Post/Author/DateTime	Post
JulesCARV 05-02-07, 04:01 PM	(I usually use the serial comma, but the title's space didn't permit it.) I've been thinking about how to make fantasy regimes more interesting than the well-trod options of traditional monarchies, magocracies, republics, theocracies, and dark lordships. One idea I had was for leadership to be divided among those with different mental strengths as enumerated in the traditional D&D ability score system -- some of the leaders would be in positions particularly demanding of wisdom, some in positions particularly demanding of intelligence, and some in positions particularly demanding of charisma. (although none of the positions would be occupied by people seriously defficient in any of those abilities) Being an American type who went to American schools and is familiar with American institutions, history, and governance, my first thought was, "have the executive be charismatic, the legislature be intelligent, and the judiciary be wise." Right. Works well enough. Maybe the leader is a bard, or perhaps a paladin, or maybe just a charismatic aristocrat or expert. Then you can put some psions (especially seers) in the legislature, wizards (especially diviners), etc, or, once again, some intelligent aristocrats or experts. Then you could have some cleric-judges (although someone with sense motive and good wisdom would be better), or expert/aristocrat judges. The thing is, I'm worried that it comes off as a bit hokey and parochial, like having a fantasy country's national anthem be a modified version of the "Star-Spangled Banner" or the like. After all, while the Montesquieuan division of government is often taught as if it were natural law to American students, and it certainly has its merits, it doesn't seem like some universal concept that is likely to arise across completely different worlds. Some concepts do seem like they'd be universal. Kings who think that their children should take over the government after them -- that seems like it isn't some idea that arose by happenstance on Earth, but one that's likely to be found in many fantasy worlds. Populist rebels who want to sieze land from the rich and redistribute it to the peasants -- another likely one. Theocracies? Very likely, especially in a world where clerical power is more than sheerly institutional and rhetorical. Evil dictatorship? Once again, likely to be found anywhere. A government constitutionally divided into an executive, legislature, and judiciary, though? That seems like a very specific idea from a very specific place and time. Rebels who want to redistribute land to the common people may be universal across worlds that (roughly) resemble ours, but rebels who talk about dialectical materialism or the dictatorship of the proletariat would clearly be a reference to a very specific Earthling philosopher. Still, I like the idea of different positions in the government being occupied by people with different strengths: some demanding high charisma, some demanding high intelligence, and some demanding high wisdom. Should I just use the executive/legislature/judiciary division, and hope that it doesn't come off as being too much like post-enlightenment Earth, or should I come up with something else which would exploit different mental abilities to different degrees? If the latter, any ideas on institutional frameworks which would do that?
Return of the Flumph 05-02-07, 04:14 PM	Considering that many campaign worlds feature desert empires with kings who are actually called "the Pharaoh," I don't think mimicing American democracy will get you in too much trouble.
JulesCARV 05-02-07, 04:46 PM	That's a good point! (although I should note that this society is unlikely to be too much like American democracy, or you'd end up with legislators primarily being selected on the basis of charisma as well as executives)
PoorHobo 05-02-07, 06:44 PM	I don't think there is anything wrong with it, either. Republics have been around for what, pushing 3000-4000 years now? I don't think its a much further step to say the wise judge, the intelligent manage and the charismatic lead. I am trying to be creative on how such a system could develop but I'm not coming up with anything... I'll keep thinking on it.
Octavian_5 05-02-07, 07:08 PM	Or...or.... An Anarcho-Syndicalist Commune.
Glak 05-02-07, 08:26 PM	actually the three branches of government have a lot of history. Pre-feudal societies (tribal chiefdoms) tend to have a chief (executive) with proto-nobles as his counsel (legislature). A lot of the movement towards powerful legislatures was seen as a move back to tradition and away from what was then the modern idea of a powerful king. They saw it as reclaiming ancestral rights. The judiciary, well there have always been old people who people went to.