Why are city-states more popular than kingdoms and empires in fantasy?

>>53233585
They are the "badass specialsnowflake merk archtype" of nations compared to faggy kingdoms.

>>53233585
Easy way to center all the action without having to bother with traveling a whole bunch.

>>53233585
>Why are city-states more popular than kingdoms and empires in fantasy?
They are?

They are?

>>53233585
You can cram a whole lot of different city states into a relatively small area, but if you want to have competing empires or kingdoms you're looking at writing out a whole continent at least.

>>53233737
Basically this. It's easier to have a variety of locations with different cultures in a smaller area (because obviously any two cities in the same kingdom are basically identical).

>>53233585
They aren't? Most fantasy functions by the "kingdom good, empire bad" construction, barely even mentioning city states.

>>53233585
I think it pretty much boils down to >>53233737

If you want a lot of different factions, it's easier to have them all just be individual cities. If you don't and just want things on a big scale, you do >>53234174 and just have two main factions and everything is associated with one or the other.

>>53233585
Because D&D shapes most people's view on Fantasy and D&D is closest to the Iron Age in all ways except RenFair technology and superficial social melange.

>>53233649
>>53233657
This, city states are rare.
Even something like Neverwinter and Luskar is described as Kingdoms without vassal cities.

File: Wilderlands-of-High-Fantasy-large.jpg (180KB, 467x600px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 467x600px

City-states instead of kingdoms or empires implies a true lawless land, genuine chaos and darkness and wilderness, wherein as soon as you step outside the city walls you could get gangraped by about three different groups. There'll be a great deal more space for adventure.

The prevalence of city-states, and near-total lack of anything resembling kingdoms, is one of the reasons why Wilderlands of High Fantasy is the best campaign setting in existence.

>>53234212
Huh? I connect Iron age with empires like the romans or the parthians

>>53233585
Because city states are more common historically? Kingdoms were mostly just collections of city states confederated by marriages

>>53233585
scale

>>53234341
unless your setting is based in antiquity/fake italy this is just blatantly wrong

>>53234229
City-states can also be kingdoms.

>>53233585
Less for the creator to have to flesh out. Kingdoms and empires will have hundreds of rinky dink villages, dozens of dialect or languages, and more claimants to the throne than anything.

City States lets you have "your guys" and just make everyone else an enemy.

>>53234563
A kingdom can be made out of several city states.
But a city state in itself, is a city state because it doesn't own other states.

>>53234275
Sell me on it you nerd.

>>53234497
I think they also might be thinking of the situation in the Germanies for some time, although saying the various "states with electors and a king/emperor" were "just a collection" is both true and not true.

Yeah, they had a lot of independence, but they were also definitely locked into their system pretty hard.

Of course, so were a lot of noble sub-domains in more solidly established kingdoms, too. Most nobles were the boss of themselves most of the time whether or not they had feudal obligations, and had a fair amount of rights too.

>>53234275
>>53234702
This.

Better yet give us a pdf so we can evaluate it ourselves.

For your standard sword and sorcery setting you need a less cohesive government, and a real wilderness. A big well organized empire can fuck up your average band of goblins on a weekly basis easily, which removes some of the room for adventurers.

File: random ruins.png (425KB, 976x2191px) Image search: [Google]

425KB, 976x2191px

>>53234702
>>53234913
It's a true child of the seventies: a setting from the times when fantasy and scifi were not two distinct genres but rather shared the same niche. Pulp is strong in this one.

It's got muscular barbarians and buxom slave girls. Cavemen, amazons, smilodons, and dinosaurs. Evil sorcerers and priests of dark gods. Vikings and pirates.

There's a war between a city of pirates and a city of wizards. Another wizard tower-city stands up in the far north. There's a Lost World area of thick woodlands and mountains full of extinct creatures. There's many a sea full of lost islands. Not a jungle without a whole lot of ruins in it - the pdf has a whole table for creating ruins and other shit you stumble into on the road.

The two biggest city-states in the setting are literally called "The City-State Of The Invincible Overlord" and "The City-State Of The World Emperor". The former is built on alien ruins. The latter (also known more boringly as Viridistan) is ruled by an ancient dark sorcerer who once summoned Demogorgon to deal with an enemy army.

Regular villages have names like Woe, Doom, and Smite.

I mentioned some aliens above. There was a whole prehistoric war between two alien empires once, and their ruins and wreckages still litter the land. You could find a raygun and shoot some motherfuckers with it.

And then of course there's the single greatest adventure module ever made - Dark Tower, in which you take sides in a war between the good and evil gods, and get to fight demonspawn and a lich, and a body-hopping wizard that's crazy enough to cast Fireball with himself in the blast radius.

File: Dark Tower.pdf (4MB, 1x1px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1x1px

>>53234913
>Better yet give us a pdf so we can evaluate it ourselves.

Unfortunately it's too big to throw in here, but I'll try to upload Dark Tower, or at least one of the campaign maps.

>>53233585

Not many GM or players know the intricancies of aristocratic ranks. How many players can answer the question of who is higher: Dukes or Counts?

>>53235094
Mega then?

>>53235253
Always bet on the Duke.

Condensing all the interesting bits of a culture or people into a single place is more narratively expediant than big kingdoms 90% of the time

>>53235291
Check out the OSR trove: http://pastebin.com/QWyBuJxd

Supplements --> Judge's Guild --> Judge's Guild d20

(I know you may not like the edition, but the d20 setting book is the clearest and easiest to figure out.)

>>53235253
This. I hate ignoramuses.
>>53235304
Top kek, the best part is you are right.

>>53234671
What is a city-state ruled by a king, anon?

>>53235426
I know I'm right, I gave a silly answer because it seems silly. I don't know who you play with, but I think most people would know the truth. Failing that, a lore (nobility) roll isn't that hard to make.

>>53234212
what the christ are you talking about?

>>53235352
Thanks man. Didn't expect OSR general to keep around a 3.5 book. Never would have thought to look there.

>>53235253
Well it's not hard and fast. You might for example have a setting where, while a duke is next best thing to a king, a count is a foreign title that doesn't fit neatly into your ranking system. Now maybe from the duke's travels on the continent he's acquainted with counts and reckons they're usually accorded the prestige due to earls in his own country, but you never know for certain, and maybe the GM pulls a fast one on your and you're somewhere altogether more fantastical where being a count means being a peer of an emperor.

>>53234275
>Cities have no control over the land one foot away from their border

What the fuck are you on about?

>>53234275
>wherein as soon as you step outside the city walls you could get gangraped by about three different groups

I suppose that's theoretically possible, if you're a breathless debutante who's managed to shake off her escort in her haste to get raped by the first peasants, brigands or gypsies she encounters.

>>53235607
>>53235653
I was making a comedic exaggeration, you autists.

>>53235575
I would hate to play there because my prior knowledge would clash with whatever the retarded DM is trying to pull.

If you want a new set of kingdom hierarchy just take a different cultures name, your way sounds already confusing. Or if you really want to change shit up, use irrelevant names for it. Like replace King with Gandhi, Duke with Churchill, etc. So it's at least easily recognizable.
>The Gandhi invites you to the ceremony

File: a495b5d27d099ccbb82bb0bb1ee14a15[1].jpg (53KB, 557x719px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 557x719px

>>53235253
>Not many GM or players know the intricancies of aristocratic ranks
It's something you can easily google. Go to google images and you can even get a handy-dandy flowchart. Hell, a well-designed TTRPG handbook can even dedicate a page to something like pic related.

File: Frida Mofette 04.png (739KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

739KB, 1280x720px

They're not. Most fantasy is as has already been stated ITT by other posters.

Now, if you were going for a time period starting with the neolithic and ending right before the Roman Kingdom, then you'd see more than a few city-states.

Maybe a Neandertal confederacy of cave-villages finds itself being approached by traders from some southern city-state they can't even conceptualize. Maybe there's a pentarchy of city-states that's beginning to see a fusion into a legit empire - if only those pesky dog-riders would piss off and let the nobility consolidate their power! Maybe the local hunter-gatherer bands of Homo ergaster happen upon the world's first city, where people with actual foreheads are busy "taming" ergasters that got too close...

File: Monkey Wizard.png (224KB, 842x809px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 842x809px

>>53235881
Does a grand princess weigh as much as a thousand princesses?

>>53235467
Sparta.

>>53233585
They're smaller and thus both politically simpler and more accessible to individual hero/protagonist characters.

>>53235467
>a king
>>53236206
>Sparta.
Try again

>>53235810
That's even worse the players are just going to bring in their preconceptions of the relationship between Gandhi and Churchill!

>The King officially wields no power, but the Duke dare not move against him because of the popular support he commands

>>53235253
That's not really intricate. I'm pretty sure everyone knows it at least to the CK2 level.

>>53235467
Early Rome.

>>53233585
They're not, not even close

>>53235253
Whichever has more money and swords

>>53236254
The Tyrants were basically kings, anon.

I dunno if I'd say city-states are more popular than kingdoms or empires. They each serve their own purpose. In the past if a group hasn't wanted a huge "globe-trotting" campaign, I've used a single city-state as a hub where they'd pick up quests from the local adventurer's guild, leave on their quest, and come back to the city-state when they're done. That's also a great way to build up interesting NPCs like shopkeepers, politicians, priests, and such that the players can interact with.

>>53233585
Allows for a lot of variation in a comparatively small geographical region.
Also, in terms of roleplaying games like D&D where PCs are generally mercenaries-for-hire it allows for a lot of stories generated from tension between local city-states á la Italian Condottieri

>>53233585
City-states are objectively better than kingdoms, so why be bothered?

Kingdoms are almost always too much for a player to really soak in, so they only really care about the capital city, and treat every other city or town as something unconnected, so why not make it so? Every town being an independent city-state makes it work for players, who can't tell the difference between a city a mile from the capital or 100 miles away, or even a city of a different kingdom.

Italian Renaissance city-states style > Holy Roman Empire style

>>53233585
Because underdogs or someshit.

>>53237283
They're not underdogs if everyone is equally shit.

File: Frida Mofette 05.png (746KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

746KB, 1280x720px

I should put together a 2-page pdf or some shit that lets the reader roll a completely random city-state. Each specific trait/quality/factor would get its own die.

d4 for current status (empty, thriving, etc.), d8 for staple crop, so on and so forth.

>>53234447
This

>>53234581
So in other words creators are lazy.

File: 1459614639180.png (4MB, 3715x3966px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3715x3966px

>>53237269
>Italian Renaissance city-states style > Holy Roman Empire style
Have you never opened a history book? Are you by any change American? Take a look at the picture, the HRE consisted of a billion independent micro states

>>53237269
>Kingdoms are almost always too much for a player to really soak in
this is sad desu. I want to incorporate a old aristocracy of the capital vs the new landed magnates finding riches conquering the east independent of the capital dynamic so bad.

>>53237987
>"""""""""""""""Empire"""""""""""""""

>>53234275
>City-states instead of kingdoms or empires implies a true lawless land, genuine chaos and darkness and wilderness, wherein as soon as you step outside the city walls you could get gangraped by about three different groups.
So how does the city feed themselves if they don't control any land outside the city walls? You can have crops inside but they won't be enough, it's supposed to be a city so it has huge population. No trade caravans can get to the city because in the surrounding area there's utter chaos. So no food by trading.

>>53238145
A city state doesn't necessarily have to bee 100% urban.

>>53238174
Yes I said so, but it's not going to be enough to feed the population. Unless there are only ten buildings which pretty much makes it a hamlet surrounded by walls and not a city.

>>53238349
>Yes I said so,
You didn't.. You implied that controlling land outside the city walls disqualify it as a city state, which it wont. Now that I re-read your post you also imply that a city has to have a massive population, when in fact the word city doesn't have an all encompassing definition and being a city doesn't warrant a huge population. (I.E I live in a city by my own country's standards, because my city was given trading rights back in the medieval period thus making it a city. My city only has 40k people though, and doesn't fit the EU definition of a city)

You can have a city state that controls enough arable land to sustain itself, hell you can have a city that has farmlands inside their walls. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anastasian_Wall)

Also fish exist.

>>53238415
>You can have a city state that controls enough arable land to sustain itself
And by this I mean (in the outside the walls is unsafe) is that the arable land is in safe spaces, I.E inside the walls or protected by geography. The city for example gets its food from a safe valley protected by mountains. The "how they get their food" doesn't disqualify the "bad things behind the walls" thing, it makes its much more interesting.

>>53238511
Or the city is near the coast that is an archipelago, and the food is farmed on thousands of small islands where the monsters can't get.

>>53238415
>You didn't.. You implied that controlling land outside the city walls disqualify it as a city state, which it wont.
The guy to whom I originally replied said that the moment you step outside the city walls you could get gangraped so any land the city owned can't be accessed anymore. I never implied what you're saying.
>Now that I re-read your post you also imply that a city has to have a massive population
I never implied that. A city of ten thousand is still big in medieval settings and requires a lot of farmland if trade is out of the question.
>You can have a city state that controls enough arable land to sustain itself, hell you can have a city that has farmlands inside their walls. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anastasian_Wall)
Cities like Constantinople were rare. This guy talks about about a bunch of cities states being close together so they're not going to be all versions of Constantinople situated in peninsulas that can be easily defended. Not to mention how the hell are you going to man all these walls if you're in a state of constant war. You would need the entire population to protect these walls (and patrol the surrounding sea with boats in case of Constantinople
>Also fish exist.
The same problem with crops. They're not going to be enough. I assume in his scenario there are water monsters and pirates so you can't sail that far away from the city.

>>53235881
>Contains "Archduke"

T. Hapsburg trash.

File: 1492145086363.jpg (40KB, 657x527px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 657x527px

>>53233585
>City-states are top tech, mercenary land of opportunity with noble houses fighting each other for art, technology and armies.
>Empires are evil, corrupt and stagnant. Usually shadows of a former greater empire.
>Kingdoms are alright and just want to be left alone and let its people be happy without outside interference.

>>53237362
The small look up on the normal sized as giants and see them as wrong.

So they are the underdogs to people that normally enjoy underdogs?

>>53238511
>>53238572
That could work but it's not what >>53234275
describes at all.

Here's a suggestion: Scrap the cities states and instead create small "colonies". At the area the game is set recently gold or some other precious material was found and so a lot of prospectors, adventurers, thugs and tradesmen started moving in and creating these little colonies in these uninhabited land. Maybe the nearby kingdoms sent some guards and officials to bring law but they had no success. The area is also home to many vicious monsters which frequently attack the colonists prompting them to build palisades around their villages. Chaos ensures over land claims that supposedly have gold with different factions fighting over them.

So there you go, you have lawless small colonies, genuine chaos and darkness and wildreness. There's a lot of adventure and it makes sense for your party to be there. And because the population is small it is possible to provide food just by hunting and fishing. You can make a very interesting world out of all this

>>53235253
Nigga I play ck2.

Monarchist for life.

>>53235467
A city state anon.
Monarchy doesn't change that.
You can even have a merchant city state, it doesn't change that its a city state.

>>53237850
It's not just a matter of laziness. Laziness may be one factor, but having a thorough understanding of your skill level and knowing your limits isn't a bad thing. Even though you can put more work into developing your setting, it becomes exponentially more difficult to make your setting interesting and get your readers to buy into it the more complicated you get.

File: Sarum_yeoldancientcity.jpg (2MB, 2365x1536px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2365x1536px

>>53238145
Because the "darkness" is concentrated in trade routes, migration routes, and valleys between spheres of control.

A city state might control everything in its valley, and some connected valleys/coastlines. But since it doesn't control all the land, there is lots of space between city states that is unsettled.
Meanwhile in a Kingdom, there is reasons to aggressive settling of the inland, build out infrastructure.
For city states, something similar would take massive effort and agreements, to even clear a trade route.

>>53237529
Do it! Make shit happen!

File: 1481035510378.jpg (2KB, 125x105px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 125x105px

>>53239407
>he hasn't achieved Tolkien level world-building

Are city-states dependent on mercenaries or could they maintain their own armiea?

File: Frida Mofette 03.jpg (550KB, 1275x1650px) Image search: [Google]

550KB, 1275x1650px

>>53239712
Oh, I will.

Just not tonight, though, kinda played Stellaris for too long. I'll get at it tomorrow, plenty of time after work.

>>53239687
That's not really an issue of political structure though. A city-state has an economic incentive to control and develop territory just like a kingdom does. The city-states of Greece/Phoenicia, early Rome/Carthage, Cahokia, Toltlan, and arguably early (like pre-Sargon) Mesopotamia may all fit the points of light aesthetic. But think also about the early kingdoms in Scandinavia, Poland, and Lithuania. PoL is not even nearly exclusive to city-states. It's an economic thing rather than a political one. Consider also the reign of Sargon, who united the top and bottom of the Tigris and Euphrates. He was bragging about the trade routes that his empire formed. How can that be something worth bragging over unless the wilderness remains unpacified?

File: 5978634+_213e203a54bf97fb54a962eda09e421a[1].png (189KB, 500x343px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 500x343px

>>53239338
>Monarchist for life.
I'm genuinely torn between posting a picture of Robespierre and making a joke about a guillotine, or posting a picture of a Roman and calling you a pleb. Your political system of choice is so shit, I genuinely can't choose between the various methods of tearing it a new one. Even when resorting to jokes rather than arguments the available options are way too numerous. My point is that you're a homosexual and your mother has questionable sexual morals.

>>53239798
Sparta was famous for her armies. So was Athens; less so but she also didn't orient her entire society around producing soldiers.

>>53239948
Not him, but there's something to be said for having a ruler who is trained from birth to rule and who has no real requirement to deal with special interests. A well-trained leader with no concerns but leading is a lot better than the corruption inherent to democracy.

File: 1375936419300.png (247KB, 760x572px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 760x572px

>>53239948
How about you give us an argument about why Monarchy is so bad?

>>53239948
>he fell for the democracy meme

>>53233585
Rule of cool

>>53240009
realism>rule of cool

>>53240039
In what scenarios? Do you have any proof that realism is always better in ALL circumstances over rule of cool?

>>53239948
Poster you responded to.

I stated my ideology. You seem to be having a nice meme over there on my particular belief. If you'd like to debate it, let's take it to /pol/.

>>53239990
>but there's something to be said for having a ruler who is trained from birth
There are so many examples that prove this wrong. Just think of all the inbred kings who ended up literal drooling retards or having 20 seizures a day, or the child kings that left their kingdoms entirely crippled due to being too young to even act (if I'm not mistaken a large part of why Scotland eventually became part of the UK is because after the death of James IV the throne passed to his infant son and Scotland eventually become diplomatically isolated and sidelined). And then there are the monarchs who weren't retarded but just indifferent, those who were born to the throne but would rather do anything but rule.

>who has no real requirements to deal with special interests
Yeah, that's the big advantage of lifelong rulers, I'll grant you that. Then again, that also means they have zero responsibility to their subjects and only a formal responsibility to God.

>>53239994
I implied my gripes earlier: leaders are chosen by birth rather than by merit, which can lead to questionable leaders you cannot get rid of.

>>53239997
Democracy in its modern sense is retarded though, and pretty much every classical liberal political thinker tried to limit democracy (point out that the Federalist Papers has an entire chapter titled "limiting democracy" to any modern day American and 'ave a nice giggle). Rousseau was probably the most generous in handing out voting rights (desiring egalitarianism before the law) and even he envisioned a Roman style system of citizen-soldiers.

>>53234497
Or the preroman levant, or pre dynastic china, or most of southeast asia, or india, or pre-mongolian russia, or a number of other historical periods.

>>53240086
>leaders are chosen by birth rather than by merit
So what system do you follow? Surely it can't be democracy with that mindset.

>>53235881
The only difference between a king and an emperor is that they chose to call themselves that. The only reason that emperor and king are two different titles is because the Romans didnt want to admit they'd gone back to what was essentially hereditary monarchy. Prior to napolion, emperor was identical to king but with an added sprinkle of claim to roman heritage.

>>53240127
>pre-mongolian russia

Kievan Rus was hardly a city-state.

>>53240086
While you bring up some good points, I must correct you that the reason why Scotland became a part of the United Kingdom had to do with James VI inheriting the throne after Elizabeth I died without heir.
The part about Inbreeding fucking up kingdoms is correct. Spain got fucked in the 18th century because of that shit when the last Habsburg monarch, Charles II ended up a total retard after the generations of inbreeding among the Spanish Habsburgs and Spain never really recovered in power after that.

File: 1403909325100.gif (2MB, 1067x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1067x720px

>>53240151
There's nothing wrong with that after introducing conscription, eliminating female suffrage and erasing the option for first generation immigrants to become full citizens

>>53240086
>Just think of all the inbred kings who ended up literal drooling retards or having 20 seizures a day, or the child kings that left their kingdoms entirely crippled due to being too young to even act
Well, no system's perfect. But it worked well in Europe for a thousand years and is working better than the alternatives right now in Africa and the middle east. And Bhutan I suppose.

>Then again, that also means they have zero responsibility to their subjects
Yeah, but without political obligations to the contrary, they're left to be human, and humans fundamentally tend to be good, especially towards their own people.

>which can lead to questionable leaders you cannot get rid of.
So in other words, the ideal government would be a monarchy but with a procedure for impeachment?

>>53240188
While that solve a lot of issues, it's still not the Final Solution. As the candidates are still chosen due to populism, and not merit.

>>53240066
>rule of cool
That's for manchildren that want to play in a high fantasy setting as puffed up barbarians dual wielding huge spiked double bitted battle axes. Realism is always makes everything more interesting and intricate

>>53235881
>doesn't even include baronet
trash chart

>>53240159
The thing is, all titles are LITERALLY social constructs.

If you choose to call yourself an Emperor, in the west that directly means you consider your land akin to the Roman Empire in both greatness and size. So the title of emperor is actually bigger than a king, because every medieval and western king wished in their sleep to become as great as the roman empire. Thus, in a hierarchy Emperor is above king.

Also in Asia emperors are literally sons of god, while kings are just trash.

>>53240213
In what ways does it though? Is there anything wrong with the goofy half-naked barbarians with double-bitted axes?

>>53235881
>doesn't include margrave
rubbish chart

>>53240265
Yes it's not realistic.

>>53240203
>But it worked well in Europe for a thousand years
To be fair, that was mostly for the period where Roman (faux-)Republican rule had collapsed, until it returned once more.

>Africa and the middle east
You mean the default mode of governance is despotism in regions that have never known rule of law? Shocker.

>humans fundamentally tend to be good
Kek.

>So in other words, the ideal government would be a monarchy but with a procedure for impeachment?
I guess, and some delegation of power to other institutions so the monarch can't randomly overturn any impeachment because he controls everything. That's basically a republic without term limits, allowing for a potential FDR to become de facto "king".

>>53240289
It is obvious that I am being baited, but I wish to know why it's so bad for something to be unrealistic?

>>53240265
The goofy barbarian can fit in a realistic setting(while him being unrealistic per se). High fantasy belongs in the trash.

I'm not even that guy by the way, you are just being retarded and you should stop. things are bad and you should grow up sometime. Ask your dad what he prefers a magical realm or historical stuff. He is a grown up, unlike you.

>>53233585
City states are actually pretty rare in fantasy. Writers like to sweep up entire regions into one empire or another.

>>53240308
>why it's so bad for something to be unrealistic?
Because autists on a cambodian water painting board will make fun of you

>>53240345
You're right. I should seek the approval of Tanzanian drumming boards on all matters.

>>53240311
Could you tell me why high fantasy belongs in the trash then? If it's fine for there to be artistic license with the Conan-style barbarians, where must the line be drawn?

>>53240406
>where must the line be drawn?
When the setting goes full autistic children play.

>>53240422
Then could you define full autistic children's play?

File: Summon+the+elector+counts+_d7043f1af1a1008967b70e5db2105579[1].jpg (259KB, 994x916px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 994x916px

>>53233737
>>53233765
>>53234211
>not having a single empire or kingdom but with semi-autonomous regions ruled by various petty nobles with different cultures or agendas

SUMMON
THE
ELECTOR COUNTS

>>53240433
It was already defined by the other anon.

Also failing to recognize social cues means you have severe autism, not even regular one. Seek help manchild.

>>53240291
>mostly for the period where Roman (faux-)Republican rule had collapsed, until it returned once more
Nigga it was a thousand fucking years. That's not a gap in between something. How old are you? Figure out how many of your lifespans it would take to make a thousand fucking years. That's not just a break in between some otherwise continuous tradition.

>You mean the default mode of governance is despotism in regions that have never known rule of law?
Not despotism, monarchy. Compare the actual monarchs to non-hereditary dictators. The monarchies are more stable and better for the common man across the fucking board.

>Kek
If nothing else, humans tend to be fundamentally self-interested, and hence the "their own people" bit.

>That's basically a republic without term limits
If you get abstract enough, everything is a variation of everything else anyway. Doesn't change that a hereditary elite ruler who is trained to rule is better than a demagogue whose power is based on fellating populism.

File: Tower knight.jpg (148KB, 1400x753px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 1400x753px

>>53240213
I disagree.
But whatever dude.
You do you.
It's your setting.

>>53240458
But it wasn't, retard. Tell me what your definition of "autistic children's play" is, because the other anon gave no such definition.

>>53240509
he did though, look it up

>>53240521
Then what was the definition?

File: Viking_Bearded_War_Axe-Socketed_Spearhead[1].jpg (17KB, 589x179px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 589x179px

ANON IS RIGHT, BARBARIANS WITH DOUBLE BITTED AXES ARE SHIT

BEARDED AXES AND SPEARS ARE WHERE IT'S AT

>>53240521
>>53240509
How about this my dudes.
We could accept that people like different things and that it's counterproductive to the community to argue with eachother.
Doesn't that sound great?

File: 1364419764428.gif (3MB, 352x288px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 352x288px

>>53240564
Where the FUCK do you think you are?

>>53240564
You do realise where you are, don't you?

>>53240564
That sounds exceedingly reasonable. That cannot be permitted on this Bangladeshi whittling forum.

>>53237987
>Imperial Immediacy
>Independent
Only after Peace of Westphalia

File: Should+ve+killed+him+on+sight+like+any+normal+good+player+_b816bf9200216ffbc960947ae16482b1.jpg (28KB, 326x217px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 326x217px

>>53240589
Oh.
It's like that then.

>>53240599
>
>
>

File: 1477244684860[1].png (730KB, 742x566px) Image search: [Google]

730KB, 742x566px

>>53240564
SUMMON

Hey guys.
Absolutely anything

File: Brain Holy Roman Empire.png (1MB, 857x1202px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 857x1202px

>>53240615

>>53240644
>that 4th reich picture

a fucking skinhead doing meth in a bathtub would be more accurate but it still made me kek

>>53240635
FUCK YOU

>>53240644
The only reason the EU is getting so many refugees is because America keeps fucking up middle east

>>53240669
>not understanding the truth behind the Merkelreich
I bet you still think that the U.N. is legitimate.

>>53240684
No, FUCK YOU!

>>53240669
What do you mean? Germany controls Europe. Merkel's tyranny will never stop.

Was Venice a city state

>>53240698
>america

Yeah cause Russia and the rest of Europe toootally had nothing to do with it

Don't get me wrong, the CIA are basically wizards NO SENSE OF RIGHT AND WRONG and american foreign policy was asshole casserole for like 50 years. It was all done with the tacit consent and approval of our NATO allies though, and in reaction to Russia doing it's own thing.

All of us together made the Middle East a shithole full of shitty people trapped in the 1800s.

>>53233585
I think the "points of light" style was popular back in the day (and therefore currently) as it allowed for civilization and rugged frontier to co-exist relatively close together.

The wild wild west with the exotic past times of Paris intermingled to create a singularly more interesting experience that either alone.

>>53240741

The middle east has been shitty since Rome despite muslims and other invalids trying to blame it all on the west

>>53240741
>implying NATO members wont do anything america commands them to do
And Russia is only protecting their ally from us sponsored rebels

>>53240793
>what is Islamic Golden Age

>>53240826

A meme

File: 1471019820897.jpg (82KB, 736x912px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 736x912px

>>53240479
i fucking love this artist

File: 1364151953481.jpg (155KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 900x900px

>>53240819
>Russia is only protecting their ally from us sponsored rebels

>>53240741
The ME has been shitty since the 700s

For a writer, it means you only need to create a much smaller stage. By comparison, JRRMartin exemplifies the gargantuan stage.

A kingdom creates more sources for new players, but then you start needing a playbill.

>>53240454
I feel invaded by how accurately this describes my homebrew setting.

>>53233585
Easier to write than fleshing out a whole kingdom.

>>53240213
>Realism is always makes everything more interesting
>puffed up barbarians dual wielding huge spiked double bitted battle axes
You contradict yourself.

>>53242257
??

that sounds like shit

File: Maybe in opposite land.png (320KB, 900x544px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 900x544px

>>53242272

>>53243194
Saw you from the frontpage. I read >>53242257
>>53242272
>>53243194
And based on that, he is right. That does indeed sounds like shit.

I ain't clicking your thread though, so enjoy not having a conversation with me. Bye nigga, peace out.

>>53240914
You don't know what you are talking about.
Also thanks for putting religious nuts into place you fucks

File: 1463304992844.png (31KB, 271x288px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 271x288px

>>53239948
I'm not the same anon, but...holy shit, I feel sorry for you orphans.

>>53246442
The merkelreich aint morons. But they're thinking beyond wage slavery. They're forcing debt slavery on the migrants (yay, debtless persons unlike nationals who are basically born into debt) and on the countries (sweden taking on considerable debt just to subsidize migrants)

>>53233585
City-States are much easier to destroy

>>53239945
>A city-state has an economic incentive to control and develop territory just like a kingdom does.
It do, but its limited by projection of power.
I.E for any Mesopotenian city state, regardless of what you do, your trade route is cockblocked by the fact Eridu, Lagash and Girsu is placed at the start of the inland rivers.
The same is true of landroutes, which is why Mongols knew which cities to siege, and which ones to siege while also sieging the next city over.
Other examples include that its unlikely for a city state to build a road network, simply because its not beneficial enough to them.

>How can that be something worth bragging over unless the wilderness remains unpacified?
It depends on how the trade route actually goes, how many city states/tribes/anarchies that borders it
Generally: If your trade route is a sea route, its fucking safe
The same is true of highlands, deserts, and other life hostile areas.

Then again:Sargon ruled river city states, alongside splitting deltas of rivers.
He is bragging, because he can project enough power to trade for more than the next city. If he wants silk, and somebody else is allowing trade, he can go there and bully them.
A lesser city state is basically permanently in the situation where their trade is only guaranteed with their neighbor, and everything beyond that is a guess.

File: Extreme Retardation.jpg (34KB, 367x469px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 367x469px

>>53246442
Merkel was plannign o use them as shock troops to destabilice the countries she sends them to so that they could break down the borders and Germoany would actually rule the EU more than they already do. The plan backfired, and now she's stuck with useless freeloaders that destabilize her regime.

It's so fucking obvious that even a /tg/ person understands it. We don't need /pol/tards tryign to 'educate' us.

GET THE FUCK OUT.

File: 1461186144958.gif (1MB, 320x213px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x213px

>this entire thread

>>53233585
Nations are FUCKING NEW is why.

>>53233585
Smaller in scale, which help to justify why a band of vagrand killers are needed when a kingdom should have a few retainers on hand.
More direct access to the rulers than with the kingdoms.

>>53233585
Oh cool, it's a "make a blatantly untrue statement but phrase it as a question thread.

Why do so many settings have dwarves and ghosts be the same thing?
Why are so many fantasy novels set in early seventies Pakistan?
Why is OP not a faggot?

>>53233585
City-states can be conquered more easily.

>>53234229
Trying to think of an actual City State in Forgotten Realms. Baldur's Gate? Zhentil Keep? Waterdeep? Mostly the cities along the "sword coast" which is Forgotten Realm's equivalent of somalia.

Everything else I can think of is a kingdom, republic, empire, oligarchy or even democracy.