The Great War?

[emperorpenguin]

I never said Minbari were incapable of killing each other, just that we have no direct evidence of it.


all I'm saying is that there is no onscreen evidence to prove they did.

LBH

LBH, it is said in "Rumours, Bargains and Lies" that fighting has broken out in the Minbari capital. Delenn looks horrified and says "Civil War". Now not too sure what "fighting" and "civil war" mean to you but to me it involves death, Minbari don't fight using pillowcases! :wink:

Further, Delenn and Neroon discuss how many Minbari must die before the conflict ends.
Further, in "Moments of Transition" we hear and see the effects of artillery. That tends to kill people, even Minbari! Shakiri threatens to destroy the entire city and kill all within it unless they surrender.

"Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack"

the same phrase used to convince a gullible public there were WMDs in Iraq I recall, it's a fairly hollow soundbite, not a real argument

 

[tneva82]

More specifically, the Drakh could have been bluffing and it is reasonable to assume that the Centauri and EA fleets have opther vessel types.

No it's not reasonable to assume they have other vessel types since they are not shown. That's your logic.

Oh btw whatabout pre-Valen time...Direct references to Minbari killing Minbari there...So Minbari do kill Minbari.

Also warrior caste driving religious caste into wasteland IS direct killing because they fated lots of them to die. Arquing it's not direct killing is same as arquing "I didn't kill directly other person despite shooting a gun at him because it was the BULLET that killed him. Not me.".

I can't believe you are still arquing silly concept of Minbari not killing Minbari during civil war without any good evidence of that and plenty of good evidence that they did.,

 

[lastbesthope]

Tneva, I mentioned pre Valen time in my post

What you call good evidence I don't, let's just agree to differ on this one, you seem to be taking it way more seriously than I am.

LBH

 

[tneva82]

Tneva, I mentioned pre Valen time in my post

There then. Minbari do kill Minbari. You have been proven false by your own admission.,

 

[lastbesthope]

Minbari have, or used to kill Minbari. They don't anymore.

We were discussing, primarily the time frame of the show (which doesn't go that far back, even in flashback) and the Minbari Civil war.

And I was proven false by the evidence, not my admission of it.

I hope you're happy now you can go and have your Minbari War Crimes trials :lol:

LBH

 

[emperorpenguin]

I hope you're happy now you can go and have your Minbari War Crimes trials :lol:

LBH

Delenn's the kind of Nelson Mandela hippy who'd call an amnesty and have peace and reconciliation

 

[lastbesthope]

"Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack"

the same phrase used to convince a gullible public there were WMDs in Iraq I recall, it's a fairly hollow soundbite, not a real argument

It may have been, but the point is still valid.

Lack of evidence does not prove something doesn't exist, but you really should prove it does before acting on that basis.

LBH

 

[emperorpenguin]

It may have been, but the point is still valid.

Lack of evidence does not prove something doesn't exist, but you really should prove it does before acting on that basis.

LBH

I just find the very phrase spine-chilling nowadays when i think how many hundreds of thousands have died since 2003 based on those words

 

[lastbesthope]

I know what you mean EP, but anything can be misused by politicians to mean whatever they want it to mean.

I've mainly been playing a game of Devil's advocate in thie Minbari vs Minbari thread, I mean could you prove murder based on the on screen evidence? I don't think so, or at least you could argue a strong case against it (Been watching too much Shark lately I think)

I'm not saying the events portrayed in the Minbari Civil War aren't terrible, but jumping to conclusions can lead to a heck of a lot of trouble. in fiction and real life.

LBH

 

[emperorpenguin]

I'm not saying the events portrayed in the Minbari Civil War aren't terrible, but jumping to conclusions can lead to a heck of a lot of trouble. in fiction and real life.

LBH

I don't think it can be called "jumping to conclusions" to say people are killed in a civil war LBH :lol:

you can argue no Narn kills another Narn based on screen evidence

 

[tneva82]

Minbari have, or used to kill Minbari. They don't anymore.

That was because grey council held them together.

Now answer me this: Was grey council around during civil war?

 

[tneva82]

I've mainly been playing a game of Devil's advocate in thie Minbari vs Minbari thread, I mean could you prove murder based on the on screen evidence? I don't think so, or at least you could argue a strong case against it (Been watching too much Shark lately I think)

If there's civil war going on you can be sure there was killing.

Why would Delenn surrender from threat of warrior caste threatening to destroy city and everybody in it if minbari don't kill minbari? Threat would be empty and therefore no need to surrender....

 

[lastbesthope]

Why would Delenn surrender from threat of warrior caste threatening to destroy city and everybody in it if minbari don't kill minbari? Threat would be empty and therefore no need to surrender....

Because for Delenn, the threat of destroying the city would be enough, killing or no killing.

LBH

 

[Spike1382]

Well my thought was that the campaign would be fought in sections, with storyline centric goals rather than specific moves dictated by a leader. Each game would be targeted at achieving a specific goal. Goals would be established each round, which could last a month or so. A game’s stated goal would be established before a game started and the results would be reported afterward. With the strife gripping the galaxy, clashes between members of the same race would not be uncommon. Here’s an example of how I was thinking it would work.

Round 1

Possible goals for a game

Expansion – Any race can attack any one else as a goal of expanding their territory. This will be reflected in storyline updates by having the best three win loss percentage factions take territory from the worst three.

Attack or defend convoy – The Dilgar convoy is valuable to attack from all sides. Losing now will drive them into the arms of their defenders. If the win loss record goes against the Dilgar, the defending race with the best win - loss record in convoy defense becomes their salvation. They start heading for that race’s territory. If the Dilgar lose, but were their own best defenders, they chose to go it alone and pursue a new, desperate agenda. If the Drakh defend them the most, they permanently join the forces of darkness.

If the Dilgar win, they stay neutral and begin an open negotiations on Babylon 5 to establish a new homeworld.

Uncover Shadow Ship plot – If the win - loss record favors the Drakh, their plot remains uncovered and fear takes over the motivations of the younger races and the ISA will soon be in danger of collapsing all together. Uncovering the plot will result in strengthening the ISA and lessening the fear galaxy wide. The Drakh will still have their Shadow Ships, but their usefulness will be diminished.

Support or oppose the Seekers of Truth – The win - loss record will determine if the seekers of truth can gain any support for their cause on a galactic scale. If the ISA is their main supporter, the Seekers start to take over the political system. Any other race gains a powerful new ally, but risks losing control of their government. For their own good, of course. If the Seekers of Truth have a losing record, they begin to radicalize and see all the races as disloyal inheritors of the great Vorlons.

A few basic rules. The Drakh, Shadow Fleet and Dilgar can only support the Dilgar. The Drakh and Shadow fleet always oppose the uncovering of the Shadow fleet. The Drakh and Shadow fleet always oppose the Seekers of Truth. Any other faction can try to prevent the uncovering of the Shadow fleet, representing the dark forces within their own government. The Drakh, Shadow Fleet, Seekers of Truth, Combined League Fleets, ISA and Dilgar can not play expansion games.

All results will be determined by a win loss percentage rather than total numbers. To qualify for a story prize a faction must have played at least 4 games relating to that story line.

I think this format would be a lot of fun, because two players could pursue a verity of goals with one fleet each, even if they’re both EA players. It also cuts down on book keeping and means that as long as a GM is around the campaign doesn’t stall, like it would if one of the faction leaders dropped out. Hope I’m not stepping on your toes too bad EP. Of course I don’t mind if just my setting idea gets used. I’m flattered people like it so far.

Here’s an example how the first round could go.

Over all win loss records for expansion result in the following.

Winners
EA 10-3
Minbari 12-5
Narn 8-4

Losers
Centauri 4-6
Brikiri 2-3
Drazi 1-4

The Drazi, Centauri and Brikiri each lose a system, which is given to one of the victors. This does not necessarily represent a direct attack as they could be ‘relief’ forces trying to protect the system after another race’s attacks. Needless to say, the race who has lost territory won’t see this as particularly helpful.

Dilgar convoy

Over all win – loss
15-18
Best win loss percentage for support, Minbari

The Dilgar start running for Minbari space, hopping they can survive their escape.

Uncover Shadow Fleet

15 – 12

The Shadow threat is widely believed to be real and strife and panic escalate.

Seekers of Truth

12 – 6

Best win loss percentage, Drazi

The Drazi have a powerful new allie and the Seekers of Truth are well on their way to becoming a force in galactic politics. At the cost of the Drazi’s old political system.

So, do people like this idea for a campaign system, or just the setting?

Oh, and if nothing else, Minbari killed Minbari all the time, before Valen. :wink:

 

[tneva82]

Why would Delenn surrender from threat of warrior caste threatening to destroy city and everybody in it if minbari don't kill minbari? Threat would be empty and therefore no need to surrender....

Because for Delenn, the threat of destroying the city would be enough, killing or no killing.

LBH

If warrior caste would be unable to actually DO what they threat(because it would mean minbari killing minbari. Can't destroy city without killing minbari inside it...) there's no need to surrender because warrior caste wouldn't do it. Stay in city, tell warrior caste to bugger off safe in knowledge warriors won't destroy city because that would mean killing minbari which according to your logic minbari are incapable of doing...

So answer is: Delenn knew they WOULD kill all inside which means warrior caste had killed religious caste(and vice versa) before.

 

[emperorpenguin]

Why would Delenn surrender from threat of warrior caste threatening to destroy city and everybody in it if minbari don't kill minbari? Threat would be empty and therefore no need to surrender....

Because for Delenn, the threat of destroying the city would be enough, killing or no killing.

LBH

here you go LBH, you seem to be grasping for these again.... :lol:

 

[lastbesthope]

Only as much as anyone else is.

Tneva, Delenn didn't need to know the warrior caste would follow through, she just needed tothink they would, it's called bluffing. Besides, they could destroy the city without killing anyone if they were suffiviently surgical about it.

But I'll finish by repeating something I said in an earlier post.

As for the rest I 've said all I have to say, if you want to believe that Minbari died directly at the hands of the Minbari during the Civil War feel free to do so. I'm not saying they didn't, I'm not saying they did, all I'm saying is that there is no onscreen evidence to prove they did.

LBH

You want to prove a direct killing, Habeas-Corpus and all that jazz. We only have hearsay that the Warriors were forcing people into the wilderness. now I know I'm calling a Minbari a liar by sying that, but he could have told the lie to save face/honour, both his own and the Drakh emissary's, and we all know about that get out clause.

Must go now, the devil wants his advocate back :lol:

LBH

 

[tneva82]

Tneva, Delenn didn't need to know the warrior caste would follow through, she just needed tothink they would, it's called bluffing. Besides, they could destroy the city without killing anyone if they were suffiviently surgical about it.

a) If Minbari would not kill Minbari it would be empty bluff.
b) how you destroy building with minbari inside without killing them...You don't. So all religious caste would need to do is to send 1 minbari to each building and hey presto. City saved.

 

[lastbesthope]

a) If Minbari would not kill Minbari it would be empty bluff.
b) how you destroy building with minbari inside without killing them...You don't. So all religious caste would need to do is to send 1 minbari to each building and hey presto. City saved.

@ a)

But Minbari Warriors have gone rogue before, and the whole society was breaking down, it's not unreasonable to assume that the Warriors might not have been bluffing.

@ b) No they can't destroy a building without possibly killing the people in it, so all the warriors need to do is despatch one or two to each building and forcibly remove the religious Minbari. You think the Warriors don't train for that sort of thing, or at least aren't up to the task if they decide to?

LBH

 

[JayRaider]

Respectfully, this Thread is about the possibility of a large online campaign.
If you want to discuss other issues , please make a seperate thread.
Thank you.