Emperor Tullegolar

The website Dikiyoba linked: Quote: ihateserviles: Makes serviles think they shouldn't have rights If only it really worked that way.

Me: Quote: The shapers always manage to make war in an orderly and efficient manner. You: Quote: What we have seen in previous Geneforge games is that the Shapers are methodical in their butchering I suppose what I said was speculation, but at least you seem to agree with it. Medab: The Shapers razed Medab because there were no innocents within its walls. Everyone who lived in that city was guilty of treason against the Shaper Council. The penalty for treason is, even to this day, death. Those that were enslaved got off easy. Rogues: No, the rebels are not methodical about where they place rogues. Where aren't there Taker rogues in the games? They are everywhere, released with no concern for where they are or who they kill. And no, most of them are not under rebel control. Maybe a few towards the end of the games, but other than that... that is why they are called rogues in the first place. Regret: The Takers are killing innocents on purpose, to create fear and chaos. Drakons are arrogant creatures, and they care for no one other than themselves. They try to fool their followers with vision of grandeur which are really thinly veiled calls for blood. I can't even remember a time I ever saw a drakon express emotion other than anger or hatred. They obviously have no souls. Scarring the Land: Just because Sun Tzu says it's a good idea, doesn't mean good people use it. It is still a scumbag tactic and it is further evidence of why the Takers are worse than the shapers. Oh, and what's so fanciful about the evidence I provided that you failed to include in your quote? Sympathizers: By 'elderly mage' do you mean Hodge? The total psychopath? Spharon, how can you say he wasn't just in it for his own good? He does not justify the Taker ways. Not sure who this this "another mage" is. As for Corrie, she is hardly high ranking. She seems like a backwater hick to me. You'll always have those, again not good justification. Common Sense: You say what I say was conjecture. It’s more like common sense. Why do you think humans despise shaper rule so much? Are the shapers sending hostile creations to attack their cities? Are the shapers walking into towns and pillaging them for no good reason? Even Diwaniya says that the shapers can not be as ruthless as you say because they like to maintain good relations with the people. No, what you say is conjecture, why would people be so intent on rebelling against a system that works? You say that loyalists are in the minority, how do you support this? Where is your proof that the people act only in fear rather than in reverence and respect for their protectors? Militia: The fact that shapers use creations to defend towns shows how much they care for the people in them. Why allow them to put their lives at risk when a thahd can quickly be made to go in their place? I would think that anyone in the world today would kill to not have the government send their friends and family into battle. Quote: the Shapers purposefully make their people defenseless I would like to argue against this... but your going to have to make more sense first. What makes you think this? Iran Analogy: Still lame, my terrorist one is more accurate... a mirror image, if you will. Serviles: Again you miss my point. Why should they have to go to battle when they don't have to? Shapers take care of them, they give them homes and food, the Takers give them only bloodshed and death. What's mature about rushing into battle to your inevitable death? Serviles make bad decisions, they need the protection and guiding hand of a shaper, not the madness of a drakon. Also, evidence (gore at the end of my sword) shows serviles suck at battle, I don’t know what your talking about... performing just as well... nonsense.

Chaos: The shapers always manage to make war in an orderly and efficient manner. The Takers on the other hand, have a ‘destroy everything and worry about it later’ strategy. Everyone loses with this method. As for the innocent towns and civilian casualties, I'll admit that all wars have these, but usually they are accidental or at least regretted afterwards. The Takers, on the other hand, are purposely seeding fear into all humans through the death and destruction they bring about. Destruction: I believe that the Takers wage war in a way that damages the land for years to come. While the shapers move in with controlled creations, wipe out the enemies and move on, the Takers are scarring the land in a colorful variety of ways. There are rogues everywhere, who knows how that is going to effect the ecosystem. Then there are the diseases. Then there are Ghaldring's trademark 'fires.' Sympathy: Who are these high ranking individuals that joined the rebels you speak of? Lankan: The rebels on the second island were forces to form their own militia due to lack of shaper presence. If there were enough shapers there to keep the town safe (which there would have been if they were Tullegolites) that isolated incident would not have happened. Given the choice, people will take shaper protection over Taker ‘liberation’ any day. Protection: The point is that shapers protect their people, whereas the Takers cause chaos to get what they want. It all boils down to the social contract: how much freedom are you willing to give up for protection? With rogue monsters running around spitting acid, all of the sudden bowing to the shapers doesn't seem like such a bad idea. Analogy: There is no way you can get away with trying to compare the Shaper regime to Iran and the Takers to the rest of the (sane) world. If anything, it is the opposite. Joining the Takers is like joining some kind of terrorist organization, who's goal is to spread fear and chaos and eventually bring the world under a new order. Serviles: I didn't mean that the Drakons force the serviles to fight. The point is, serviles were not meant to do battle, and the drakons giving them this option is very irresponsible of them. Of course the serviles will fight, they are stupid like that, the inevitable result if their deaths. The drakons know this, yet they allow them to fight anyway. Finally, I am having trouble naming historical revolutionaries that destroyed their own nation to free it. It is different when two separate nations are fighting and destroying each other (Allies vs. Axis). But when a group is fighting for freedom, they don't usually destroy their own people or property to accomplish this goal.

The Takers are spreading unnecessary chaos. If the shaper regime were truly as repressive as you say it is, why do the Takers not have overwhelming support of the population? It’s because they attack innocent towns, they release rogues upon commoners with little to no affiliation with the shapers whatsoever. They leave only destruction in their wake. Yeah, real "sympathetic." The fact that people go to the shapers for protection rather than helping to overthrow their oppressive regime is all the evidence I need to show me who is in the right here. Serviles join the Takers willingly because they are foolish children. You can't let them make this decision on their own. It's like wanting to run away and join the circus, only this circus has deadly results. Are the serviles not in better hands under the care of shapers than they are being thrown into battle by drakon overlords? Drakons seem rational? What's rational about destroying the world they are trying to free? But what is the alternative? The Tullegolites. We will bring about a new age of peace and order. Join me, and together we can rule the world!

Micawber: You couldn't handle Tullegolania, anyway. By the way, are we still talking about the geneforge world here? Do you think the geneforge world would be better ruled as a corporation? The Shaper Council has three leaders (as far as we can tell) and they are not doing the best job. I’ll bet it is due to their indecisiveness and lack of passion. These things run rampant when there is a shortage of heroes. I think this whole three leaders deal needs to be scraped, thrown in the pile of failures along with Marxism and the Geneva Convention. Goldenking: I don’t think you can have one person that deals with public relations and a separate person that deals with foreign relations. Those are both duties of the head of state. Wouldn’t you want the face of your government to meet wit foreign leaders, and wouldn’t the foreign leaders want to meet the face?

If the King appointed the Prime Minister and the President, then it would be a whole new system. The King would hold a deliciously uneven amount of power, clearly acting as both the head of state and of government. The two appointees would be superfluous. As for the Queen of England, she is the head of state in the United Kingdom. It is her job to meet with foreign officials while the Prime Minister fills his role as head of government. Since France has a President to be the head of state, there would be no point in having a king as well. The whole point being you only need two chief executives, preferably one, and it wouldn't make sense at all to have three.

Quote: Originally written by doraemon: thanks, [*i] you are the lightbringer I knew it.

Where is the logic in trying to spread chaos? The Takers are cold blooded murderers that would genocide humanity if they had the chance. They claim to support freedom and equality, but the serviles are as much servants under the them as they are under shapers. It's more like only a child could see its validity. Which makes sense since serviles have child-brains and drakons are insane.

Unless I were building a road to a crystal mine.

Khoth: It is reasonable to assume that information can travel by word of mouth throughout a single island, an isolated valley, or even a chain of small islands. But we are talking about an entire world here. As far as I can tell, the geneforge world has not even discovered the printing press, which I give credit to as the reason why democracy worked when the United States was founded. Micawber: Why would ambassadors want to meet with someone with no political influence whatsoever? This whole concept of dividing the power bugs me. You are greatly hampering effectiveness, and adding excess in the government that simply is not necessary. Obviously there should be a body, such as a council of ministers, that debates things and makes educated recommendations to the highest leadership. But really, there needs to be one person at the top to make sure things actually happen. A single person to manifest the government and its ideas, a person to follow when the call rises. Nioca: Are you seriously saying that my form of government would not work because my leaders could be poisoned? I hope you realize that all governments’ leaderships are subject to assassinations. If anything, it would be less likely in mine because the rulers got their position through strength and cunning. Then again, I have no qualms about answering a stupid question with a stupid answer. My answer: poison resistance! Superforge: Thus is the risk that comes with any scientific advancement. A risk I am willing to take.

The President of France is the Head of State, the Prime Minister is the Head of Government. There would simply be no place for a King if they wanted to bring it back. Your corporation model is unlikely, though interesting. And as for the Triumvirates of Rome, those both ended in disaster. People don't like to share power. It is also inefficient. A single ruler is the way to go. Word of the Day: Envisage.

Legislative: There is no form of mass communication in geneforge. Democracy only work with mass communication or a very small population. How will the people know who they are voting for? How will they know the issues? Most people will be voting out of ignorance, it seems. Really, despotism is the only way to go here. Executive: I assume the Prime Minister fills the role of Head of Government. Who is the Head of State, the King or the President? Most governments in the world today have two chief executives, some have one that fills both roles, but three is simply unheard of. It seems excessive to me. One is all I ever needed.

Tell me more about the Representatives. Would there be an even number of citizen, corporation, and military ones? This would be terrible. If the military and corporation could outvote the population, they would constantly by screwing them over. This is exactly what happened in the Estates General, where the nobility and clergy representatives always outvoted the population ones and screw them over... in France.

Goldenking: It seems the executive branch in your government does just about everything. What is the Senate responsible for? Nioca: This Owen sounds like an idiot. He was killed by a bunch of hired assassins? Pathetic, he deserved death. I like this Carol, she has ambition, which is important. It is very unlikely that someone with enough ambition to kill the ruler would become a puppet. Even if she was a puppet, that's fine too. After all, if the person pulling the strings doesn't want to be in the spotlight, that sounds like a brilliant move, not one made by an incompetent. Rulers: I suppose I always assumed this was implied, but maybe I should clarify a little on this point. Physical strength would not be the sole determining factor in a new ruler rising to power under the Tullegolite philosophy. Obviously, any army can defeat one man, even a man blessed by the geneforge. A ruler would have to have support of the people, and support of his own army. This is where the good leadership skills come in, this is why my rulers would never be incompetent. This is also why they would not constantly be assassinated. They would have guards, you know. It is at the point where they are such bad rulers that they can not even control their own army that they would actually be overthrown. Resources: What could be a better investment of money than a superforge? Voting: It matters not, all your voting systems would be ruined due to lack of education. The world of geneforge is simply not ready for democracy.

Emperorking: 1. It would have to be until the king is dead, otherwise there will be succession problems. 2. A senate where the military and corporations get as many votes as the public? That sounds like the Estates General in France right before the revolution, a recipe for disaster. 3. Supreme Court dispensing justice? Isn't that the king's job? What is the point of the king at all in your government? It is all very confusing. Retlaw: The only way someone would be able to overthrow a geneforge imbued leader would be if that person has overwhelming support. Lunatics rarely get such support, great leaders get this support.

Nioca: Yes, my system of government is based on the geneforge, without it, it would fall. I'll admit that. If I wanted to argue about governments suited to a world without the geneforge, I would be posting in the general forum. Your Government: With terms as short as you are suggesting, how is anyone supposed to get any ruling experience? Dikiyoba is right about the constant campaigning, but even worse is the fact that the entire bureaucracy would have to be replaced each time someone new is elected. It would be total chaos, and completely inept people would constantly be gaining positions of power. In my system, a ruler can rule as long as he does a good job. When he stops doing a good job, rather than elect someone new, he is killed off and replaced by someone that is guaranteed to be stronger and better. As for resources, what makes you think that keeping an operational geneforge takes so much energy? In Geneforge 3, it existed on an island devoid of resources and with but a few serviles to maintain it. Not sure where you are going with that point. Emperorking: 1. Why would the king ever try to have a child if he needs to worry about being replaced when he reaches 18? 2. Who chooses the representatives? 3. And finally, by being the same as the U.S. Supreme Court, do you mean have virtually no power at all?

Play a game where you murder everyone you can without getting caught. I love entering a shop, closing the door, murdering the keeper and taking his stuff, and then being on my merry way, with the townspeople being none the wiser. There is, of course, the possibility that that is how you play it the first time, in which case, this time don't kill anyone?

I said a crappy ruler that used the geneforge would be overthrown, a good rule would not only be ore difficult to defeat, but if he is really good, there will be few who wish to challenge his rulership. When you character uses the geneforge, he is almost invincible, a much more worthy ruler than Trajkov. Also, destroying the geneforge would be going against Tullegolite philosophy. If there was no geneforge to be the ultimate goal, there would be little motivation to become supreme ruler, and the wars would eventually trickle to a halt, unless a new one was built. That said, you can not declare the argument over until you have explained to me how you think things should be run. That way, I can point out how my way is so much better.

I don't think the ruler would be overthrown so soon, because he would have access to the geneforge itself. Mmm, the fruits of victory. If the human race actually somehow managed to war itself into extinction rather than eventually unite under a single rule, then those idiots deserve extinction.

Hitler picked on the weak. Tullegotlites pick on the strong. There would be little to gain from attacking the weak, in fact, it would be best to have them on your side, as it would make world domination that much easier. The villains would simply be the strongest in society, and the hero would be the villain that wins in the end. If no winner/leader arises, then everyone is simply doing a pathetic job of fighting, and they must continue until such as time as one does.

Another problem with democracies is that they tend to lead to party politics. This tends to result in the senate or whatever being split right down the middle, hampering the decision making process. Also, if you are going to vote for leaders, this requires either a very small or a very educated population. Since we are talking about the world of Geneforge, these people are neither small in number nor well educated. They would not know who to vote for, and there would be either total chaos or inept leaders elected. War, on the other hand, leads to heroes. Heroes tend to garner the love of the people and they tend to be good leaders. War brings out the best in people, and thus it is an excellent way to find leaders. It wouldn’t be killing people for fun, it would be killing people for progress and prosperity.

I have heard of an experiment done where a woman was blindfolded for several months. Brain activity in the eye section of the brain or whatever slowed to a halt, but after a week or so there was activity there again, hinting that that part of the brain was indeed being assigned to other tasks, hearing perhaps. As for servile brains, it really is a matter of how developed they are. First generation serviles seem to be extremely stupid, however, they have great evolutionary potential it seems, almost on par with humans after a mere 200 years on Sucia island. Really, we might be dealing with two separate species here, as the differences are so substantial. I say enslave first generation serviles, and destroy intelligent evolved ones. Intelligent serviles must be destroyed because they are not only a threat to shaper culture, but they are also very physically destructive. I believe this is true for them as a race. Sure, there will be exceptions, but for the most part, intelligent serviles are hostile, and should be dealt with accordingly.

Be-Cavalier: First I must ask about this brain to body weight ratio. How does that make sense scientifically? If someone is born with no arms or legs, will they be smarter than the average person? I do recognize that serviles are superior to other creations. Because of this, I believe they should be given a place to live, food to eat, and I'll even agree not to slaughter them for food or force them onto the battlefield. All I ask is that they put in a days work in the mines or make me a sandwich to repay me for giving them life in the first place. They may be the most clever of all creations, but they are still creations, and shapers are still far superior.

Retlaw: I meant my example to be little more abstract than you took it for. I see you took it literally but did you at least understand the point I was trying to get across? Quote: Originally written by Luo Guanzhong: The Empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide. Thus it has ever been. Nioca+Dikiyoba: You'd probably expect a quote like that to be written by me. It was actually written by a famous Chinese historian on the history of China, one of the most powerful nations in both ancient and modern history. China, while they were by no means Tullegolites, went through long periods of Empire, and whenever a particular dynasty grew weak, rebellion would ensue, and the Emperor would be replaced. This ensured that China stayed strong. Destructive, you say? I think a little rebellion every now and then is healthy for any nation. Not to mention inevitable. So why not promote it? If the government is worthy, it should not matter either way. Edit: Serviles. While I hate to admit it, it is not unreasonable to think that serviles would indeed prove a valuable resource during the periods of war. After a long enough time, centuries at least, the lines between humans and serviles may even become blurred, as both races would bleed on the field of battle. I would not try to enslave a serviles that saved my life in the middle of a skirmish. Then again, serviles are weak, and perhaps they would not be so useful in war after all. I will have to see how well they prove themselves in Geneforge 4 before I can say for sure.

There is always the chance that a leader will be a complete lunatic. This is why Tullegolite philosophy supports violent overthrowing of the government. If a lunatic does take power, it is the duty of each and every citizen to make sure that he is taken out of commission as soon as possible. Besides, I feel it is unlikely that a lunatic would ever take power under my philosophy because to become leader, one would have great difficulty taking over the world all by himself, he would need many strong supporters. Yes, he would need to be not only strong himself, but a genius that is able to garner support as well. Democracies do limit the damage done by each individual, but they also limit the progress and allow for incompetence. Governments need strong leaders. Imagine you are on a ship in the middle of a storm. What do you do? Who do you go to? Do you vote on what to do? Do you elect someone to tell you what to do? No, you go right to the captain, a man who has his position because he is the best. Someone said something about hereditary rulers, Tullegolite philosophy does not believe in hereditary rulers. I never understood why that concept was so popular throughout human history. It allows for greater incompetence than even democracy.