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.
Gert wrote: Not sure why there's the fixation on Middle Ages Europe when as has been said, Feudal nations existed well into the 19th century.
Well, it clearly was what GW meant. Look at the picture they chose!
As for recruiting, I think we already know the answer: European colonial armies were able to rapidly turn people with no experience of firearms into reliable troops able to run modern weapons. They didn't need to understand why the thing worked, or read a manual, just turn the bolt, insert a cartridge, close it and pull the trigger.
They key element (which one of the cards even says) wasn't tech level, but the society's approach to warfare. The British in particular keyed in on whether a given tribe or people had a warrior tradition and if they did, those lads got kitted out and used against everyone else.
If there wasn't a warrior tradition, it was harder, but it was still possible to get good results. Check out the Ever-Victorious Army in the Taiping Rebellion.
Perhaps an even better example is how Japan went from a technologically stagnant closed society to designing its own modern weapons within 40 years. The Type 14 Nambu is something of a glass hammer, but the Arisaka rifle is brilliant.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/08/18 21:10:33
By your logic, all Death Worlds are jungles because this picture is a jungle:
Doesn't matter about the text because the picture shows a jungle so they can only be jungles right?
Those were the archetypal examples GW used. Feudal was clearly patterned after their very European-centric fantasy game and of course Catachan was a Rambo/Predator send-up.
They left it open-ended for further potential expansions, but those were the examples they held up as emblematic.
My point in that post was pointing out the absurdity of saying that every single Feudal World had to be based on Middle Age Europe because of one example image.
If you'd read the thread you'd see that I've been pretty clear in my opinions on this subject.
Gert wrote: My point in that post was pointing out the absurdity of saying that every single Feudal World had to be based on Middle Age Europe because of one example image.
If you'd read the thread you'd see that I've been pretty clear in my opinions on this subject.
Yeah, and I think you're wrong. Feudal China bears very little resemblance (if any) to feudal Europe. The concept of feudalism is rooted in European culture and it was used as a way to explain other cultures without having to dig too deep into them.
GW's cultural touchstones are remarkably shallow, and while I freely admit I've read zero of their novels, I would be highly interested in all the feudal worlds they mention that are Chinese, Japanese or African in character.
Haighus wrote: The only feudal world we ever got models for is Attila, which has rough riders inspired by Eurasian Steppe peoples.
Right, and that's evidence that the term was referring to technology rather than political structure because the origins, culture and social organization of the Hun people are lost to history.
GW wanted horse cavalry (which could reuse fantasy molds!) and that provided the excuse..
Commissar von Toussaint wrote: Yeah, and I think you're wrong. Feudal China bears very little resemblance (if any) to feudal Europe.
Yes. Because they are different cultures but the concepts remain the same because Feudalism is not a European-only ideology. The Chinese were practicing it from 500 BC.
GW's cultural touchstones are remarkably shallow, and while I freely admit I've read zero of their novels, I would be highly interested in all the feudal worlds they mention that are Chinese, Japanese or African in character.
Feudal Worlds don't make for good settings for large-scale stories or big fights. You might get the odd Knight world but they are different. There was a short story published in WD where a world had been infiltrated by both Chaos and Genestealer Cults in the guise of warrior orders, a concept not unique to Europe.
The reason GW has largely not done non-European cultures is because the company has largely been staffed by middle-class white men for the last 30 years. As the hobby has grown, the staff pool has widened and we're now seeing stories written with more non-English influences.
Yes. Because they are different cultures but the concepts remain the same because Feudalism is not a European-only ideology. The Chinese were practicing it from 500 BC.
Chinese culture is so radically different from European culture as to render the term "feudalism" almost meaningless. Yes, if you read the Spring and Autumn Annals, you see references to "dukes" and "counts" but those terms are at best loose approximations of social rank. The apogee of European social status was the landed warrior gentry; the apogee of Chinese social status was the scholar-administrator.
In Europe, the martial class was celebrated while in China people went to great lengths to escape from it. You may want to check out my book on Chinese military history to see just how profoundly different Chinese political/social systems were from those of Europe.
Feudal Worlds don't make for good settings for large-scale stories or big fights. You might get the odd Knight world but they are different. There was a short story published in WD where a world had been infiltrated by both Chaos and Genestealer Cults in the guise of warrior orders, a concept not unique to Europe.
Right, so you're admitting there is no actual lore supporting your contention. Thank you.
The reason GW has largely not done non-European cultures is because the company has largely been staffed by middle-class white men for the last 30 years. As the hobby has grown, the staff pool has widened and we're now seeing stories written with more non-English influences.
No kidding. You may want to read the whole thread because I have repeatedly pointed out that GW's understanding of feudalism is based on Europe, which is what the staff knew best.
Commissar von Toussaint wrote: Chinese culture is so radically different from European culture as to render the term "feudalism" almost meaningless. Yes, if you read the Spring and Autumn Annals, you see references to "dukes" and "counts" but those terms are at best loose approximations of social rank. The apogee of European social status was the landed warrior gentry; the apogee of Chinese social status was the scholar-administrator.
In Europe, the martial class was celebrated while in China people went to great lengths to escape from it.
You must be real fun at parties.
I've used both China and Japan as examples of Feudal states that were non-European as they are the more popular cultural choices for that type of society when you move away from European cultural influences.
And while the term is European in origin but that doesn't mean it isn't accurate for use on a broad scale, which is how 40k operates.
1500s Japan wasn't exactly like 1200s Europe but it shares enough similarities that having a Feudal World in 40k based on Feudal Japan would be entirely reasonable and understood by a wider audience who doesn't have intricate knowledge of Japanese history because that is how 40k works.
It's like when people tried to "um, ackchyually" the White Scars into not being influenced by the Mongols and other Steppe Nomads because Jaghati Kahn would be too heavy to ride a modern horse, despite no background ever actually saying the people of Chogoris ever rode horses.
Boohoo GW isn't writing every single possible planet and definition for its fictional setting with 100% historical accuracy in all things. Build a bridge and get over it.
Right, so you're admitting there is no actual lore supporting your contention. Thank you.
In the same way there's nothing saying it supports yours yes. You have one picture of a dude in a helmet with a castle behind him and have declared that all Feudal Worlds must be European-styled. Not exactly stellar logic there big fella.
I've used both China and Japan as examples of Feudal states that were non-European as they are the more popular cultural choices for that type of society when you move away from European cultural influences.
Yeah, and they're bad examples, especially China. Chinese culture and state structure was completely different from that used in Europe.
Because Japan's social structure granted prestige to the warrior class (which China conspicuously lacked), the analogy fits better, but once again, a planet based on 1500s Japan would be dramatically different from one based on 1200s France in terms of social structure.
Now, their technology base would be similar, which is clearly what GW was referring to.
It's like when people tried to "um, ackchyually" the White Scars into not being influenced by the Mongols and other Steppe Nomads because Jaghati Kahn would be too heavy to ride a modern horse, despite no background ever actually saying the people of Chogoris ever rode horses.
Well, since I'm not saying that and don't agree with it, I'm not sure why you're bringing it up.
Boohoo GW isn't writing every single possible planet and definition for its fictional setting with 100% historical accuracy in all things. Build a bridge and get over it.
You're the one claiming something for which there is no documentary evidence. Feudal political structures are very common within the Imperium and have no relation to the technology level. Therefore your definition of the term robs it of descriptive value.
In the same way there's nothing saying it supports yours yes. You have one picture of a dude in a helmet with a castle behind him and have declared that all Feudal Worlds must be European-styled. Not exactly stellar logic there big fella.
I have lots of evidence. The first run of codexes list optional armies of feral or feudal worlds in the back. You can use actual Chaos Warriors and other fantasy miniatures. That's what GW clearly meant. Orks and Eldar also had this feature. What are Exodite Knights other than Cold One Riders with brighter paint jobs?
The crossover is unmistakable, and I'm not sure why you insist that something for which there is no evidence is more logical than the commonality of miniatures shared between the games and fluff supporting it.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2023/08/19 14:11:42
You seem to be incapable of grasping the fact that the term Feudal World is a broad strokes classification, one that works perfectly fine for the layman who doesn't spend all their time reading history books.
Your average Joe likely couldn't describe the Edo Period of Japan but could describe Feudal Japan.
That is why GW uses those terms, for us mere mortals who don't spend all our time reading (or writing) history books.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/08/19 17:02:50
If we could all put our history books aside and get back to the setting?
I’m still not persuaded there’s much call for a Feudal World to be left as a Feudal World.
As demonstrated above, it’s a catch-call term of a technological level around pre and immediately post black powder technology.
It strikes me that just like the real world, they’re only a single technological/industrial revolution from getting to more or less where we are today. Especially if the worlds tend to avoid the warfare we’ve experienced.
Though granted certain of our important advancements have come through war and its necessity of innovation. But I must stress that by no means require war for them to be found. Just funded particularly well.
What use is a permanent feudal world to the Imperium overall?
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
It's more effort to change it than to let it be. A Feudal World is already settled and culturally accepted into the Imperium as it is. All the Imperium has to do is bring the Ecclesiarchy down to keep the locals in line with the faith and send a Munitorum official every so often to make sure the Tithe gets paid.
It also acts as a largely militarised outpost for the Imperium. An Agri World might have a PDF but it won't have as many forts, castles, strongpoints and holdouts as a Feudal World will.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/08/19 16:10:53
In theory a Feudal world is sub optimal in its output. It won't ever out-compete other worlds in terms of mineral, production, research nor even raw population.
However its important to realise that the Imperium doesn't run every world to its maximum capacity. Feudal worlds are simply those that are advanced enough to have organised social structures and where investment to uplift it to a higher level is beyond local interest/capacity and where the world doesn't warrant attention from greater power bodies within the Imperium.
Basically the world "works" and its just not cost-effective right now to invest more into it
If we could all put our history books aside and get back to the setting?
I’m still not persuaded there’s much call for a Feudal World to be left as a Feudal World.
As demonstrated above, it’s a catch-call term of a technological level around pre and immediately post black powder technology.
It strikes me that just like the real world, they’re only a single technological/industrial revolution from getting to more or less where we are today. Especially if the worlds tend to avoid the warfare we’ve experienced.
Though granted certain of our important advancements have come through war and its necessity of innovation. But I must stress that by no means require war for them to be found. Just funded particularly well.
What use is a permanent feudal world to the Imperium overall?
I'd say it's not of any particular use other than for tough dudes to enlist, which is still mostly a byproduct most of the time although as we said above they make perfect recuitment grounds for space marines and guard.
Otherwise I think it is mostly lack of ressources, administrative decisions taking litteral ages to be implemented, terraforming technology being hard to access and long to work, and general negligence on the part of the imperium for worlds that won't bring enough payback for the efforts deployed.
There are also those worlds that might be in wait for deeper exploitation
But by and large, really feudal worlds are kind of worthless I think.
40k: Necrons/Imperial Guard/ Space marines
Bolt Action: Germany/ USA
Project Z.
"The Dakka Dive Bar is the only place you'll hear what's really going on in the underhive. Sure you might not find a good amasec but they grill a mean groxburger. Just watch for ratlings being thrown through windows and you'll be alright." Ciaphas Cain, probably.
Worth isn't really something that needs consideration when it comes to the dogma of the Imperium though.
The Imperium doesn't really care if Frankius Maximus is producing less Grox Paste than Agrius Prime because it's still another world in the dominion of man. The manifest destiny of humanity has claimed another world.
Gert wrote: Worth isn't really something that needs consideration when it comes to the dogma of the Imperium though.
The Imperium doesn't really care if Frankius Maximus is producing less Grox Paste than Agrius Prime because it's still another world in the dominion of man. The manifest destiny of humanity has claimed another world.
I disagree. I think it depends too much on context.
The Imperium of Man as in the central administration parts of Terra regarding a fringe world - yeah they probably only care its theirs; heck they probably don't even know its theirs for a very long time.
The local governor of a central set of systems who enjoys fine dining, great riches and generally only has to worry about providing a tithe from a few worlds - probably likes to keep it as a backward playground to entertain his guests.
The system governor who is managing a set of worlds on the fringe and is constantly under pressure for troops and resources. Probably would REALLY like that world to be more useful, but lacks the resources to invest into uplifting it in any meaningful way and thus focuses on worlds that are already further ahead and more viable.
I'm sure people care; by how much they care and how much influence and resources they've got to make a change is where the issues will set in.
I would put it down to a number of factors as to why the persist.
1. Ignorance, most people in setting have very little, knowledge of anything outside their own experience, deliberately so. So if you are on a feudal world you know no different and if you are on an advanced planet you may not know feudal ones exist at all. Even at quite high levels on said planets.
2. Incompetence. The imperium isn’t known for its big thinking leaders and planners.
3. Indifference. Many with the ability to change the power base and levels of a planet just don’t care or even worse want it as a downtrodden backwater because it suits their needs for whatever reasons. For example, ferris is listed as a feudal world according the example previously, it is not in the space wolves interests to drag the populace out of that way of life and it would be very difficult given the death world nature of the planet but the marines want simple easy to manage folk who are hardy but cause no trouble and are biddable.
@Overread
I'd still argue that it's not a concern.
If we take your example of a Sector Governor, the chances of them even having a Feudal or Feral world under their remit is pretty slim to begin with as these worlds are rare and even then often fall under the control of Astartes Chapters.
If they do have one, it's one out of maybe twenty worlds all of which are going to be a higher Tithe grade and a lot more trouble to run than a Feudal or Feral world.
Throw in a limited amount of resources that Sector Governor will have to keep these planets in line and producing for the Imperium and having a world with a small population that doesn't cause problems isn't so much of a burden. Hell, the Governor might even use it as a holiday destination.
Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote: I'd say it's not of any particular use other than for tough dudes to enlist, which is still mostly a byproduct most of the time although as we said above they make perfect recuitment grounds for space marines and guard.
This alone is reason enough for them to exist. Civilization (and its associated decadence) have long been associated with the loss of martial spirit. That's why pre-industrial armies were recruited from the peasantry rather than urban poor. They were stronger, healthier, and were considered to have better fighting spirit.
Since we're on an Asian kick, look what happened to the Mongols when they finally conquered China: their armies went into steep decline. Southern China was terrible for horses, which made it difficult to retain that capability, and the immense wealth wrecked their hard-edged warrior system. I suspect the Imperium sees things the same way.
Otherwise I think it is mostly lack of ressources, administrative decisions taking litteral ages to be implemented, terraforming technology being hard to access and long to work, and general negligence on the part of the imperium for worlds that won't bring enough payback for the efforts deployed.
There are also those worlds that might be in wait for deeper exploitation
But by and large, really feudal worlds are kind of worthless I think.
I think you're leaving off the potential for massive agricultural surpluses. Just because they don't have guns doesn't mean they can't have mechanical skill or advanced, planet-wide irrigation systems designed by tech-priests. A tithe in kind would be hugely useful in feeding hive planets and regular drafts of population for warfare and workers would keep the population in balance
All that said, I still maintain it's purely a gaming function to allow crossover from WHFB, but there is a way to rationalize it within the fluff.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/08/19 20:54:02
Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote: I'd say it's not of any particular use other than for tough dudes to enlist, which is still mostly a byproduct most of the time although as we said above they make perfect recuitment grounds for space marines and guard.
This alone is reason enough for them to exist. Civilization (and its associated decadence) have long been associated with the loss of martial spirit. That's why pre-industrial armies were recruited from the peasantry rather than urban poor. They were stronger, healthier, and were considered to have better fighting spirit.
Since we're on an Asian kick, look what happened to the Mongols when they finally conquered China: their armies went into steep decline. Southern China was terrible for horses, which made it difficult to retain that capability, and the immense wealth wrecked their hard-edged warrior system. I suspect the Imperium sees things the same way.
[
The author tackles this concept of the "barbarian" warrior being better than the civilized, which he disagrees with and argues is a myth with the few outlier examples of such non-settled peoples triumphing sticking in the memory over all those other times when they failed against sedentary people and their states.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2023/08/20 03:00:04
Eh it is complicated and depends on which historical context you are referring to. It definitely isn't some universal rule but there were some quite famous examples.
Industrialization did meant a considerable drop in living standards, so there is the argument that a feudal warrior is likely individually better than a hive worlder.
But historically speaking said drop wasn't permanent and eventually was reversed and further improved. A modern fully trained soldier will clean the floor with any "barbarian warrior" because the modern soldier benefits from vastly superior training regime, food quality and all that.
Tyran wrote: Eh it is complicated and depends on which historical context you are referring to. It definitely isn't some universal rule but there were some quite famous examples.
Industrialization did meant a considerable drop in living standards, so there is the argument that a feudal warrior is likely individually better than a hive worlder.
But historically speaking said drop wasn't permanent and eventually was reversed and further improved. A modern fully trained soldier will clean the floor with any "barbarian warrior" because the modern soldier benefits from vastly superior training regime, food quality and all that.
The idea of the nomadic or barbarian warrior being better is also based on a paradigm of warfare in which the general day to day skills of this warrior (i.e. hunting, horseback riding etc...) are generally applicable also to warfare. This becomes less and less true the more technical warfare becomes.
The Mongols themselves struggled initially against fortified walled cities. They overcame them through the use of conquered or mercenary auxiliaries that had skilled engineers versed in siege warfare.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/08/20 07:57:07
However its important to realise that the Imperium doesn't run every world to its maximum capacity.
Exactly this.
Yes, I'm sure it would be optimal to get all feudal worlds out of their backwards state and to maximum output. But the problem is that doing that would take time, resources, and bureaucratic procedure. All of which are valuable commodities for the Imperium.
For those who have played Stellaris, the Imperium is playing a heavily modded game on a galaxy sized at billions of stars and possesses roughly a million individual planets. It is also not playing with any system automation because screw that noise, so it is manually running its worlds. Lots of them are getting largely ignored because they can't devote the time to it.
The Imperium almost certainly does pull planets out of the Feudal classification all the time. But it needs a reason to do so. Its not going to do it "just because". If a planet is discovered to have a rare and valuable resource or the local sector needs a new planet of a specific type then they'll do it.
Perhaps the local sector is experiencing a large population growth and projects they will outgrow their current Agri-world production in 100 years. They have a feudal world in the sector which has been largely left to its own devices, but it has an abundance of agricultural land on it. Boom! In go the settlers and Mechanicus to set up the industrial farming equipment. An Imperial guard regiment is requisitioned to aid in the suppression of any rebellious locals and ensure that the populace is integrated into the new workforce or just moved to areas that are not going to be used for agriculture where they will probably be left alone other than when it comes time to raise a guard regiment. Within a few decades the local culture has fully modernized and integrated with the Imperium as an Agri-world.
The same might happen if they discover massive Iron, Promethium, Adamantium, etc... deposits.
Heck, worlds might be slated to have this happen, but the paper work to get things moving has been stuck in the red tape that runs the Imperium for centuries because the limited amount of equipment and specially trained individuals who specialize in educating those who are being fully integrated into the Imperium can't be everywhere at once, and more valuable targets keep appearing all the time. So Kappa 9 Delta has to wait for its inevitable enlightenment.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
I agree that it must have been in their minds that a WHFB crossover was too cool to go by.
While I also agree on the agricultural potential, I'd tone this one down a little. They may hav wide planetary agriculture, but not necessarely all that advanced either. Plus lower technology would mean more difficulties harvesting, packing, and exporting said production.
At least however, and that brings back the "no time to care" part, it is also a world relatively self sufficient, so again it doesn't cost the Imperium much.
40k: Necrons/Imperial Guard/ Space marines
Bolt Action: Germany/ USA
Project Z.
"The Dakka Dive Bar is the only place you'll hear what's really going on in the underhive. Sure you might not find a good amasec but they grill a mean groxburger. Just watch for ratlings being thrown through windows and you'll be alright." Ciaphas Cain, probably.
Iracundus wrote: The author tackles this concept of the "barbarian" warrior being better than the civilized, which he disagrees with and argues is a myth with the few outlier examples of such non-settled peoples triumphing sticking in the memory over all those other times when they failed against sedentary people and their states.
I'm not saying it's true, I'm saying the fluff does have some real-world support. R.E. Howard was all about how Conan the Cimmerian's pure wild fury would always defeat decadent civilization.
A huge part of the bias in favor of "barbarians" was the success of nomadic raiders against sedentary peoples. It is true that in the pre-industrial age, the premier "weapons system" was a horse archer trained from birth to his trade. Very hard for anyone to stop and impossible to eliminate since the vast Eurasian continent provided limitless strategic depth into which they could withdraw.
The development of superior ranged weapons (crossbows at first, later artillery) combined with the loss of that open space due to the encroachment of civilization resulted in their obsolescence.
But even before that happened, there were examples of how nomads could take empires but not hold them.
Getting back to fluff, one of the clearest proofs that "feudal worlds" are rooted in marketing rather than any kind of world-building is the presence of horse cavalry. Horses are really, really hard to support, and as soon as mechanical substitutes were available, horses fell out of favor. Indeed, one of the great limiters on nomadic raiders was the availability of foraged, which limited their area of operations.
I'm not saying the Imperium couldn't use some form of biological mount, but the choice of horse was rooted in the fact that they already had the plastic kits in production for the fantasy line and could just make some new riders for them. Same for the Exodite dragon-riders.
Commissar von Toussaint wrote: I'm not saying the Imperium couldn't use some form of biological mount, but the choice of horse was rooted in the fact that they already had the plastic kits in production for the fantasy line and could just make some new riders for them. Same for the Exodite dragon-riders.
The Imperium is supremely lazy at recruiting. If a Feudal World has a preference for mounted combat, then it will raise Rough Rider regiments from that planet because it's easier than training the people to be front-line grunts or tankers.
It does the exact same thing with Feral Worlders where they get given a gun but aren't even slightly expected to use them because the Imperium needs bodies and the Feral Worlders provide that.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Culture shock aside, standard IG training should be easy enough to ingrain into them, especially their world has a pre-existing warrior culture.
Which again is the strength of the not-at-all-humble Lasgun. If you can work a Crossbow, you can most certainly work a Lasgun, which in certain respects is probably more user friendly. Heck, any one who can effectively shoot a bow from horseback should be able to do the same with a Lasgun?
I think we could also argue someone from a Feudal world is going to be more used to proper equipment maintenance and the overall importance thereof.
Even artillery may not be that much of a stretch, if they have trebuchet and ballista. A Lascannon Tripod, Basilisk and Medusa type stuff all work in almost the same way (line it up, calculate your parabola, let fly)
But hey. They’re still human and as such pretty adaptable. Sure they’d almost certainly find it tough going at first, but one has to assume some accommodation exists for such issues.
You've failed to factor in transtechnological dread
