Welcome! These forums will be deactivated by the end of this year. The conversation continues in a new morph over on Discord! Please join us there for a more active conversation and the occasional opportunity to ask developers questions directly! Go to the PS+ Discord Server.

Martian geopolitics (was "Missing Inventions?")

11 posts / 0 new

Last post

Tue, 2011-10-11 17:43

Jay Dugger Jay Dugger's picture

Martian geopolitics (was "Missing Inventions?")

Xagroth wrote:
Frankly, I see only three reasons there is no real War in Mars in Eclipse Phase: first, the barsoomians don't have the means and they know it (they are struggling to survive inside morphs with programmed obsolescence, after all...), second the PC is really careful to not press too hard, and keeps everything it can in check. And third, the barsoomians know that they have no chance in hell of turning Mars into a more costly op than the PC wanna pay without ruining the planet for hundreds of years.

Good points all. Barsoomians, almost by definition, lack off-Mars resources. Conduit makes an exception to this, but they deal mostly in information and self-restraint prevents them from weaponizing their server-sky cloud. OTOH, in Martian Autumn...

Spoiler: Highlight to view

...Barsoomians do try to get off-Mars resources to bear on their side. They don't much try to deny the P.C. its' off-Mars resources. Just too difficult. They will try to stop the new space elevator, in vain. This makes a terrible distraction from the one fellow who finally gets a U.C.M. planet-side. Copies will spread fast and enable precisely the calamity everyone hoped to prevent.

Second, the P.C. can afford to wait. Off-Mars resources give them power the Martian flatlanders lack. They also have other fish to fry, such as quarantining Earth. They can make serious mistakes, such as the Venusian secession, but time and demographics favor them. They just can't let things escalate too much--otherwise the guns come out from under the table. Third, the Barsoomians do exercise a lot of self-interested self-restraint. Push too hard, too fast, and the horrors of Pre-Fall Earth's wars--fresh memories in much of the surviving population--return from the dead. Slow, thorough, terraforming can continue despite much of what might happen in such a war, but current gains might become casualties. Not everyone judges that a bad idea--on all sides of the conflict. Barsoomians might want the TTA shut down, and P.C. factions might like a world-house better than a shirt-sleeve environment. In all, a Martian World War might easily enough happen without anyone intending it, and an accidental conflict might happen even with everyone working against it. No one intended the French Revolution to lead to the Reign of Terror and the Napoleonic Wars, either. The real risk I see in E.P. comes from desperation measures. The Barsoomians have no good winning strategies, not least from their lack of unity. Small groups have very potent industrial bases--they need it for survival. The P.C. can keep the pressure up and bring off-world resources ink but they've lots of places to defend from all comers--including those off-world resources. Every faction has motive and opportunity to escalate. Chemical weapons, atomic weapons, mass-produced warbots, cogno-weapons, mass-psychosurgery, and on and on and on. Who ever wants to fight can escalate the conflict one way or another. Oh, and underneath it all lies all the horrors of the Fall. The first group that loses hard has a true doomsday option in the Exsurgent virus...

—

Sometimes the delete key serves best.

Tue, 2011-10-11 19:26

Axel the Chimeric Axel the Chimeric's picture

Re: Martian geopolitics (was "Missing Inventions?")

The other reason there's not a war is that there's not really much of a reason to. The PC keeps to itself 99.9% of the time; the one time it doesn't is when it is doing major terraforming work, or perhaps road/transit enhancement. Barsoomians can frankly just tell the PC to shove off and go live in the desert, as long as they don't rake up shit for the PC. Three simple rules: 1. Don't sell black market weapons. 2. Don't cause them loss of profits. 3. Don't go spreading anarchist memes beyond your local mesh. Simple as that. While there may be occasional tension, the strength of will just tends not to be there (do you really want to fight and risk your existence, your potentially immortal existence, for a group of people you don't know getting cracked down on by the PC?).

—

[img]http://img813.imageshack.us/img813/982/exhumanbar.jpg[/img] [img]http://img804.imageshack.us/img804/4473/scumbar.jpg[/img] [img]http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/1396/gatecrasherbar.jpg[/img] [code][@-rep +1, f-rep +2][/code]

Tue, 2011-10-11 22:25

Jay Dugger Jay Dugger's picture

Re: Martian geopolitics (was "Missing Inventions?")

Axel the Chimeric wrote:
The other reason there's not a war is that there's not really much of a reason to. The PC keeps to itself 99.9% of the time; the one time it doesn't is when it is doing major terraforming work, or perhaps road/transit enhancement. Barsoomians can frankly just tell the PC to shove off and go live in the desert, as long as they don't rake up shit for the PC.

No rational person would fight a unnecessary war nor would they fight a war they reasonably expected to lose. You can find plenty of examples of warring parties making both mistakes in military history. Accurately judging military ability and necessity matters very much, but that doesn't make it easy to do. More to the point, I want to emphasize "war is the most likely existential risk" as a theme in Martian Autumn, the campaign I GM. This conveniently lets me assume much of what I want to argue in the case of that campaign's actual play. :) Casus belli abound on Mars. The idea of a moral crusade to stop infugee indentured servitude appeals to many frustrated by the Underground Railroad's slow work. Others find the Planetary Consortium's terraforming methods unsatisfactory, dangerous, or worse--temporary. The "clanking masses" snap out of their trance of self-hate and wonder why a population so obviously superior doesn't just seize power from its oppressors. Isolationists look at the weather and look at maps. The ever-thicker air and the approaching roads mean an end to their fantasies of solitude. The river rises slow, but where will it crest? Wandering the desert worked for the Israelites, but on Mars those deserts shrink. Isolationists have enemies destroying their very land! The old causes of economic ideology, religion, or even nationalism might rear their heads once more. Then you've the do-gooders hoping this time they'll catch the unintended consequences of their utopian aims. Fa Jing might grow impatient with importing Outer System volatiles to thicken Martian air. Why not just move the volatiles in Martian rock from the ground to the atmosphere? It would cost slightly more, but it would be so fast and wouldn't require any off-planet inputs. As for other people doubting what they'll do with hundreds to thousands of multi-teraton atomic demolition charges, just explain honestly. What could go wrong? Cognite and Experia both spend effort understanding and manipulating the memetic environment of Mars. Cognite has scary results. Seriously recommending mass psychosurgery of habitat populations sounds bad, but what if they honestly think all other options worse? What if they can prove it?

Axel the Chimeric wrote:
Three simple rules: 1. Don't sell black market weapons. 2. Don't cause them loss of profits. 3. Don't go spreading anarchist memes beyond your local mesh.

Fine rules of thumb! I'll certainly steal those for outback and rural settlements my players' characters visit.

Axel the Chimeric wrote:
Simple as that. While there may be occasional tension, the strength of will just tends not to be there (do you really want to fight and risk your existence, your potentially immortal existence, for a group of people you don't know getting cracked down on by the PC?).

The stakes are indeed higher: immortality gives you more to lose. That makes action more urgent. A minority opinion, no doubt, but super-empowered individuals abound on Mars as a consequence of the savage environment. How many people do you need to sabotage life support, or release sarin, or spread plagues, etc.? Most of the population remembers the Fall, and how bad that was, and the desperate necessary things they did to survive. Those acts, some savage or violent or even just pathetic, all worked. (Because of survivor selection bias, yes.) Everyone wants to return to normal conditions, but if things get bad? What worked before will work once more. (And lead to exactly the same transhuman calamity.) It would make a fine adventure seed to have a Gandhi-analog on Mars, preaching non-violence and practicing passive resistance. I'll have to work on that. The ironic result proved tragic in real life, and tragedy in RPGs deserves more attention than it gets.

—

Sometimes the delete key serves best.

Wed, 2011-10-12 05:13

Arenamontanus Arenamontanus's picture

Re: Martian geopolitics (was "Missing Inventions?")

I'm working on an adventure dealing with this issue too, so I am quite interested in this thread. In my game, the leader of a radical Barsoomian group has found a convenient weapon against the PC: inserting TITAN-infected debris into the material feeds for the terraforming factories. It causes risky nanotech blooms that force shut-downs, isolation measures and expensive clean-up. That it is very risky is of little concern to her: she gets a disproportionate leverage since she causes massive economic losses with a small investment in sabotage. It is very hard and expensive to patrol the mining chain leading up to the factories, and beefing up the security in one place just means she can "mail" her sabotage somewhere else. That it might also cause TITAN outbreaks is of secondary concern to her (but of major concern to the Firewall characters). Of course, her fellow Barsoomians might not appreciate her actions. Tough luck. She sees herself as the Lenin of Mars, and if the others are too wussy to follow it is their own fault...

Our Freedom, Akinyi Hendrikje wrote:
“The first step is to hit the elite where it counts: in their wallets. We will inflict as much capital damage to the status infrastructure of the oppressors as we can. They will be forced to respond by beefing up security, but that is far costlier than our interventions. And we are mobile, we can change targets, and we strike at hard to monitor early parts in the supply chain. As we spread across Mars at hit systempunkts we will get their operations to grind to a halt. The second step is to establish alternate means of communication, memetic spread and means of production. This is already being done by our pink allies who are networking with active citizens. As the elite increases repression as a response to our activities it will by necessity affect the major cities and the middle classes most strongly. This is a good thing, since we need them to come on our side rather than remain passive allies of the oppressors. Repressing the nomadic or small-settlement population is far more costly and inefficient. I almost hope they try, it will speed up the revolutionary process. The third step is to establish a strong memetic counterposition: we must seize the commanding heights through example, radical demonstration and viral sousveillance revealing the repression. Symbolic attacks on key oppressive infrastructure is ideal. It is at this point we can hope to activate the masses. Once they are activated the cost of holding the planet will go up exponentially given the economic realities of a post-service economy. At this point the Consortium is likely to wish for negotiation and appeasement, which should be resisted until a sustainable victory is assured. The fourth step is the organisation of a new social order directed against the oppressors. It will be necessary both for legitimacy and for protection against the many counter-revolutionary elements still in existence. We should not expect a clean ending, but ideally we will by this point have enough strength to force a decisive ending and establishment of a détente.”

—

Wed, 2011-10-12 05:43

Xagroth

Re: Martian geopolitics (was "Missing Inventions?")

Mmm... The Ghandi cameo looks like a good idea, however it will require a lot of thought. After all, it's not the same to act that way when cortical stacks, forking, an impersonation are things relatively easy to achieve in a setting like Eclipse Phase. I can think on a con scheme based around that... maybe even pulled by the corps to try to calm things... Of course, I'm too prone to make things a'la Timothy Zhann... ^^

Wed, 2011-10-12 09:11

Axel the Chimeric Axel the Chimeric's picture

Re: Martian geopolitics (was "Missing Inventions?")

Jay Dugger wrote:
More to the point, I want to emphasize "war is the most likely existential risk" as a theme in Martian Autumn, the campaign I GM. This conveniently lets me assume much of what I want to argue in the case of that campaign's actual play. :)

If you want to do that, you need destabilizing elements and unifying elements on both sides of the future conflict. On the one hand, you need a hardline PC overseer, who wants to see these anarchist scum brought into line. On the other, you need a Barsoomian unifier, who has united the tribes into a solid front against the fascist dogs. Otherwise, the Barsoomians are too fractious as a movement; they're anarchists, and the idea of war doesn't fit all that well in here. You'd get skirmishes, conflicts, etc. but not a war. If all the tribes were united, though, that's a different story. Then, when enough destabilizing elements are introduced (a B-movement kid is killed because he was thought to be pulling a gun and his stack is confiscated, an act of sabotage by a destabilizing element destroys a factory and threatens the safety of a dome, etc.), it becomes open war between the desert dwellers and the dome dwellers.

Jay Dugger wrote:
-Moral crusades, railroads, and nukes, oh my-

These are all excellent examples. These serve as unifiers and destabilizers for a conflict. A leader who manages to unite the interests of the disparate Martian groups would need to explain to all these people just why going after the Consortium is in their best interests, why they should work together, and how they can succeed in their goal. The PC isn't going to go gently into that good night and they'd likely torture and delete the back-ups of anyone whose cortical stack they managed to take, so the odds and stakes better damn well be favouring the rebels.

Jay Dugger wrote:
Fine rules of thumb! I'll certainly steal those for outback and rural settlements my players' characters visit.

Glad to be of service.

Jay Dugger wrote:
The stakes are indeed higher: immortality gives you more to lose. That makes action more urgent. A minority opinion, no doubt, but super-empowered individuals abound on Mars as a consequence of the savage environment. How many people do you need to sabotage life support, or release sarin, or spread plagues, etc.? Most of the population remembers the Fall, and how bad that was, and the desperate necessary things they did to survive. Those acts, some savage or violent or even just pathetic, all worked. (Because of survivor selection bias, yes.) Everyone wants to return to normal conditions, but if things get bad? What worked before will work once more. (And lead to exactly the same transhuman calamity.)

That's something that does need to be pointed out. Most transhumans that survived are not "normal" people as we know them today. At best, a significant portion are like Jewish refugees fleeing the Nazis. They've lived through hard times (Earth wasn't exactly "nice" before the Fall), they lived through harder times (the Fall, and likely an indenture period for many, especially Barsoomians and synth activists), and they're likely not going to be shy anymore as a result. I think it's kind of funny to ponder the fact that any transhuman who hasn't fired a gun or thrown a molotov or at least bashed someone's skull in with a rock is probably a little unusual.

Jay Dugger wrote:
It would make a fine adventure seed to have a Gandhi-analog on Mars, preaching non-violence and practicing passive resistance. I'll have to work on that. The ironic result proved tragic in real life, and tragedy in RPGs deserves more attention than it gets.

Another two historical figures who might echo in would be Malcom X and MLK Jr. The combination of threats of violence and preaching non-violence provides a split sort of image to the public, and, when spun right, creates a friendlier face to relate to. The violence prevents people from being able to ignore the issue, while providing something for the peaceful victims to show as saying "This is not what we are, we want unity". I can imagine a synthmorph rights advocate forking themselves for just such a purpose, with each fork taking up a different identity, leading two divisive movements, where they try to recreate that sort of effect.

—

Tue, 2011-10-18 02:25

Jay Dugger Jay Dugger's picture

Re: Martian geopolitics (was "Missing Inventions?")

Before I bump John Barnes's "How To Build A Future" and all the Bruce Bueno de Mesquita I can find to the top of my "to-read" list, to the detriment of my job, my relationship, and my own campaign, let me ask this. What do you need to know about Martian geopolitics? 1) What great powers exist on or affect Mars, and what aims do they have? 2) What historic periods provide analogies to imagined Mars, and how do I use them as templates for a game? 3) What kind of "war stories" can I play on imagined Mars, and how do I reverse-engineer a setting to support them? 4) How do I answer these questions for myself? 5) None of the above Please don't say "all of the above." I purposely omitted that to restrict the amount of work on offer.

—

Sometimes the delete key serves best.

Tue, 2011-10-18 04:51

Re-Laborat Re-Laborat's picture

Re: Martian geopolitics (was "Missing Inventions?")

Have you read the relevant elements of [i]Sunward[/i]? Just asking, because it seems like those provide, at the very least, many pointers towards answers to some of your questions...If it doesn't answer a few of them entire.

Tue, 2011-10-18 06:00

Arenamontanus Arenamontanus's picture

Re: Martian geopolitics (was "Missing Inventions?")

Jay Dugger wrote:
1) What great powers exist on or affect Mars, and what aims do they have? 2) What historic periods provide analogies to imagined Mars, and how do I use them as templates for a game? 3) What kind of "war stories" can I play on imagined Mars, and how do I reverse-engineer a setting to support them? 4) How do I answer these questions for myself? 5) None of the above

Here is my take on them: The situation on Mars is to some extent like the American West in the later years: still more than enough lawlessness and isolated communities, but central powers and major companies are making inroads. Lots of potential resonance with the early American labour movement. This already suggests plenty of stories or stealable history. Now, the real closing of the western frontier was rather peaceful - a demographic/social change from frontier to "civilized". On Mars things might go differently because of the heavy shocks - the Fall, anti-PC ideologies already in place, dangerous technologies, terrorism etc. Not to mention the possibility that there is some social virus in eclipse phase, just waiting to erupt. So imagine an analogy with that the various revolts at the time (the US has a surprising number of rebellions - the Battle of Athens 1946 is pretty interesting for EP) or even the Mormon attempt at founding Deseret gets out of hand, producing a real war situation. Another approach is to look at the main players, and see what the interactions are. So on one hand there are the Tharsis League city states that seek to retain their independence but also get wealthy by dealing with the PC. The Barsoomian, nomads and rural people want independence and a voice. The PC is nominally united in making Mars a nice home for humanity - which requires getting all those silly independence memes out of the way - but has internal differences in view and method between the competing hypercorps. Meanwhile Autonomists and Jovian agent provocateurs do their best to stir up trouble. This might be more of cold war equatorial politics than a western: superpowers aiding not very popular governments, their opposing number sending military advisers, funding and weapons to rebels. Various local groups playing the powers against each other, often fighting with each other over ideology or criminal influence. Starry eyed idealists come in from the outside trying to help, getting crushed in the process.

—

Tue, 2011-10-18 07:26

#10

Jay Dugger Jay Dugger's picture

Re: Martian geopolitics (was "Missing Inventions?")

I have, Re-Laborat, and I assume anyone participating in this thread finds them no more satisfying than I did. Answers to those questions posed for other readers helps me write more generally useful material than the campaign-specific stuff I'd normally post. No need to bore everyone with glorified "Let me tell you about my game" tales, after all.

—

Sometimes the delete key serves best.

Thu, 2011-10-20 08:57

#11

Xagroth

Re: Martian geopolitics (was "Missing Inventions?")

1) What great powers exist on or affect Mars, and what aims do they have? Tharsis League: a sort of middle point between the PC and independants, I see as the politcal part of the Barsoomian Movement (while not really part of the movement, there seems to be a lot of common goals), however aimed at the cities. Planetary consortium: Control, money, power. They want all that wherever they are. They want Mars as a sort of new capital for Transhumanity where they can get all the money they might even dream. Barsoomians: nomads mainly, they want to keep things being the way they are. In their mind, also, if you want to live in Mars outside of the domes, you should get a ruster or the mods for your morph to allow you to, instead of the pharaonic work of terraforming the whole planet. Criminal syndicates: several are mentioned in Sunward, but they are usually as united as the PC's factions. Titan tech: they have a damn "nation" (TQZ) of their own. They are the Borg, and they wanna assimilate everybody... but they are waiting. For now. Each great city: I see Venus' Morningstar's cities as some sort of calling back to the city-states of old (Machiavelo's Italy, or even the Classic greek city-states like Athens or Sparta). In Mars, this also can be seen, however the system is somehow controlled/coordinated by the PC... or at least, it would be interesting to have certain PC factions controlling more one city or another. 2) What historic periods provide analogies to imagined Mars, and how do I use them as templates for a game? Imprtant times would be The Fall and its aftereffects (from -5 to +5 AF, for example). For a period so important, I feel like a small amount of info has been provided, and I'm not talking about who nuked who and the TITANs having some agenda or another, I'm talking about what happened to the people in Mars, in the habitats, etc... 3) What kind of "war stories" can I play on imagined Mars, and how do I reverse-engineer a setting to support them? Classic stories about nomads Vs conquerors (some PC faction sends black ops troops to cull some nomad movements. And a "Zulu" like movie ensues!), classic cyberpunk stories can also be used (the Nomads sourcebook from CP 2020 can be used, I think, with a few variations). Lawrence of Arabia can be another story, and classic westerns can be recycled. By the way, I tend to tell players to imagine something on the lines of Blade Runner when we talk about New Shanghai's (or Little Shanghai) description, but I think a lot of stuff can be also taken from Warhammer 40k.