Interstellar Sophontarian Law ?

Lord High Munchkin said:
Personally I use a Tech Level scale of my own (as do a fair number of other GMs I know), so that isn't an issue. That also allows the "stripping out" of a lot of things I don't find useful from books like CSC.

The only major difference in a setting such as The Culture really would be AI, which is covered in detail in the two robots books, if required. Trade is less of an issue too, but, as you say, character driven stories dominate that game-style, so is not so prominent.

I avoid changing too much, too many house rules scare players, I find. Personally, I reserve them for when I shoehorn Metamorphosis Alpha into my campaign using Strontium Dog, fun stuff. Plus changing the tech levels means that your players can't look at the UWP and know what the common TL of the world is.

Agreed, trade would be a issue as Banks stated that the Culture was a command economy, whereas the general trav theme is of a market economy. Against a Dark Background works for an awesome trav world though, traveller as stated in the early, it is just a basic framework to recreate any scifi background.

BTT: One reason that Sophont is such a great word, is that as is usual in science, it is specific and not an adjective like sentient, without having the unfortunate consequence that sentients and sentience sound the same and sentients is improper, my spell check lights it up.
 
Wil Mireu said:
'Sentient' on the other hand means "having the power of sense perception or sensation; conscious" or even (rarely) "a sentient person or thing" ( http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sentient?s=ts ), which is exactly what we're after here - so why is there a need to use another word?
For example because the use of "intelligent" and "sentient" has changed
during the last decades. Today "intelligence" is considered as an ability
all complex animals have to a lesser or greater degree, it is no longer
thought that we humans are intelligent and the animals are not, today
we are only considered to be more intelligent or to have a different ty-
pe of intelligence than for example a raven or a rat. And "sentience" is
now used for self-consciousness, an ability also attributed to some ani-
mals, for example chimpanzees and dolphins. When India recently pas-
sed a law that declared dolphins to be "non-human persons" with special
rights (e.g. a ban on dolphinariums), the fact that dolphins are "sentient"
played a major role in the decision. These changes in the use of "intelli-
gent" and "sentient" make it useful to have another term which applies
to our degree of intelligence, sentience and "mental sophistication", and
"sophont" with its connection with terms like "philosophy" is a possible
choice for such a term.
 
rust said:
the fact that dolphins are "sentient"
played a major role in the decision. These changes in the use of "intelli-
gent" and "sentient" make it useful to have another term which applies
to our degree of intelligence, sentience and "mental sophistication", and
"sophont" with its connection with terms like "philosophy" is a possible
choice for such a term.

You are confusing a law with science. There is no scientific fact that dolphins are any more sentient than dogs...
 
F33D said:
You are confusing a law with science. There is no scientific fact that dolphins are any more sentient than dogs...
You could try to tell that to the scientists who convinced the
government of India to pass the law ... :wink:
 
rust said:
F33D said:
You are confusing a law with science. There is no scientific fact that dolphins are any more sentient than dogs...
You could try to tell that to the scientists who convinced the
government of India to pass the law ... :wink:

Who cares. Political agendas aren't science. See the AGW scam...
 
F33D said:
Who cares. Political agendas aren't science. See the AGW scam...

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

You think AGW (anthropogenic global warming) is a "scam"? Excuse me while I point and laugh at your moronic idiocy.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
Wil Mireu said:
You think AGW (anthropogenic global warming) is a "scam"? Excuse me while I point and laugh at your moronic idiocy.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Think? No. It is established fact.
 
F33D said:
Think? No. It is established fact.

I'm not going to argue with you about this because it's really off topic, but AGW is a fact. Denying it means you're delusional. Take your deranged trolling elsewhere.
 
Wil Mireu said:
F33D said:
Think? No. It is established fact.

I'm not going to argue with you about this because it's really off topic, but AGW is a fact. Denying it means you're delusional. Take your deranged trolling elsewhere.


:roll: I think you are on the wrong forum. The forum for uncontrolled, seething rage is on another site...
 
Back
Top