Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How to make a Wyld hunt Incompetent but not too incompetent

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Isator Levi
    replied
    Originally posted by The Wizard of Oz
    The wife of the English ambassador to the Ottomans in I think about 1800 wrote back to her friends in England about how sexually liberated the Ottoman women were.
    I suppose another thing that may have endeared the Ottomans to the English was how cooperative they were in the appropriation of other people's cultural heritage. My visit to the British Museum was one of the most dissonant experiences of my life.
    Originally posted by The Wizard of Oz
    this was the tail end of English society being accepting of affairs
    I am continuously astonished at the fashions and lifestyles of the Regency.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Wizard of Oz
    replied
    Originally posted by phalamir View Post

    Europeans had been trying to go outside Europe for at least a century before the Ottomans were a thing. Their beef with the Ottomans was how dare these people not convert to Christianity (0.00000001%) and how dare these people not pay us for the privilege of giving us Chinese consumer goods (99.99999999%). If the Ottomans had showered spices,, silks, and oranges on Europe, the English would still be singing paeans to the glory of the Ottomans and their civilized civilization of civilizing civility.
    The English actually did say the Ottomans were awesome for a long time, and formed a very long-standing alliance with the Ottomans, in order to oppose the Russians (for example, in the Crimean War when English and Ottoman troops fought together). It only ended when the Ottomans were literally massacring Serbs and putting them in mass graves, and the leader of the Liberals won an election against the leader of the Conservatives on the issue that maybe this was a bit morally wrong (it also led indirectly to Irish Home Rule: the new PM started to think that maybe if it's not okay for the Ottomans to massacre Christians in the Balkans, maybe it's not okay for the English to do it in Ireland).
    Until then, the people that were raving about how awful the Ottomans were, was mostly people in Central Europe, like the Austrians, to whom the Ottomans were genuinely a threat (after all, they conquered the Byzantines, and then all of the Balkans, and got as far as Vienna at one point), and the Russians (who both wanted to conquer a lot of Ottoman territory, but were also concerned with how the Ottomans treated their fellow religionists in Serbia and Greece).

    A rather amusing anecdote about the way the Ottomans were perceived:
    The wife of the English ambassador to the Ottomans in I think about 1800 wrote back to her friends in England about how sexually liberated the Ottoman women were. How they could do what they want, have whatever affairs they wanted, and it was absolutely fine and their husbands didn't care. All other sources insist that Ottoman women (at least, high-ranked ones) wore veils and had to stay in the Harem. Historians reckon that this woman just claimed Ottoman women could have tons of affairs to her friends because they liked the idea, essentially (this was the tail end of English society being accepting of affairs). So, my point is how Europeans saw them may have had absolutely nothing to do with what they were, and a lot more to do with what views Europeans wanted to push.

    Leave a comment:


  • phalamir
    replied
    Originally posted by CycloneJoker View Post

    There is a picture that goes around some /tg/ threads showing what I believe are early 18th century stereotypes of various groups of people, and its translation. It is hilariously irreverent, especially the one for Turks.

    EDIT: Here it is. You may have to copy and paste into a browser. https://i.4cdn.org/tg/1419412460211.jpg Note that despite the irreverence all of them usually muster up at least one GOOD trait, interestingly.

    I was reading for the English and got the trait and the adjective for two lines mixed up and read "They love; tuberculosis". which was odder than Hell; until I remembered Manchester.

    Leave a comment:


  • phalamir
    replied
    Originally posted by Isator Levi View Post
    Europeans (who were quite happy to be left alone to beat the shit out of each other).
    Europeans had been trying to go outside Europe for at least a century before the Ottomans were a thing. Their beef with the Ottomans was how dare these people not convert to Christianity (0.00000001%) and how dare these people not pay us for the privilege of giving us Chinese consumer goods (99.99999999%). If the Ottomans had showered spices,, silks, and oranges on Europe, the English would still be singing paeans to the glory of the Ottomans and their civilized civilization of civilizing civility.

    Leave a comment:


  • CycloneJoker
    replied
    Originally posted by Isator Levi View Post
    It's actually an interesting irony of European history; the point at which an outsider society becomes dangerous enough that the typical image of the invading barbarian can be applied to them is generally the point at which they stop living in the manner that resembles the aesthetics.
    Fascinating how history works out sometimes, innit?

    Leave a comment:


  • Isator Levi
    replied
    Originally posted by CycloneJoker
    Really the whole "ravening horde" appellation is a poor fit; almost all of the people that invaded their way into Europe were highly sophisticated societies. Several arguably MORESO than contemporary Europe, like the Ottomans.
    The key thing in how these matters were perceived wasn't really about how they were living in their own right, it was how threatening they were to Europeans (who were quite happy to be left alone to beat the shit out of each other). That an invading society is actually sophisticated actually helps the image of them being ravenous, because it makes them more effective at ravening you. It's actually an interesting irony of European history; the point at which an outsider society becomes dangerous enough that the typical image of the invading barbarian can be applied to them is generally the point at which they stop living in the manner that resembles the aesthetics.

    Leave a comment:


  • CycloneJoker
    replied
    Originally posted by phalamir View Post


    It is more accurate to say they were perceived by Europeans as ravening hordes when it suited Europeans to perceive them as ravening hordes. Europeans were also quite willing to describe them as effete, decadent sophisticates if that suited their propaganda needs. Historically, most writing was more jingoistically propagandistic than Fox News. "We see Group X as having attributes A, B, and C" was more likely to mean "we" just made up A, B, and C to justify whatever we want to do to Group X than it was that Group X had anything even remotely resembling A, B, and C.* Reading any historical document, you have to assume the writer is a lying sack of horseshit. I would look askance at someone from 1400s France saying the sun rose in the east, much less his views of Asian potentates..
    There is a picture that goes around some /tg/ threads showing what I believe are early 18th century stereotypes of various groups of people, and its translation. It is hilariously irreverent, especially the one for Turks.

    EDIT: Here it is. You may have to copy and paste into a browser. https://i.4cdn.org/tg/1419412460211.jpg Note that despite the irreverence all of them usually muster up at least one GOOD trait, interestingly.
    Last edited by CycloneJoker; 12-24-2014, 05:22 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • phalamir
    replied
    Originally posted by Oriares View Post


    He's not saying they were ravening hordes, he's saying that they were perceived by the Europeans as ravening hordes. The whole "barbarian means 'not us'" angle.

    It is more accurate to say they were perceived by Europeans as ravening hordes when it suited Europeans to perceive them as ravening hordes. Europeans were also quite willing to describe them as effete, decadent sophisticates if that suited their propaganda needs. Historically, most writing was more jingoistically propagandistic than Fox News. "We see Group X as having attributes A, B, and C" was more likely to mean "we" just made up A, B, and C to justify whatever we want to do to Group X than it was that Group X had anything even remotely resembling A, B, and C.* Reading any historical document, you have to assume the writer is a lying sack of horseshit. I would look askance at someone from 1400s France saying the sun rose in the east, much less his views of Asian potentates.

    * And "We have attributes A, B, and C" is almost always bald-faced lies. You see that sort of thing in periods of laxity (real or perceived), where people are writing about aspirational desires as if they are immutable parts of their group's DNA. "A Waloon is always honest and forthright" is functionally equivalent to the statement "the Waloons of the current era will lie to their mothers about the most inconsequential things for the lulz". Conversely, "people these days are venal and petty" usually means "people these days won't listen to my hilariously perfectionist and fascist nonsense".

    Leave a comment:


  • Oriares
    replied
    Originally posted by CycloneJoker View Post

    Really the whole "ravening horde" appellation is a poor fit; almost all of the people that invaded their way into Europe were highly sophisticated societies. Several arguably MORESO than contemporary Europe, like the Ottomans.

    Also, true story--Mongol scout riders made it all the way to sight-range of the gates of Venice before the Great Khan perished.

    He's not saying they were ravening hordes, he's saying that they were perceived by the Europeans as ravening hordes. The whole "barbarian means 'not us'" angle.

    Leave a comment:


  • Omicron
    replied
    1e material that is not specifically focused on Dragon-Bloods (such as Aspect Books) is generally pretty terrible about depicting them like mooks with delusions of grandeur. Riza is just the flip side of that coin: a mook with delusions of lowliness! Either way they die badly and easily.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lioness
    replied
    Originally posted by Prince of the Night View Post

    Hows that need Fixing?

    I loved the question of nature vs nurture.
    -Dragon-Blooded feeling a yearning to serve the Solar Exalted isn't mentioned anywhere else, It being there changes the whole dynamic between the two splats.
    -Her Motivation is similar to those possessed by DotFA Lilith and Dukantha who are slaves.
    -It's an awful precident for a signature character to have an Ally whose Motivation is to do what they're told.

    Leave a comment:


  • CycloneJoker
    replied
    Originally posted by Isator Levi View Post
    *snip*
    Really the whole "ravening horde" appellation is a poor fit; almost all of the people that invaded their way into Europe were highly sophisticated societies. Several arguably MORESO than contemporary Europe, like the Ottomans.

    Also, true story--Mongol scout riders made it all the way to sight-range of the gates of Venice before the Great Khan perished.

    Leave a comment:


  • DrLoveMonkey
    replied
    Originally posted by Prince of the Night View Post

    Out of morbid curiousity, would you like to try statting up that charm?
    Cost: 3m; Mins: Socialize 3, Essence 3; Type: Supplemental
    Keywords: Combo-OK, Emotion
    Duration: Instant
    Prerequisite Charms: Warm-Faced Seduction Style

    Dragonblooded often make bold faced advances against their subordinates, and should those advances be rejected the dragon's fire shall remain as strong. This charm supplements an attempt to seduce a character subordinate to the user. She adds 2 dice to the attempt and should the attempt fail there shall be no negative repercussions towards the Dragonblood. For instance at a formal meeting regarding the defense of Greyfalls the Dragonblood may proposition his second in command for a night of kinky sex and should he be rebuffed none of the other officers present will protest. This charm may only be used once per scene against a given target.
    Last edited by DrLoveMonkey; 12-23-2014, 10:34 PM. Reason: Hah, mispelled seduction as deduction.

    Leave a comment:


  • Prince of the Night
    replied
    Originally posted by phalamir View Post
    Well, technically Complete Waste Of Carbon knew there was a Glowy Bastard out there, so if Wyld Hunt = any group knowingly going after Glowy Bastards, then it was a Wyld Hunt. I personally not count CWOC's Non-Excellent Misadventure as a Wyld Hunt, but if we're going with the expansive definition, it fell within the parameters.
    Otherwise you are correct in the sequence of events. Though it shouldn't have been hard for Dace to behead CWOC since his only known Charm was Workplace Sexual Harrassment Perfecction Technique.
    Out of morbid curiousity, would you like to try statting up that charm?

    Leave a comment:


  • Prince of the Night
    replied
    Originally posted by Lioness View Post
    I really wish they had fixed the early installment weirdness with V'neef Risa instinctively knowing her place.
    Hows that need Fixing?

    I loved the question of nature vs nurture.

    Edit: never mind was referring to the lines she gave in the Dawn Castebook about nature vs nurture.
    Last edited by Prince of the Night; 12-23-2014, 11:04 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X