CT LBB3 - LL/Govt

[atpollard]

I am WAY out of my area of knowledge, but I remember something about Ancient Chinese Government (era of Confucius, I think) being a giant bureaucracy with everyone having and knowing their place in the social-political pecking order. How would that be represented in the Wiki and Wiki-condensed lists?

I have a strong 'western civilization' bias in my thinking that often overlooks concepts outside Ancient Rome, Medieval Europe and the Age of Reason modes of thought, so I work at seeing other options.

Would a true 'Theocracy' be possible? (direct rule by god) To keep this out of Religion and firmly in Science-Fiction, what about a government ruled by a supercomputer AI that communicates directly with every citizen via the interactive mass media and a 'cell phone' network. Terms like Autocracy, Monarchy, Despotism, and Dictatorship do not quite catch the feeling - too many inappropriate connotations are closely linked to the terms.

 

[atpollard]

I generally like EDGs more descriptive, less connotative list.
Even if it were to be expanded for use with UWPs and 2D6:

2. Autocracy: One Leader – Absolute power (despotism)
3. Autocracy: One Leader – Strongest power (dictatorship)
4. Autocracy: One Leader – Hierarchical power (monarchy)
5. Oligarchy: group rule – Small group (a handful of people)
6. Oligarchy: group rule – Medium group (‘aristocracy’)
7. Oligarchy: group rule – Large group (‘bureaucracy’)
8. Democracy: rule by citizens - limited franchise (ie. landowners)
9. Democracy: rule by citizens - broad franchise (western ‘republic’)
10. Democracy: rule by citizens - broad franchise (true ‘democracy’)
11. Decentralized: multiple ‘small’ governments (balkanized)
12. Decentralized: clan, family, tribe only (anarchy)

This is just a shooting from the cuff example - do not use it as is.

 

[captainjack23]

I generally like EDGs more descriptive, less connotative list.
Even if it were to be expanded for use with UWPs and 2D6:

2. Autocracy: One Leader – Absolute power (despotism)
3. Autocracy: One Leader – Strongest power (dictatorship)
4. Autocracy: One Leader – Hierarchical power (monarchy)
5. Oligarchy: group rule – Small group (a handful of people)
6. Oligarchy: group rule – Medium group (‘aristocracy’)
7. Oligarchy: group rule – Large group (‘bureaucracy’)
8. Democracy: rule by citizens - limited franchise (ie. landowners)
9. Democracy: rule by citizens - broad franchise (western ‘republic’)
10. Democracy: rule by citizens - broad franchise (true ‘democracy’)
11. Decentralized: multiple ‘small’ governments (balkanized)
12. Decentralized: clan, family, tribe only (anarchy)

This is just a shooting from the cuff example - do not use it as is.

Three comments;

1. good categorization on two axes (size/leadership) but very much contemporary - plus, (to me) it doesn't seem to provide much in the way of guidance for the GM, or flavor for the player.

Kind of like :

Star:
1-4 main sequence
5 giant
6 remnant

Planet
1 too big
2. too small
3-6 just right

Atmosphere:
1 =No
2-4 =yes (no protection or minimum life support required)
5-6 yes, but so what ? (protection & Life support required).

Port
1=jumpship support capable
2-3=systemship support capable
4-5=fuel and landing strip available
6=none

Tech
1=non industrial primitive. (primitive screwheads)
2-3=industrialized non stellar (backwater hayseeds)
4-5 stellar (boring mundanes)
6 max (in charge)

Law
1 No
2-4 Yes
5-6 Intrusive


It works - but........meh.

2. would you relate this to population ?

3. Captive governments (occupied) missing in the discussion, as would possibly Feudal tecnocracy....although it may be an...oligarchy ?

 

[GamerDude]

Let me say that this is a good discussion and I like what's being brought to the table.

Now, while I like the list of world gov types in LBB3, it's a good list without being cumbersome and overly large, I like some of the descriptions being brought up. I'm not much for adding an extra table/step but if the basic types could be set up and then all the 'sub types" listed separately for the GM to pick from (or roll from if they wish) might be nice.

It would allow for things like rolling is balkanized, then being able to just decide if it is like Earth with several agencies trying to help manage the nations on a global scale (UN, the WTO, and the World Court)... or doesn't have anything (pre WWI) or has one single world body like the UN, or even has something stronger that the UN but not an actual/full global govt.

 

[atpollard]

1. good categorization on two axes (size/leadership) but very much contemporary - plus, (to me) it doesn't seem to provide much in the way of guidance for the GM, or flavor for the player.

2. would you relate this to population ?

3. Captive governments (occupied) missing in the discussion, as would possibly Feudal technocracy....although it may be an...oligarchy ?

Three responses:

1. No table, including the existing codes used since CT, provide much guidance. I was actually just orienting the loose options from Most Despotic (one man with all power) to Most Anarchy (many people with no one in charge). My earlier post described two possible 'guidance' governments.

... and what the heck is a Feudal Technocracy anyway? Gov't by the sons of Geeks?

2. no. China is totalitarian, but so is the Vatican. The US is a Democracy (sort of) but so was ancient Athens. Population seems irrelevant.

3. Captive governments are usually just a military umbrella over the existing gov't system. (In My Opinion)

 

[EDG]

1. good categorization on two axes (size/leadership) but very much contemporary - plus, (to me) it doesn't seem to provide much in the way of guidance for the GM, or flavor for the player.

In practice the GM already provides most of the details when it comes to the government. atpollard's version of the table isn't really any more detailed than what you get in book 6.

 

[GamerDude]

... and what the heck is a Feudal Technocracy anyway? Gov't by the sons of Geeks?

A feudal world where the nobility has control over the technology.
http://www.glendale.org.uk/traveller/data/glossary/government-feudaltechnocracy


http://www.downport.com/traveller/tml/tml-faq.html#Q4.4-FT

 

[EDG]

A feudal world where the nobility has control over the technology.

A Technological Elevated Dictator (and his goons) from TNE fits this sort of description quite well I think...

 

[GamerDude]

A feudal world where the nobility has control over the technology.

A Technological Elevated Dictator (and his goons) from TNE fits this sort of description quite well I think...

I never got anything from TNE. Anything else from there that is pertinent to the discussion?


BUT, a dictator (and goons) is a bit diff than a "class of nobility" in control.

Pretty much the difference between Idi Amin or Hitler vs the Nobles of feudal England/France (with or sans king).

 

[EDG]

I never got anything from TNE. Anything else from there that is pertinent to the discussion?

Flynn's collapse/recovery rules in Stellar Reaches (which are basically the official 1248 rules) have a few other government types: Interim Government, Military Dictatorship, Slave World, and Viral Hell.

BUT, a dictator (and goons) is a bit diff than a "class of nobility" in control.

Pretty much the difference between Idi Amin or Hitler vs the Nobles of feudal England/France (with or sans king).

It's different in detail, but I don't think it is in practice. Both are still "a small group of people in charge of the masses, without their input".

 

[atpollard]

... and what the heck is a Feudal Technocracy anyway?

A feudal world where the nobility has control over the technology.

Thanks, but that has to be one of the silliest definitions that I have ever heard. Can you even IMAGINE a government system in which the wealthy and powerful members of society do not have control over the newest and most expensive technology? All Traveller governments are a Technocracy - it is an Interstellar Empire! You will not have a general population with air rafts under a dictator who rules by the might of his flintlock armed dragoons!

A 5th Century Knight/Baron rules over his peasants because he has access to armor and weapons that the average citizen does not. Does that make Europe of the Dark Ages a 'Feudal Technocracy'?

At the very least, 'Feudal Technocracy' requires a much better explanation than just an item on a random table.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

I viewed Feudal Technocracy as a a form of government where the primary mission of the that government was to increase the technology of the society.

"We will do whatever it takes to claim our rightful place among the stars."

This typically manifests itself as distinct groups working on different areas of technology (almost balkanized in a sense). So there is one part of the society concentrating on Electronics. One entire segment of society working to improve electronics in all it's forms. Another group is working to improve transportation. Often these take the forms of global corporations working toward one goal, think Ma Bell or Microsoft.

These semi-isolated groups are why it gets the "feudal" part of the name.

Over each of these semi-isolated groups in the government structure trying to balance funding and priorities. Often this takes the form of a "counsel of CEOs".

Yes, my vision of a Feudal Technocracy is an expansion of the Corporate government type.

But, I am the first to admit that I am not an expert on governments, just an engineer.

 

[SableWyvern]

I've got a couple half-formualted ideas on different brands of Feudal Technocracy. So far, the only version I've got a good handle on is a Corporate/Feudal/Patronage system, designed to support a culture that strongly believes in technological advancement.

At the top you have a rich benefactor type ruler. He has his own personal retinue of scientists/manufacturies/research teams, as well as providing access to his resources for partially-independent subordinates. These subordinants do not pay for the privelege of utilising these resources, but are obligated to undertake a certain amount of reseach or supply an amount of their own production capacity for the patron's exclusive benefit. These first-level subordinants can have their own "vassals", and so forth down the line.

Frequently, this kind of culture is set up by Imperial sponsorship, with the goal of advancing a particular field. Others (generally with similar or intersecting interests) are given the opportunity to pursue their own agenda with resources they couldn't normally access, in return for contributing to the greater goal.

Works well enough for the (common) smaller FTs; not sure that it would be as feasible once you start getting to populations in the hundred-thousands and higher.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Maybe it could be looked at as the entire population is directly or indirectly supporting a single industry or technology.

For example, the entire planetary population is involved in manufacture of advanced Robots. Every citizen is either working in the factories or providing the services for those workers. BUT, it is not completey corporate controlled, so there is free enterprise; maybe even several robot manufacturing companies taking advantage of the trained resources.

Think Silicone Valley (comupters and electronics) or Wichita Kansas (private aircraft manufacturing).

That might make sense. It is feudal because each factory is independent of the others, but they are all tied together due to the common pool of workers.

Honestly, I don't know what a Feudal Technocracy really means and I am just throwing out idea.

 

[captainjack23]

FWIW,
Feudal tecnocracy was described best as an artifact of the long night - and a general systems collapse. The people who had the knowhow to keep things going were either recruited (or encouraged to stay) by being given more and more perks and privileges, while also gaining more political power thru control of vital resources (Water, electricity, food - atmosphere in some cases) until they became a ruling class, possibly with strict rules about social flow between the two.

It's more than just the typical have/have not relationship suggested above - its more of a caste system, really, with enforcement provided by control of a life supporting resource or resources. It is a much more rigid and ruthlessly conservative system than a simple oligarchy or autocracy. In fact, given that it is the most common GT generated by CT, oit has been suggested that the glacial pace of technological advancement suggested by the OTU is a direct consequence of the prevalence of this kind of government.

It also is a type of government not currently found on earth since irrigation empires (Egypt, some china, some mesoamerica) went away.

Caste based rule , I note, is another government type worth discussion .

 

[SableWyvern]

Why have I never seen a Feudal Technocracy described like that before? It works, is consistent with the vague description found in TNE, and makes sense. Cheers.

 

[EDG]

FWIW,
Feudal tecnocracy was described best as an artifact of the long night - and a general systems collapse. The people who had the knowhow to keep things going were either recruited (or encouraged to stay) by being given more and more perks and privileges, while also gaining more political power thru control of vital resources (Water, electricity, food - atmosphere in some cases) until they became a ruling class, possibly with strict rules about social flow between the two.

....which is basically what a Technologically Elevated Dictator is in TNE.

 

[SableWyvern]

....which is basically what a Technologically Elevated Dictator is in TNE.

For anyone looking for simplified, broad government types, the distinction is probably irrelevant, but I think that captainjack's Feudal Technocracy is fairly different from and probably a lot more evolved than a typical TED. YMMV.

 

[EDG]

....which is basically what a Technologically Elevated Dictator is in TNE.

For anyone looking for simplified, broad government types, the distinction is probably irrelevant, but I think that captainjack's Feudal Technocracy is fairly different from and probably a lot more evolved than a typical TED. YMMV.

Well it seems to fit his view that it's a result of a collapse - the groups that have the tech rise to the top and dominate those around them. Though I guess TEDs are more inclined to keep the tech at the same level rather than try to improve it.

 

[SableWyvern]

There's no argument from me that the two could be combined into a single entry. The main differences seem to be that the TED has a concentrated power base and control of the most important tech, while the FT has a more distributed, interdependent system. The TED also carries the implication of rulership by force through access to military tech, although this need not be the case (nor does the FT preclude such).

Edit: It occurs to me that I would probably treat an extreme law FT like a TED, and a lower law FT as a less oppresive system of semi-feudal aristocracy.