Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Alkasyn wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:It only stays around with wealth.

simple brute strength isn't enough. you need strength + wealth to make nobility.


Wealth being land and material posessions.

Simply not correct.

Check the history of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, where many of the noble families were no more than peasants with a Noble title.

There is a difference between being a Noble in name and a Noble in truth.

Having a title doesn't make you a noble.


I would consider Bill Gates a Noble. He doesn't have a title, but he is an extremely wealthy and powerful individual so he fits the criteria.

If I managed to aquire enough wealth, I would become of that level of society.


Maybe we are having World View problems. you are from Europe which had a long history of the Nobles having an unquestioned hold on their power, mostly through the apathey, and simple acceptance, of the lower classes. Thats what you are familiar with.

I see Nobility as not being something you are given or that you can aquire on your own, its something that intrinsically attaches itself to certain criteria. usually wealth and power.

Not to sound elitist, buuut as you have sort of hinted at...

You're American. You know nothing about nobility or living in a society which still suffers from the legacy of such an arrangement.

Not that such says anything bad about you, I just feel you're talking rubbish about a subject you don't seem to comprehend You clearly have a concept of wealth mobility deeply ingrained in your psyche and yet you can't reconcile that to the idea that wealth does not purchase mannerisms, influence amongst certain castes and that your manner of speaking, dress and action will affect the way you are perceived in said groups.

The closest America really has to this is The Great Gatsby... New Money versus Old Money. If you want a simpler way to observe our contrasting worldviews, watch that scene out of Titanic where the fat wife of the American mine owner is sitting with English aristocrats

Its true.


I actually have utter contempt for a ridgid aristocratic society. I belive that status needs to be worked for. There are people who are rich because their parents handed them tons of cash when they passed. Those people either stay rich because they use the money wisely and/or actually do work, or they squander the wealth.

Then people get rich themselves through their profits, they either stay rich because they don't let it go to their head OR they squander it all and end up bankrupt.

If you can actually stay rich, you deserve the status. Everything can be lost in an instant, be smart.


The idea of nobility based only on who your parents were is sickining. I wouldn't respect some inbred little twirp, even if his parents left him a fancy title. Naturally, if he was also rich, I would try and get some of that fortune myself Work your way to the top, and hang on for dear life once you get there.

Happygrunt wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Happygrunt wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:Any and all economical systems you have ever heard of or can think of exist somewhere in the IoM. From full blown communism to Laissez-faire to bartering with pebbles.

Or teef. Don't forget da teef.

well....teef is for Orks.

Was a joke. Although I am sure some Rouge Trades use some big ol' teef.

Orks don't have currency.If they was wanting somefinks,they jus' walk ova and smash 'is face saying "giv' it 'ere ya pansy!"

No, they do. Seriously, it's teef.

Really?I don't understand how it works,see my post above.Buigger is better,so when a warboss wants more teef,see above,and no one will challenge him.

Deadshot wrote:Really?I don't understand how it works,see my post above.Buigger is better,so when a warboss wants more teef,see above,and no one will challenge him.

It's the best economy ever. Orks continue to grow teeth throughout their lives so there's no such thing as a poor ork. He'll always have enough teeth to spare to at least eat and get himself a decent choppa. However, teeth rot. So you can not stockpile teef indefinately. This prevents inflation.

Indeed,

also, a Warboss would use his own teef. He wouldn't use da boyz teef, they arn't big enough for what he's buying.

Grey templar, I have to agree with Henners on this one. Though I may share your contempt of lineage nobility. nobility does not equal wealth. I'm sure there's a good analogy there but for the life of me I can't think of one.

Society is not simply classes stacked on top of eachother. your wealth does not put you in a class. This has always been true. Merchants and nobility can have overlapping amounts of money and power. Society is not simply vertical, but horizontal as well. this applies to any society, anytime. simply cause someone has power, does not make them noble.

Melissa, I often times enjoy your posts, but we're talking about warhammer if you want to talk about politics I'm sure there are other forums more appropriate. I don't go on here to get in political fights.

I still don't understand.A warboss walks over and asks for what he wants.If they demand money I would think he would laugh and punch them out cold.Certainly Ghraz would get what he wants.

Deadshot wrote:I still don't understand.A warboss walks over and asks for what he wants.If they demand money I would think he would laugh and punch them out cold.Certainly Ghraz would get what he wants.

Yeah, he could do that. And after he punches that guy there'll probably be some more teef on the ground for him.

Deadshot wrote:I still don't understand.A warboss walks over and asks for what he wants.If they demand money I would think he would laugh and punch them out cold.Certainly Ghraz would get what he wants.

Maybe that doesn't work all the time.


Maybe Ghaz needs something to be Kustom built for him. Punchin someone out, while its good for a laugh, isn't condusive to getting the dakka upgrade you need.

so they use Teef as money. Every ork has a ready, but limited, supply and the money is self-regulated by the Law of Entropy.

A boss can't just go around punching every Mekboy in the face. They and other specialists will simply leave and sign up with another Boss. You need to pay up those teef if you want quality work done.

Deadshot wrote:I still don't understand.A warboss walks over and asks for what he wants.If they demand money I would think he would laugh and punch them out cold.Certainly Ghraz would get what he wants.

Not every Ork can do that though. Only the biggest/meanest. Most Ork Boyz need scrap metal/paint/fuel/weapons/etc. and will use their teeth to get them from a Mekboy/Loota. There's also an issue of food, squig meat from runtherders isn't free.

The Orks have an incredibly unstable and anarchy-ridden society where mass-violence, random explosions, and sudden changes of power are an everyday occurance. However one thing it does have is a stable and functioning economy.

Iracundus wrote:Are you familiar with the whole "parvenu" or "noveau riche" phenomenon?

I am.

I don't care. People who are "nobility" but are functionally powerless are rather irrelevant, and the Imperium has no use for them. They are weak, and what does the Imperium do to weak people? Cut them out like tumors or use them up until there's nothing left. Or they just get murdered by someone who actually HAS power and replaces them.

Either way, they're gone, and noone misses them.

Henners91 wrote:You're American. You know nothing about nobility

Kiss my pale white American arse, cause this is either arrogance, trolling, or ignorance, and I don't respect any of those.

Grey Templar wrote:Its true.


I actually have utter contempt for a ridgid aristocratic society. I belive that status needs to be worked for. There are people who are rich because their parents handed them tons of cash when they passed. Those people either stay rich because they use the money wisely and/or actually do work, or they squander the wealth.

Then people get rich themselves through their profits, they either stay rich because they don't let it go to their head OR they squander it all and end up bankrupt.

If you can actually stay rich, you deserve the status. Everything can be lost in an instant, be smart.


The idea of nobility based only on who your parents were is sickining. I wouldn't respect some inbred little twirp, even if his parents left him a fancy title. Naturally, if he was also rich, I would try and get some of that fortune myself Work your way to the top, and hang on for dear life once you get there.

Yep, we agree.

Melissia wrote:

Henners91 wrote:You're American. You know nothing about nobility

Kiss my pale white American arse, cause this is either arrogance, trolling, or ignorance, and I don't respect any of those.

Apologies if it wasn't nice of me to leap to that conclusion, but when I see Americans in a thread equating wealth with class then it seems logical to me to suppose that it's simply a lack of experience with old world class systems; the closest the states had to an aristocracy were the gentry families of the revolutionary era. However, if you must, consider me as guilty of the latter of the traits you just mentioned.

It's my personal view that there are two ways of looking at class today; purely from a wealth perspective (which is how I imagine most Americans view it) which we're fortunate enough to be able to have as the state of affairs in the supposed meritocracies of today and the 'traditional' class perspective, which is still here in Britain: People with power don't tend to speak with South London accents. Even those who are well-educated may find themselves hitting brick walls when there are softer-spoken middle class peers who would blend far more easily with the workplace culture of a prospective job... or who know the right people. Our nobility is definitely diminished but people are fining it much harder to penetrate the upper-middle classes.

Melissia wrote:

Henners91 wrote:You're American. You know nothing about nobility

Kiss my pale white American arse, cause this is either arrogance, trolling, or ignorance, and I don't respect any of those.

What about a sick combination of all three?

Henners91 wrote:You're American. You know nothing about nobility

We may not know much about nobility, but we do know a bit about defeating it .

I don't think this is entirly untrue. I've spent a bit of time in both Canada and England, and they seem to accept nobility as more of a symbol than actual people... or is it the other way around? Anyhow, much of Europe DOES have a fairly Elitist view. My personal belief is that Nobility is gained, not given by birth or other nobility. There needs to be status, power (not neccessarialy wealth) and morality. Also, there needs to be a way to strip nobility of said power if the morality wanes.

Hence, American Democracy.

Or at least my (probably misguided) understanding of it.

That was... kinda an off topic rant. ON TOPIC, I think that there are so many worlds, with ever shifting politics, possibly due to warp storms shutting them off from the rest of the imperium, far out, or near enemy territory, that any sort of political system and thus economy can exist... even muliple ones on the same planet (look at ours) so long as they still worship THA EMPRAH.

I don't think many people nowadays would have any problem with a meritocracy in principle. Unfortunately life tosses some pretty mean realities at you (such as thinking a well-spoken sort must be a nicer guy than a guttermouth ;P)

When I imagine the Imperium I imagine that it is subject to just about every foul bias or prejudice I can come up with; it's backward. So yes, I imagine nobility would boil down to blood on many worlds... and the Governor's favour and patronage be proactively sought.

I think the reason why this question of industry came up for me is because I'm just too small-minded to perceive things outside of the historical context of Earth... and I find it very hard to associate any kind of developed industry or economy with an feudal autocracy as the driving force for such amongst Europeans were the bourgeois. Thusly I'd expect to find them in the Imperium but as it's such a brutal authoritarian state, surely any movement from below would be crushed? I guess that's why I gravitate toward an idea of state control...

Then again, are nobles the state in the Imperium? Meh I'm ranting...

haha, I didn't even take the american comment as an insult. Us americans are going to have to grow some thicker skin if that gets a rise out of us. After spending a year as an ex-patriot I can tell you that ignorance of nobility is hardly the worst stereotype the world has developed for us.

on topic, I'd have to agree with Dark wolf. There must be vast amount of diversity between planets and continents among planets. We can always hope that the democratic ones are the ones that are more productive though!

As blunt as I might have been, I'm finding it interesting that people would be getting touchy about me suggesting it Guess some could link it to naivety but that isn't what I intended.

Henners91 wrote:When I imagine the Imperium I imagine that it is subject to just about every foul bias or prejudice I can come up with

I don't. I imagine an Imperium that simply does what it has to to survive.

The Imperium favors results, however they're achieved-- someone who talks a good deal but runs on the first sign of trouble is quickly sidelined for someone who's actually competent. They are brutal because it works, and works efficiently, not brutal for its own sake. And this brutality culls the weak and ineffectual, meaning the only noble families who survive are those whom have actual power, especially through wealth and thus the ability to tithe to the Imperium and the Ecclesiarchy).

I'm not saying their logic is 'let's be as mean and backward as possible', I'm saying that the writers who came up with it thought that as their general jist... in the fluff I'd agree that they consider themselves realists and quite utilitarian.

Yet, they are hyper religious, superstitious and steeped in ritual.

Henners91 wrote: Unfortunately life tosses some pretty mean realities at you (such as thinking a well-spoken sort must be a nicer guy than a guttermouth ;P)

Rule #14: If you come from an economically moribund pit village north of Hadrian's Wall, learn not to swear like a troglodyte, or spit, when in polite circles. It worked wonders for me.

Henners91 wrote:When I imagine the Imperium I imagine that it is subject to just about every foul bias or prejudice I can come up with; it's backward. So yes, I imagine nobility would boil down to blood on many worlds... and the Governor's favour and patronage be proactively sought.

There are fluff examples of the position of Planetary Governer being hereditary, yes. There are also fluff examples of the Officio Assassinorum dealing with ineffectual Governors with extreme prejudice. Blood or birth is no protection from the raw, grinding mechanisms of the Imperium - if you are incompetent, you are removed, either by Higher Authorities or people who want your job and are competent enough to arrange an Accident for you. If your father was incompetent, you have just inherited all of his responsibilities and had best become competent pretty damned quick - because the same authorities that dealt with him will be watching you, as will all of your father's many, competent rivals.

Henners91 wrote:I think the reason why this question of industry came up for me is because I'm just too small-minded to perceive things outside of the historical context of Earth... and I find it very hard to associate any kind of developed industry or economy with an feudal autocracy as the driving force for such amongst Europeans were the bourgeois.

Like Sir Henry Thomas Liddell - there was a filthy member of the bourgeoisie who stymied productivity across Europe, yessirree. Much of the industrial revolution was actually driven by the patronage of the landed gentry. Aristocrats are like any other subculture - they evolve and adapt, or stagnate and have their heads cut off. The Imperium is, if you like, the ultimate manifestation of this - if you meet your tithes, quell uprisings, and have no truck with Xenos filth, you're welcome to keep yourself hale and hearty for centuries on juvenant treatments and augmetic implants and live in a fashion the menials of your world can barely dream of. If you fail to meet your responsibilities, there's another Noble House of the Lansraad- Oh, sorry, wrong science fiction universe.

Melissia wrote:The Imperium favors results, however they're achieved-- someone who talks a good deal but runs on the first sign of trouble is quickly sidelined for someone who's actually competent. They are brutal because it works, and works efficiently, not brutal for its own sake. And this brutality culls the weak and ineffectual, meaning the only noble families who survive are those whom have actual power, especially through wealth and thus the ability to tithe to the Imperium and the Ecclesiarchy).

Exactly - if you meet your dues, the Imperium doesn't care what grist you've had to grind in order to do so - only that you've had the will to do it, and the sense to do it in a way that doesn't prevent you meeting your dues in future. Because anyone who lacks that steel, who fails in their duties, or who puts their own personal advantage ahead of their obligations to Holy Terra, is suddenly at the top of an ever-short list of people the Inquisition want to have a word with. Excruciators optional.

Henners91 wrote:You clearly have a concept of wealth mobility deeply ingrained in your psyche and yet you can't reconcile that to the idea that wealth does not purchase mannerisms, influence amongst certain castes and that your manner of speaking, dress and action will affect the way you are perceived in said groups.

The closest America really has to this is The Great Gatsby... New Money versus Old Money. If you want a simpler way to observe our contrasting worldviews, watch that scene out of Titanic where the fat wife of the American mine owner is sitting with English aristocrats

Considering that the Imperium is based off in part the Middle Ages (or at least a popular conception of the Middle Ages), I think the above is a good way of characterizing the nobility. Yes, it is against what we as modern societies view as efficient or meritocratic, and yes it is elitist, but that was the case historically as well. That is the key thing to remember about 40K: it is not our own society and their mindset is not our mindset. The Imperium with its xenophobia, rabid zealotry, and callous expenditure of human life embodies some of the worst traits of humanity. Why then such objection to hereditary power structures?

Read the Necromunda rulebook. It talks about the Merchant Guild of Necromunda. They can be fabulously wealthy, have property in the upper spire, yet they are not nobles. Wealth alone does not buy class. In fact, this parallels the historical situation. Rich merchants, but still commoners. Wealth alone does not always purchase social mobility. Waving a fistful of Thrones or credits or whatever doesn't always open doors.

When one is fabulously rich, mediocrity may be sufficient to get by. A noble doesn't personally have to be incredibly talented or competent. He or she would have servants and retainers to handle all the details of managing investments and assets. GW fluff is rife with examples of nobles even planetary governors being proven incompetent only when crises (such as an invasion) hit. While superficially this seems to support a claim of the Imperium requiring competence, the fact such nobles got and maintained their positions in the first place shows that actually efficiency and competence are not requirements. They only need to be capable of handling the run of the mill situation (i.e. status quo situation). If they inherited their positions, then the system for maintaining the status quo would likely already be in place (such as the army of accountants and servants to keep the money flowing in).

Other examples from other fiction would be say from the Game of Thrones novels which are based on an enlarged fantasy version of the British Isles. A certain smuggler is knighted and ennobled by his king for services rendered. However he is still snubbed by the entrenched nobility. However his hope is that with proper education and behavior, his children will be accepted among the noble class. That is similar to how I see the Imperium's noble class working. The rare individuals that do manage to propel themselves upwards whether through service, wealth, or whatever, would still never be fully accepted as "one of them", with the process of acceptance taking perhaps generations.

That is how also poor nobles may also not be powerless. Note that wealth is not the same necessarily as power. Poor nobles could still have influence in the right social circles even though they are poor, and might be willing to sell such influence in return for infusions of wealth. A word in the right ear, or some other social pressure, may open more doors more unobstrusively and subtly than waving a bribe. Similarly they might be open to such things as a marriage alliance or other such tie in return for wealth, such as how for example in the Titanic movie, Kate Winslet's character was engaged to a man so that the marriage would solve their high status family's debt problems.