The Factory Floor

12:00 AM

gimme a sec

Now that I'm alone I must ask the all-encompassing void: Why'd you pretend that an M67 frag grenade is a fireball when it is neither a fire nor a ball (for very long).

FoxElemental

Oh thank god got it

Now creating a new Word doc

Hosch250

@FoxElemental That's what OneNote is for.

Mephistopheles

Don't mind me, eavesdropping space ferrets with no emotions must be a common occurrence here.

Hosch250

Also, if it's Windows, you can close the Sticky Notes app and it'll save everything. You can even reboot.

FoxElemental

12:08 AM

Wow

Not counting the constructed language one

It's a total of

34 pages

worth of material

Mephistopheles

O.O

FoxElemental

Plus the 7 pages of language construction

Shalvenay

hey there @Mephistopheles

Mephistopheles

@Shalvenay Hello there

FoxElemental

TTYL

Shalvenay

12:17 AM

how're things going?

Green

2:15 AM

@Shalvenay You're alive!

How goes it?

Shalvenay

alright here, as for you @Green?

Green

@Shalvenay I'm learning lots of new interesting math.

How are you? What's new?

Shalvenay

ah

Green

2:29 AM

Have you ever heard of the Divergence or the Curl of a vector field?

Shalvenay

@Green yeah -- heck if I could really work with that stuff any longer, though

Green

@Shalvenay I'm doing some research into plasma physics for a project of mine. Curl and divergence come up all the time in aerodynamics. It's fun new stuff to reason about.

Shalvenay

@Green yeah, no kidding

dot_Sp0T

4:50 AM

Hurlo!

dot_Sp0T

9:20 AM

Quiet here

Mithrandir24601

@dot_Sp0T The world is indeed quiet here :)

dot_Sp0T

how boring :/

Mithrandir24601

Is it just me, or is this too broad:

11

Q: How would one attack or lay siege to a flying castle?

So we already know that flying creatures are good at attacking castles. But what about a flying castle attacked by ground creatures? Let's say we have ourselves a medium-sized castle built on a driftrock, attached with a heavy chain to the ground 800ft below. For the purposes of this particular ...

@dot_Sp0T - you're around ^

dot_Sp0T

taking a look; another topic: what nasty creatures do you know that I could name a spring of sulphur-water after?

Can't say too broad, but feels very pob to me; as in: how is one method better than another?

Mithrandir24601

9:36 AM

@dot_Sp0T Um... No idea?

dot_Sp0T

me neither

gonna call it something with devil then

Mithrandir24601

@dot_Sp0T I'll go with that

dot_Sp0T

devil's choke

Mithrandir24601

@dot_Sp0T Sounds like devil's snare...

dot_Sp0T

@Mithrandir24601 well it smells of sulphur, you're gonna choke on it

Mithrandir24601

9:40 AM

@dot_Sp0T True that - I'm just thinking of the Harry Potter equivalent

dot_Sp0T

@Mithrandir24601 well you'd be hard trying to drink that one

Mephistopheles

If somebody happened to wonder here and feel like it, feel free to drop feedback on this:

-1

A: Sandbox for Proposed Questions

Title: Humans as repair drones Body: The only real advantage humans have over robots is their endurance and fine motor abilities. This would make them a cheap and excellent repair drone, but there are certain problems. What biological modifications should I make to humans to enable them to a...

Worldbuilding Meta

12:13 PM

0

Q: Should questions be as specific or as abstract as possible?

Because of Ash's question "How curious is too curious?" and the old "Is Worldbuilding a What-If Site?" discussion I came to think about how I present my questions and if my questions could appear to be mere what-if shower thoughts. Because I think they could appear that way. I try to keep unnece...

discussion questions

dot_Sp0T

12:34 PM

got a cool term for countries/peoples that live in free/trade cities situated between the civilized world, and the future colonies?

Mephistopheles

@dot_Sp0T >implying that the colonies aren't civilized?

Hosch250

@dot_Sp0T Outposters? Backwoodsmen?

Pioneers?

These would really only work if the cities have a couple hundred people or fewer.

dot_Sp0T

12:51 PM

@Mephistopheles indeed

@Hosch250 cities have couple 10k inhabitants, more like the stuff along the southern mediterranian

Hosch250

Oh, so it's full-size cities?

dot_Sp0T

yeah

Hosch250

Metropolitans?

dot_Sp0T

full size countries probably depending on definition

Mephistopheles

@dot_Sp0T Then what are those colonies like?

Hosch250

12:52 PM

I was thinking it was the cities between the "main" cities and the area of unknown.

dot_Sp0T

Basically the areas where cities exist that live from trade, etc. between the north( civilized) and further south (foreign cultures). The people in these places grow up with influences from both but also act like a border sort-of

e.g. like hong-kong was for trading with china, and so forth to prevent foreigners from entering china

Hosch250

Well, the borders can be wildly different depending on the situation.

Mephistopheles

@dot_Sp0T Bridgers it is?

dot_Sp0T

yeah, but bridgers sounds too important

i gues the main thing is the free tradezone stuff

Hosch250

The border of Scotland/England and US/Native Americans tended to encourage it's people to become extremely fierce and warlike because of the constant fighting.

Other borders flourished more as peaceful trading points.

People adapt to their situation fast, and show the adaptation even more a few generations in.

AngelPray

12:55 PM

Why couldn't you call them colonists?

dot_Sp0T

because they are not colonizing anything

they have already been there

Mephistopheles

@dot_Sp0T free trade zone stuff is important.

AngelPray

How long have they been there?

dot_Sp0T

I'm curr working on the structure of recruitment for troops from this area

in order to write a 5 sentence intro-heading for a new question that has nothing to do with these people aside from using one of them in the intro

call me productive

Secespitus

Does it need to be an English Name?

Hosch250

12:57 PM

Bandits?

Mephistopheles

For more context on what AngelPr said: descriptive names devolve over time into barely recognizable mispronounced forms that make grammar nazis cry.

dot_Sp0T

1:10 PM

@Secespitus not at all

@Mephistopheles I don't have time to evolve a term I am going to use in planning only

AngelPray

Borderlanders?

dot_Sp0T

callin them Grenzländler now

thanks

Secespitus

@dot_Sp0T I like to take a word and put it into google translator until something interesting comes up. For example "trader" in "Basque" yields "Dendari".

Or German, even more exotic :D

AngelPray

I was about to suggest Purlieurs, but yeah, Grenzländler is pretty cool.

Secret

academia.edu/226125/…

Getting hardcore

21st century magic

AngelPray

1:21 PM

"An Attempt at Dimensioning the Magician's Personality." They're kooky?

Secret

> Perhaps the unreasonable effectiveness of magic is mainly because almost everyone think it does not exists

> and this creates a notion of stealth as our best known tool, science, cannot reach them and liable to persecution

dot_Sp0T

@Secespitus call them Germans?

Hosch250

@AngelPray Did someone say "cookie"?

dot_Sp0T

no

Hosch250

Oh.

AngelPray

1:25 PM

Haha, nah.

Secret

> Magick is the Science and Art of causing Change to occur in conform-ity with Will

what if the will is subconscious, lol

then you never knew you casted magic

Also:

Orthodox, Paradox, heterodox, homodox,

but there is no metadox

dot_Sp0T

@Secespitus I called them Germans, but when I reopened the document they started demanding something called a Reichskristall?

AngelPray

If Andy was here, I'd ask him for his thoughts concerning another bit of political minutiae in my world, since he was surprisingly receptive and insightful the first time. But instead, I've been trying to find and read up on real-world situations that are similar to the one in my world. Unfortunately, not much luck.

Hosch250

You can run it by me if you want.

I may not be as insightful, but I can try to keep any un-receptiveness to myself :)

AngelPray

When, I said it's minutiae, I wasn't kidding, haha, but alright.

Hosch250

1:49 PM

"in the words of the immortal General Callus Tacticus" - I'm pretty sure he died. Probably of old age. You may have meant "in the immortal words of the General Callus Tacticus"? — AndyT 2 hours ago

@AndyT I was reading that book last month and he was still alive then. I lost the book, so he will never die. — Keeta 41 mins ago

AngelPray

@Hosch250 Sorry, this took me a little long to write up. And I'm especially sorry how convoluted it is, it's the best I could do.

So, there's country A and country B. Both monarchies.
At some point country, A conquers a large part of country B (let's call it region C) and incorporates it into its own territory.
Region C becomes part of country A. Later the monarchy of what remains of country B is overthrown.
The B royals flee to country A and interbreed with the A royals. As a couple centuries pass things don't go so well for country B.
Meanwhile country A is prospering.

At some point, a nationalist/neo-monarchical movement springs up within country B, as they contemplate the good ol' days back when territory C was part of country B and they had a monarchy (even though "those days" were pretty terrible).
So, there's both a big push to reestablish the monarchy and to reunify territory C and country B. Luckily as a result of A royals and B royals mingling the monarch of country A is also the "rightful" heir to country B.
Great! So in an ideal case scenario for these B nationalists B and C would reunify and the monarch would rule A and B in a Personal union. P…

So how could this situation be resolved.?

War.

...

No, I'm serious.

How!

1:58 PM

If what remains of B is serious enough about getting it back, and A doesn't just give C back, they will attack A.

A will be forced to defend itself, and will likely crush upstart B.

Basically like how the US Civil war started.

South said "this is our territory".

North did business as usual, resupplying forts, etc.

South attacked to kick the North out by force.

Didn't quite work out in the long run.

AngelPray

I'm confused how does that solve my problem?

Hosch250

Which problem? Keeping C as part of A?

Settling the differences between A and B?

AngelPray

So in the minds of B, they're thinking, oh yeah, let's go reclaim C by force.

Hosch250

Well, they'd probably start by diplomacy.

But A would probably just laugh at them because C has been part of them for so long

AngelPray

Right, but that's the part I don't get.

If B, by some miracle did manage to reclaim C by force.

What do they do then, ask politely that the A monarch comes rule them?

After they invaded his kingdom...?

Hosch250

2:03 PM

No. They'll have a "ruler" already picked to rally around before the fighting starts. Probably a distant cousin of the original B ruler who hasn't been "polluted" by A's blood.

They'd probably frame it as a "put the rightful ruler on the throne" war.

AngelPray

But, inter royal coupling happens all the time.

Kepotx

well, diferent succesison law

Hosch250

Yeah, just like England/France.

Technically, the English ruler was the rightful king of France in the 100 years war.

But someone else said "Let's keep a Frenchman on the throne", and they fought over it.

Kepotx

yup. France just made out of nothing "Loi Salique" so women can't inherit

so, the english pretendant couldn't pretend for France

Hosch250

Possibly this new "ruler" wouldn't even have that much power.

They might just be a puppet for the real top-pin.

AngelPray

2:06 PM

So... B would just invent a reason for why the A monarch isn't legitimate.

Hosch250

Probably.

Kepotx

depending on diferent interpretation of laws (lot of them were orals and vague), you can have several heir to the same throne, even if it's the same family now

you could have diferent heir for A and B

Hosch250

@Kepotx Yep. There were several English civil wars pitting cousins against each other.

Kepotx

another example with France: during a period of time, French Kings were also Nvarre King

they manage to delete "Roi de Navarre" title, but it could be diferent

AngelPray

Okay, what if tensions aren't that high. Is there any other solution? Some quirk or loophole that could satisfy everybody?

Kepotx

2:08 PM

in fact, Naverre kingdom succession law is made so woman can inherit, even if there is a male heir

France was totally diferent

so, if there was a case like, first born is a girl, second as a boy, there could be a split

the girl take the throne of Navarre, the boy the throne of France

you can have a similar thing with A and B

with one, single heir?

so no civil war or other thing to know who rule what?

Hosch250

If war isn't an answer, then there is always diplomacy.

If A is weak enough that they are concerned about B, they'd probably set up a puppet king over B.

Kepotx

And what stop king of A and B to make C part of B? A would revolt?

Hosch250

And technically give C back to B while essentially unifying A and B for the moment.

Because the laws wouldn't be that different, and (mostly) open trade would help solve the problems of C leaving A.

AngelPray

Something I should have probably mentioned earlier. Monarch A doesn't have much power as it is. Country A is a constitutional monarchy. He only a few actual powers. And country B has been a republic for quite some time.

They don't exactly want to set up an absolute monarchy.

Hosch250

At the end of the day, the laws are basically the same. "Don't murder; pay your taxes; worship God".

Or, if you want a relatively newish country, you can leave the "worship God" part out.

Kepotx

2:12 PM

even B?

Hosch250

Yeah, B would have essentially the same laws, especially since they would have grown up in A.

Kepotx

i can understand that A became a constitutional monarchy, with fewer power to king, but I have some problems with royalists who fight to make a constitutional monarchy

Hosch250

They'd probably model the laws after A.

@Kepotx England's laws didn't change that much for anybody but the nobility when the monarch lost their power.

AngelPray

Why couldn't royalists fight to make a constitutional monarchy?

Kepotx

well, a monarch can rule on both in a constitutional monarchy and an absolute monarchy

Hosch250

2:14 PM

Basically, the royalists say "we want to work with Joe instead of John".

AngelPray

To be clear, I don't mean like a modern constitutional monarchy. No, my king still does have a few key powers.

And a lot of politics revolves around the court and such.

Hosch250

They set Joe up as king, but then Joe gives them the same role in the government they had in B.

Or maybe even more power as a reward for supporting him.

So B could end up with the monarch having even less power than A has.

Even though he's the king, he allows them to have that role, and later, they just won't give it up because people like power.

AngelPray

This has gotten so confusing.

Hosch250

LOL, this stuff is confusing.

It's all about who has power and who wants power.

AngelPray

Yeah... But I knew that, but now I'm seriously lost.

Kepotx

2:16 PM

@AngelPray well, at least in france, those who call themselves are willing to give really lot of power to the king

but you could still have a revolution with more or less moderate royalists

AngelPray

A revolution?

Jeez, who's revolting now?

Hosch250

Ping me in 8 hours, and I'll draw some diagrams.

Kepotx

"
At some point, a nationalist/neo-monarchical movement springs up within country B, as they contemplate the good ol' days back when territory C was part of country B and they had a monarchy (even though "those days" were pretty terrible).
So, there's both a big push to reestablish the monarchy and to reunify territory C and country B. Luckily as a result of A royals and B royals mingling the monarch of country A is also the "rightful" heir to country B. "

though it was by force

AngelPray

Huh?

I'm really sorry, I'm slow.

Kepotx

but yeah, as it's a republic, it could be without a revolution

AngelPray

2:19 PM

So a revolution to reestablish the monarchy?

That's new...

Has that ever happened before?

Lol...

France.

France

Hmm, okay.

basically every possible stuff happen in France ^^

Hosch250

There were swings both ways after the first revolution.

Almost the US.

AngelPray

2:20 PM

Could I maybe provide you some information to narrow my options?

Hosch250

There were those who wanted to make Washington a king.

AngelPray

Because so far I have war... Which doesn't seem like it would work?

Or a puppet king...

Which also doesn't seem like it would work too well...

Hosch250

Well, the most important part is who ends up controlling C.

AngelPray

As why would a population who's trying to get a king who's mainly a symbol back on the thrown be satisfied with anything less than the actual king who's the heir.

Okay, let's say there wasn't the issue with C.

Let's say A and B do join into a personal union.

How could that develop into a real union?

Who would that even benefit?

Hosch250

Regular intermarriage.

AngelPray

2:24 PM

Hmm?

Between who?

Hosch250

One family has reproductive issues and slowly dies.

Between A and B.

AngelPray

But they already did that.

Preemptive intermarriage.

They did that back when B royals were overthrown.

Hosch250

Yes. At the end of the day, B's last remaining king wills the kingdom to A's son.

Then A's son becomes ruler of B, and when A dies, they become ruler of A too.

AngelPray

Okay, let's say the queen/king of B is overthrown.

Hosch250

There will likely be some disturbances, maybe a small civil war, if a powerful enough group think they should've gotten the throne.

AngelPray

2:26 PM

She/he goes over a mates with A's king.

Their first born is thus the heir to A and B, right?

Hosch250

But a generation in, nobody cares.

@AngelPray Not necessarily.

AngelPray

Why not?

Hosch250

Because she might not be the official queen of A.

AngelPray

Huh?

Okay, let's say she is.

It's a legitimate affair.

Hosch250

Queens are married to the king :)

AngelPray

2:27 PM

...

You mean the king of B, right.

Hosch250

And if they were legally married, then the marriage would also have been the union ceremony.

OK, I'll back up.

AngelPray

Well yes, but no, because B at that time just overthrow their monarchy and don't care if A and B joined.

Hosch250

The queen of B has a child with the king of A?

AngelPray

Yes.

Hosch250

Meanwhile, she's not the ruling queen of B because B was just overthrown.

AngelPray

2:29 PM

That's right.

She used to be reigning monarch of B but isn't anymore.

Well... she is in the sense that she's the rightful ruler, but B just overthrough her so...

You get what I mean right?

Hosch250

Now, unless that queen is formally married to the king of A with all the proper ceremonies, her child isn't the heir to A (unless you take the Turkish style of succession, where the one who has the most support wins, and illegitimate children have full succession rights).

Yes.

AngelPray

Proper ceremonies?

Hosch250

In European style monarchies, her child would not be the heir to A's throne, even if it's older than the first son of the official queen of A.

AngelPray

Yes, it's an official marriage.

Hosch250

OK.

AngelPray

2:31 PM

King A was unmarried and the married queen B.

Hosch250

OK, in that case, A and B are now unified.

AngelPray

Well no, they aren't because B doesn't care about that.

Hosch250

Well, here's how this would go:

AngelPray

When king A dies and the heir becomes king, he can shout all he likes that he's also the heir to B but they won't care.

Hosch250

A would be king of A. B would be queen of B. Their child would be king of A and B.

In title only.

AngelPray

2:32 PM

Yes, that's right.

Hosch250

Actually taking power would be a different case, and might lead to war.

AngelPray

Right.

Hosch250

Which is basically what happened with England/France.

The royal families married.

The heir said they were ruler of France, and France said "Oh yeah, come and take the throne if you can."

There was a war, and France eventually won.

AngelPray

Well actually in my narrative that's why Queen B and king A married. Queen B knew she'd need King A armies to reclaim country B for her heir.

Hosch250

Alternatively, England could have won, and they did have the upper hand for a while.

AngelPray

2:34 PM

But unfortunately, that conquest doesn't happen.

As country B was conquered by another country.

But that's besides the point.

Hosch250

So, now we have the king of A and B, who only rules A.

AngelPray

Yes.

Hosch250

Meanwhile, E invaded and captured B.

AngelPray

Temporarily, yes.

Hosch250

E probably already defeated the combined armies of B and A.

Or defeated B, then defeated A when A tried to use the opportunity to take control.

A wouldn't let E come in on "their" territory without a fight.

AngelPray

2:36 PM

Why are those the only options.

Hosch250

And B probably would be happy for the help.

They aren't.

Maybe A couldn't fight them at the moment because they were weak.

So maybe E just defeated B.

So now what happens? Does E get pushed back again?

AngelPray

In my narrative A simply never conquers B because A is trying to maintain a truce with E.

Hosch250

OK, that works.

AngelPray

A delicate truce.

Hosch250

So AB controls A and E controls B.

AngelPray

2:37 PM

Yes.

Hosch250

BBIAB.

Sorry.

AngelPray

Wut?

Let's not get I involved in this, lol, already confusing as it is.

Hosch250

2:51 PM

OK, back for 10 minutes.

AngelPray

Sure.

Hosch250

So, what happens next?

Does B revolt and throw E out, or does E retreat, or what?

AngelPray

E collapses pretty much.

Hosch250

OK.

AngelPray

So yeah, B "revolts" not that there's much to revolt against.

Hosch250

2:52 PM

So you have a better chance of a peaceful solution then.

AngelPray

But by that time A is really, really interested in conquering far away colonies.

Hosch250

If B had revolted and kicked E out by force, they'd be more likely to feel strong enough to take on A.

So AB at this point isn't interested in B anymore?

AngelPray

Well there interested, it's just they're far more interested in subjugating foreign savages.

Uh... I mean liberating them from savagery.

You know, white man's burden.

Also A's burden to steal their resources.

Hosch250

So AB is happy to just go back to A (+ C from original B). B can be B still.

Where AB is the guy who's heir to A and B.

AngelPray

Yeah.

So A colonizes a bunch. They were already quite a large country, now they're a large empire.

Competing with other large empires.

Not going to waste resources on B.

Hosch250

2:56 PM

At this point, B would probably ask someone who was at the court of either A or E to come be their king.

AngelPray

Some random person at the court?

And why E?

E is a foreign power.

Don't have much in common with B.

Hosch250

Because E took the remaining heirs to B who weren't captured by A.

Just to help prevent an uprising behind an "heir".

AngelPray

Huh?

Sorry, I'm confused.

Hosch250

So, nobility almost always ends up at someone's court.

AngelPray

Sure, makes sense.

Hosch250

2:58 PM

Either it's their court, or they were captured by a foreign nation and taken to that country's court.

They do this to A) keep these guys out of the way so they can do what they want with their country.

And B) so these guys kids can be educated to be good citizens of the conqueror.

AngelPray

Okay...

Hosch250

So when you want to find a king, you trace the genealogical line and find someone.

AngelPray

Sure and for B, that would be AB.

Hosch250

They will probably be at either AB's court or E's court.

Transcript for