TNE: Sword Worlds Technology

Gentlesophonts:

The Hans and David show continues.  :-)

Hans Rancke [email removed] writes:

> I think we've lost track of the original question.

Probably.  :-)

> As I recall it (correct
> me if I'm wrong) you started out by asking how come Gram was the leader of
> the Sword Worlds when Sacnoth was so much more powerful.

Yes, I think that's it.

> I assumed that
> you were talking about powerful in the naval sense (since a TL or two
> dosen't mean nearly as much as the population size in the economic sense).

Okay, here's where I diverge.  I was thinking more along the lines of
`economic' strength, which I agree is tied to population, than mere naval
strength.  Keep in mind that Gram and Sacnoth are on the same order of
population (6 billion and 3 billion, respectively).  Narsil is at 20
billion but it's two TLs below Sacnoth.  Still, in a feudal technocracy,
one tech level is going to make a *tremendous* amount of difference.  (It's
like the difference between Japan and Mexico if Japan's economic power
gave it corresponding political power in Mexico.)

> Since then I've tried to defend the notion that the economic cycles are
> _possible_. I don't say that they definitely must be, that there are no
> other possibilities. Just that they are perfectly possible. I don't try
> to prove that they exist, only that they could exist. OK? Nor did I use
> them to explain the disparity of different TLs.

I believe I've accepted that these cycles *might* exist and that if they
do they would explain Gram's leadership of the Confederation.  My concern
has been that I can't see what *causes* these `techno-economic' cycles
(since we've agreed they have no `real world' parallel) and that I don't
see how they explain the tech level disparities.

> >>(Remember, I also assume that a world can
> >>maintain ships and equipment at least two levels above their own TL)
> >
> >I'm not sure this is really relevant to our discussion

No, sorry, I meant I didn't think *my* rebuttal was relevant!  :-)  I get
the point you were making which was why I said:

> >Of course, you're going to say she can because her world was at TL 8 when
> >she went to trade school two decades ago.  :-)

I just disagree with you though when you say:

> But my whole point is that they _will_ have much more than a clue. The
> knowledge is there even if the industry isn't.

I feel that it takes more than just knowledge.  I don't care how much you
know about internal combustion engines, if you can't refine oil to make
gasoline and you don't have a continental highway network you're going
to have a rough time getting your Yugo or Hyundai from Houston to Detroit.
The knowledge may be there on a lower tech world but the corresponding
infrastructure isn't.

> No, it proves that the authors of a board game have different priorities
> from the authors of a role-playing game.

Now wait a minute!  :-)  What happened to:

> I really think you should try to make up an explanation that fits the known
> facts rather than to make up an explanation and change the facts to fit them.

And:

> IMO one should prefer
> the one that corresponds most closely to GDWs version.

Please, Hans, I've got a smile on my face right now and there is absolutely
no malice in it.  I'm enjoying the living daylights out of our discussions.

> Not in terms of the economy according to _Trillion Credit Squadron_. The
> GPP (Gross Planetary Product) of Gram is close to that of Sacnoth and that
> of Narsil is a lot bigger.

Well, I think we're beginning to see there are some serious conflicts
between *5FW*, *TCS* and the TNE military forces per *POT*.

> The troops are marked with TL: One brigade from
> Gram is TL 11 and one from Joyeuse is TL 10.

Hmmm, Steve Bonneville has reported:

> Note that Gram is stated to be TL 10!

Looks like there is a discrepancy *within* *5FW* between the counters (TL 11)
and the map board (TL 10).  Is this the case?

More Hans:

> The whole force is much less than the total available Sword World forces;
> the attack on the Imperium appears to be a secondary effort. Most of
> their prime units must have gone against the Darrians. Any Gram TL 12
> units could be there.

Well, maybe, but this doesn't agree with the campaign as it was reported in
*Spinward Marches Campaign*.  According to *SMC*, the Narsil Fleet patrolled
the Darrian border (and eventually lost the disputed worlds in Querion to
the Darrians) while the Sacnoth Fleet patrolled the rimward border and
was eventually destroyed by the Imperial 214th Fleet attacking from Glisten
and occupying what became the Border Worlds.  Note the Narsil Fleet was
deployed against the lower tech Darrians rather than the Imperial Navy.

> So what the Traveller SWs owe to Piper is actually little more than
> the concept of the sword names.

Well, not exactly.  There are other similarities.  The whole feudal
technocracy thing.  The *JTAS* article on the former Sword Worlds naval
captain who's spouse/fiance was killed on their wedding day so she sold
the family estate to buy a ship and chase the killers - nothing more
than Lucas Trask in a dress!

> The societies are different in a number of
> ways too (Women accepted in 'male' roles for instance).

I think this `liberation' issue is merely a matter of when Piper was
writing (early 60's) versus when GDW was creating Traveller (late 70's).
Remember, the GDW material makes a big deal of the `mis-treatment' of
women in the Sword Worlds.  As Steve Bonneville points out:

>  The ranking flag, Riksdattar, is
>  much like Santanocheev.  [Incidentally, if her name is formed
>  in the Icelandic manner, Riksdattar is a woman.  Just an
>  observation for the SW culture watchers.]

I think there's a great deal of similarity between Piper's Sword Worlds
and GDW's Sword Worlds on the issue of how women are portrayed/treated.

>  _Cats&Rats_

You mean *Solomani and Aslan*?  Ouch!  :-)

> says that they left
> Terra in -420. That they used 29 years to get to the Spinward Marches
> implies a desire to get _really_ away from it all. My interpretation is
> that they were losers in a civil war in the Old Earth Union. Not official.

This sounds like a good rationalization.

> That's just what I said. It's two different and independent bits of my
> argument. The disparate TLs indicates a close tie to economy. Economy can
> (and often does) fluctuate. Ergo TLs can fluctuate. If you postulate that
> Sword World economy dosen't fluctuate you get stable TLs. If you postulate
> that it does you get unstable TLs.

Okay, but why suppose these still-unexplained cycles when they're not needed
to explain the disparity?  If the different economies are merely at
different stages of development (with higher TL being an indication of
greater `advancement') there is no need of these cycles.  Then Zhodani aid,
already well established in the canonical material, explains why Gram has
lead the Confederation when one would expect more advanced (higher tech)
Sacnoth to do so.

> Certainly. The stable economy theory. But one set of UPPs isn't enough to
> say anything one way or the other about this.

Ah, but what about *all* those other worlds *outside* the Sword Worlds
that aren't experiencing these cycles?  What `facts' suggest the Sword
Worlds should be different from the rest of the universe?

> several sets of UPPs for the Sword Worlds, but since they have world
> populations fluctuating by bilions within a decade

Billions?  Really?  Can you cite the sources?  This is interesting from
our allegiance/borders viewpoint too.

> Are the US and Europe and Japan different countries? Yet their economies
> are tightly intertwined.

No, they're not tighly entwined politically *and* economically like the
case would be in a feudal technocracy.  A better example would be, say,
California and, heck, all the other states west of the Rockies put
together.  When California wants federal water in Montana, it gets it.
Largely because of it's greater population (which also gives it a larger
economy) which gives it greater political power in the representative
democracy we have here.

> >If the economy is interstellar then political power in interstellar...
>
> I don't see how that follows.

By definition.  In a feudal technocracy, economic power translates *directly*
into political power.  You get to be `king' because you control the largest
share of stock.

> > Sounds like the Japanese *keiritsu* to me.
>
> Sounds like a slightly stronger European Union to me.

Yes, it does, except that in Europe representatives are chosen through a
representative democracy that places power in the hands of individuals
equally while in a feudal technocracy (and in the *keiritsu*) those
representatives are chosen by shareholders that place power in the hands
of the owners of production.

> >>Nowadays they _do_ have a politically stable Confederation.
> >
> >Doesn't sound like it from the above quote.
>
> Perhaps not, but it sure sound like it from the length of time the Gram
> Coalition has lasted.

I agree.  I would explain this apparent conflict (it's a fact Gram has led
for a *long* time but it's someone's opinion that the Sworld Worlds are
`unstable') as more cleverly-disguised Imperial propaganda.

[Has anyone realized how convenient this has become for GDW?  By clearly
placing some misleading information in published works (like the library
data in the *Imperial Encyclopedia* that was identified as having a SMART
bias) they (and we) can explain away just about any inconsistency at a
latter date.  Clever, or just lucky?]

> I think that is wrong. Whatever the age of an institution, the people who
> run it usualy thinks in terms of their own generation.

Good point.

> The pacification campaigns took place before even the Ante-bellum period of
> the Imperium. The 3rd frontier War took place after the Civil War and the
> Psionic suppressions. I find no problem with accepting that Imperial
> attitudes were different in those two periods.

Another good point, but it still begs the question of the Imperium not
`dealing with' the Sword Worlds.

> I must have a different definition of 'intergration' than you. I think these
> worlds all produce whatever is most profitable at any given time and sell it
> to anyone who will buy. That's not intergration in my book.

If I'm Freya Freighters of Sacnoth and I buy a controlling interest in
Loki Levitation of Gram I have not only gained economic influence on Gram
but *political* power as well.  Since, at TL 12, I'm clearly the strongest
economic power then I'm going to gain more and more of this sort of
control.  As soon as the King Harald of Sacnoth (thanks, Cynthia) buys
a controlling interest in the holdings of King Angus of Gram, Angus
becomes Harald's *vassal*!  That's how a feudal technocracy works.

Some really good stuff, Hans.  BTW, I think you've got the *ihatei* situation
pegged exactly.

Happy Travelling,

David Johnson
Houston, Texas, USA