that book!), that would have changed things - accepting rigid governmental style to save the Earth. Then having to take over the entire 1st Imperium with it's entrenched castes and hereditary oligarchy.

In game terms, it's there because the designers liked the idea (and even it evolved over the years in their minds), so I think if you like it (or at least don't dislike it) then assume it's true (canon) and figure out ways to make it work IYTU.
If you don't like it, then you can make it more the antagonist (from the uncaring/corrupt federation with no reason for existence, to a truly evil empire) and/or set your game outside the 3I (ignore it), or make up your own universe.

I tend to like the 3I and choose to work up plausible (at least to me) explanations for apparent discrepancies.

nor (given the number of low-TL worlds) does it seem to do much to improve people's lives,

As usual, I think this is an artifact of it only being the Marches considered - and/or the sysgen being geared for frontier/march/adventurous subsectors. I don't believe it's representative of the 3I as a whole.
The core sectors could certainly be more highly developed and thus the transfer of tech bringing up the TL of worlds helps improve people's lives.
It's just that in the Marches, it's risky to invest there so it's stagnated somewhat.

(I'm not saying the core sectors are more highly developed - but that there's a range of possible TUs including both types, allowable by canon.)

so I really have trouble seeing what good the 3I does (reduction in warfare, most likely).

Well, like I said above, either one likes it or one doesn't and we'll each see or work to see what we want, I guess. As a game milieu it is well-developed in many areas but also not so well-developed in others. Things get missed or glossed over and examining it in rigorous detail will bring out the flaws. (But what game or even SF milieu can stand a rigorous examination? I assume the Firefly/Serenity "is it one system or many system" question came up here somewhere, right?)
And as a game milieu, it's intentionally vague in areas to allow individual refs to craft their TU the way they want. So you have to be flexible in reading canon, taking that into account - not focussing on every jot and tittle and absence of evidence being proclaimed evidence of absence. Work with it, be creative, make it what you want.

Now are there things I wish were more detailed/different? Sure. It'd be nice to know that there are procedures/customs (if not 'laws') in place to allow citizens to oust a bad noble. Even just a few sentences somewhere about a tyrannical noble, say a subsector duke back around 300-400, that so abused the citizens that they successfully petitioned the sector duke and he was replaced ("opted for a different career option").
One such case could serve as an example/warning for future noble generations and give the citizens as much political power as we are told we have today.
But if it's not in canon, I'll just add it in to MTU.

I'd like to see some of the rhetoric, the slogans and mottos used to promote the 3I to it's citizens. So much gets made of the few we have like "rules the space between the stars", a little could go a long way to providing some of the ideals that some see as missing.

But all in all, it's a game and there's a vast range of TUs possible with the given canon - <sappy-mode>as vast as your imagination...</sappy-mode>

 

[rgd]

Originally posted by Anthony:
The Imperium isn't an all-powerful evil empire. It's weak and corrupt. It's perfectly possible to have a 'country' worth fighting for and coming home to. It's just more likely to be a world or an (unusually idealistic) segment of the fleet.

No, I don't think it's an evil empire - though it could be, in the right TU. It could also be extremely good and noble too, in another TU. I think the most likely/realistic scenario is somewhere in between. For me, it's more on the good/noble (or tries to be) than the evil side. Depends on what kind of philosophical background you want to game in I guess. Dark, depressing, 'you can never win in the end'; or more like hero's journey with crossing into the 'weird areas' having adventure and returning 'home' safe. (Again, I'd fall somewhere in between - but that kind of depends on your view of life and human nature I guess.)

But you're right - people can feel loyal to their 'country' without being unquestioningly loyal to their leaders - it's more a loyalty to the community, to the group of people, the 3I as a community - the nobles/megacorps might want to promote that feeling. Sure some people will be more loyal to their world than the 3I, but people aren't (usually) slaves to their world - they can travel to other worlds, so I think they can feel loyal to the 3I over their world.
Can an American feel more 'loyal' to the USA than to the state he lives in?

 

[rgd]

Originally posted by Anthony:
A common language is significant. The common imperial government isn't really significant, since most people never encounter the Imperial government (it governs the spaceport. Woo).

Big woo - if it's the only way for imports, high-tech products/services, news, etc. to get onto the planet. If you're a small backwater agricultural subsistence planet with no exports and but one ship arriving a year, then yeah, not a big deal. But where trade is important or vital (just play along here and assume it can be), then the starport would be important and those in control important.

Some worlds are run by the imperial nobility, no? *cough*Duchess of Mora*cough* They'd be pretty important on those worlds. Sure on some worlds the nobles are just figure heads, liaisons, layabout do-nothings and the like, but that's the spice of variety.

 

[rgd]

Originally posted by Anthony:
The Imperium lacks discernable ideals other than survival, considering it doesn't do anything about worlds with appalling dictatorships, internal warfare, or other forms of general lack of civilization.

there really more like guidelines than rules
Isn't it up to the local nobles to decide whether or not to interfere? The Imperial Rules of War calling for intervention if nukes are used, but the local nobles could still intervene.
(And the Star Trek Prime Directive is any better a system?)
As a game designer you want to worlds to have wars so your players can play merc games but don't have the FFW in mind yet - so you make the 'Imps tend not to interfere' decision. Playable, but not the best. I would've preferred a more truly 'unexplored frontier' for the 3I where merc games could go on on non-imperial worlds. (Maybe shift/squeeze the Vargr over a sector or two and leave an "unexplored" gap between the Vargr and Zhos.)

And maybe these things just don't happen in the older, more developed sectors (or nearly as often). The old "oh dear, that Spinward Marches sector is just so wild and untamed and dangerous" approach.

 

[aramis]

I wouldn't describe the 3I as Evil.

Callous, absolutely.

 

[Anthony]

Originally posted by Rob D.:
Big woo - if it's the only way for imports, high-tech products/services, news, etc. to get onto the planet.

It's not necessarily; worlds can have private spaceports if they wish. It matters on the small worlds, where trade is critical. It doesn't matter so much on the big worlds, and the vast majority of the population lives on Hi-pop worlds.

 

[rgd]

Originally posted by Anthony:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Rob D.:
Big woo - if it's the only way for imports, high-tech products/services, news, etc. to get onto the planet.

It's not necessarily; worlds can have private spaceports if they wish. It matters on the small worlds, where trade is critical. It doesn't matter so much on the big worlds, and the vast majority of the population lives on Hi-pop worlds. </font>[/QUOTE]True, but I also mentioned there are worlds *run* by Imperial nobility - and not just the dinky worlds either. You didn't respond to that point, so are you still saying that you think the Imperial government isn't significant to the citizenry?

(I'm saying it can be, on some - maybe even most worlds, or maybe almost none, depending on your view. It's that range of possibilities thing again.)

 

[rgd]

Originally posted by Aramis:
I wouldn't describe the 3I as Evil.

Callous, absolutely.

Well, I'm not saying it is evil. I'm saying the setting is vague/flexible enough that it could be IYTU if you want it to be. If you want to play the "plucky Ine Givar rebels vs. big bad empire" campaign, e.g.

I think it could also be fairly benevolent - maybe as benevolent as modern 'democratic' governments if you squint really hard, add a bunch of altruistic agencies heretofore undescribed in canon, and shake liberally.

Personally I like a 3I that's maybe callous because it has to be at times (most governments or groups in authority/power have to be at times it seems) but that care somewhat about the citizens - if abstractly, as the 'fabric of the 3I'. Nobles that are trained to rule benevolently where possible. (Wouldn't you *want* them schooled in appreciating sophont dignity, value of life, hard work, platitudes and rhetoric, etc.?) Not that they all (or even nearly all) do rule that way. Some honestly try, most try somewhat, some don't try at all and abuse the system. (Hmm, not unlike modern politicians?) They know what they should do, and the worst ones eventually (usually) get ousted by popular outcry to his superiors. Some get away with murder, abuse the system, etc. (Great source of antagonists!)

Not a perfect system, problems exist, not every citizen is cared for cradle to grave, they suffer, and work hard, but it's workable and provides an adventurous gaming milieu, IMHO.