Level of free thought and creativity in the known world?

[Uglyhead]

Are such things feasible in zalanthas, or do the harshness of the world and the ruthlessness of the authorities quash such things?

Would the average citizen have the time or inclination to try to figure out how to... say... get into a position of power? change society for the better/worse?

Would the average citizen have the time or inclination to come up with stories of faraway lands beyond the known world, where cities float on the breeze and old men with long beards write in books thicker than a HG's skull? Would the average citizen even know what a book is?

Or are such thoughts only common to those who have reasonable time to think them, wealthy merchants, nobles, templars, other hoity-toities?

[Stroker]

Define -making the world better- Now is the common citizen trying to make the world better for himself, as in becoming awfully rich? Or for others as well?

I'd think anyone would try to get as rich as possible and as high in power as possible. However changing the world for others .... that's a wee bit shaky.  I would guess the occaisonal rebellion, but even that will be started by either nobles or templars, I would assume.

As far as creativity goes .... sure, there are bards and you can sing and tells stories about whatever the hell you want.

[Uglyhead]

Okay, so, the citizens of zalanthas are competitive, and out usually for themselves, and rarely out to help others... okay.

Templars and nobles usually start the occasional rebellion? They fall into the hoity-toities category... Hm.

Yeah Bards've got their stories. alright.

Oh! Neat song on!
Sings:
Don't pay the ferryman!
Don't even fix a price!
Don't pay the ferryman,
'till he gets you to the other side!

Sound advice on Arm, no? Don't trust them 'cause they might stab you in the back(literally or figuratively)...

kthnxbye

[Eclipse]

In the old days, the only reason the medieval system (monarchy) worked was because the people feared death. The nobility were seen as the social elite, they had such power that they could kill anybody they wished outside of that elite without just cause. The people feared death and didn't realize that if they stood together, change would have to occur. Afterall, if all the common people were killed, who would serve the nobles? This thought didn't occur in Europe though for over 1500 years and before then, there were the Romans who can hardly be said to have been better.

The Templarate and Nobility though would of course be unable or unwilling to think of such changes. They would fight it with desparate abandon and quash dissidence where it arose. Those that spread thoughts of these wonders would be hunted down and beheaded for treason. These thoughts would arise, in perhaps the one in every thousand or ten thousand people that wished for something new and had a lot of time on their hands and a great mind to rival that of the nobility. But the instant they spoke of such things, they would be ratted out and killed. As you can imagine, that's probably the greatest reason that writing is restricted. Once people can pass on thoughts from century to century, it builds until such a time that rebellion comes about and change is forced on those that don't want it.

[creeper386]

I would hardly think nobles would start rebellions.. Rebellions tend to be overthrowing the people currently in charge or in the least changing how they rule, and the nobles are the people in charge. The only rebellion in Armageddon I've heard of was started by a dwarf. And pretty sure he was a commoner, and even then it wasn't much a rebellion as... well... a war of sorts... Shrug.


Creeper who doubts there would be rebellions too often.

I think its very realistic to assume that a worker say... being paid to shovel dung down Miner's Road everyday of his life for 30 years would brew thoughts of discontent with the current way things are done. Weather he has the means to start or achieve such is another thing.

Where a worker say... in a team of oppressed slave-like Templar construction might work to rally his people around him to overthrow their commanding officer. Then it may progress depending on means.

Its all about means. People usually dont start futile fights. Like a commoner singlehandedly trying to bring down Tektolnes without being an omnipotent sorceror would probably be nuts.

A focused dwarf with a small army and good tactics... that sounds like a possibility.

[Jacques]

Let us not forget all the crazy schemes that people MUST think up but they never try because they just don't have the insanity to do it.

"Let's see... if we dig a deep enough hole, the templars will fall into it and we can pour the wagons full of kank dung on top of them, and smother them to death...

Nah, never work. Kank dung dries out too fast...."

[JollyGreenGiant]

Actually, the Romans were FAR more civilized than the people living in the dark ages.  Also, social standings were vastly different.  For example, slavery.  Feudal serfs were essentially slaves.  They were treated poorly, looked down on, downtrodden, etc.  Their status was rigid - you were born a serf, you died a serf.

A Roman slave, however, might actually be a Roman citizen, subject to the rights and priviledges thereof.  A slave could also be a teacher, or gladiator.  They could buy or win their freedom.  On occasion, they were adopted into the households of nobles and merchants.  Social status was much more fluid.  You could join the army, acheive a decent rank, buy your citizenship, and retire on a nice plot of land.

This is evidenced by Spartacus' rebellion, for example.  Note that Spartacus and his small army of slaves weren't really interested in overthrowing Rome - they just wanted to get outside of Rome's reach, settle down, have their own farm, etc.

I would hardly think nobles would start rebellions..

I disagree, and I think history bears this out.  Up until the French revolution, regicide was almost always carried out by the nobility.  To use Rome as the example, the notable rebellions were typically some general marching on Rome, overthrowing the old emperor, and setting himself up instead.  The same thing occured with the Babylonians, Assyrians, Egyptians, and so on down that direction in history.  Moving into the dark ages, rebellions were again almost always about the nobles who didn't have power ousting the nobles who did.

Oh.  I apparently forgot to make an actual point before the edit.  *cough*.

The point was, society in Zalanthas resembles feudal society more than the Romans, Greeks, etc.  The nobles and templars are going to do everything they can to hold onto their powerbase, while squabbling among themselves for that power.  Your average commoner is just trying to survive.  I'd like to note, however, that a PC is generally NOT your average commoner.

[creeper386]

I disagree, and I think history bears this out. Up until the French revolution, regicide was almost always carried out by the nobility. To use Rome as the example, the notable rebellions were typically some general marching on Rome, overthrowing the old emperor, and setting himself up instead. The same thing occured with the Babylonians, Assyrians, Egyptians, and so on down that direction in history. Moving into the dark ages, rebellions were again almost always about the nobles who didn't have power ousting the nobles who did.

Hmm... Were the nobles all working together, along with a group of magick throwing police-squard who had a large army behind them and all the will of a great sorcerer who is the current Highlord that most everyone praises and worships, including said nobles? No I don't think so. The nobles have it good, and have little choice in the matter.

Creeper

Also even the most powerful of nobles might still think they have not enough. Why have a Senate, I should be Emperor! I dont think these would exactly be publically expressed feelings, but the (Pat/Mat)riarch of the scheming house Oash might have all sorts of plots to eventually overthrow the government of Allanak, but we'll never know until it happens. Who knows if all these Tor military advisors are actually gradually sending soldiers to their deaths to eventually weaken the militia so they can take over!

While those in bad situations are more likely to become discontent and angry and rebelious, those that feel they should rule or are entitled to more power are also likely to feel rebelious, if in a quieter fashion.

[creeper386]

Yes, but again, this certainly can't be related, no real world power was backed by a known and very powerful magick wielding person. Has enough power in fact to give it out to his underlings to control his city.

Same in the North, and the other cities, I think are basically ran by people that left else where. The only place that seems to have a more outside government besides Tuluk or 'nak is Luir's and Kurac probably knows everything thats going on and around there place, and involved in most of it as well.

Creeper