Cultural Familiarity in 9th Century Europe

[DAT]

How many different Cultural Familiarities would you say would be in Europe during the 9th Century?

Potential ones I can see could include:
Northmen (Norwary, Danes, Swede/Goth, and Rus')
Finno-Ugric Tribes (Sami / Lapplanders, Finns)
Tribes of the British Isles (Picts, Scots, Britons, Welsh, Saxon, , Celtic/ Gaels)
Slavic Tribes (Poles, Pomoryans, Serbs, Veleti, Sorbs, Czechs)
Baltic Tribes (Prus, Pomeranian
Frank and other Germanic Tribes (not already mentioned)
Islamic (Emirat of Cordova )
Byzantine/East Roman Empire
Turkish Tribes (Khazar Khanate, Avar Kingdom, Kingdom of Bulgars, Volga Bulgars, Pechenegs
Magyars (Hungarian)

Thoughts on a smaller set? Ones to combine?
Larger set?

[Ashtagon]

On the principle that there should be exactly ten...

1. Northmen (Danes, Swedes, Goths, Vikings, etc.)
2. Finno-Ugrics (Finns, Sapmi/Lapps)
3. Celts and Britons (Britons, Bretons, Gaels, Celtiberians, Picts, etc. Edit: also Saxons, Angles)
4. Slavs (Poles, Pomoryans, Serbs, Veleti, Sorbs, Czechs, Russians)
5. Balts (Prus, Pomeranians, Lithuanians, Letts)
6. Carolingians (NE Spain, N Italy, Franks, Germans, Lotharingians)
7. Islamics (Cordova, Levant, Spain)
8. Rhomaioi (Greece, Anatolia, S Italy)
9. Turkics (Khazar Khanate, Avar Kingdom, Kingdom of Bulgars, Volga Bulgars, Pechenegs)
10. Magyars (proto-Hungarians)

Yes, this does make the Slavs and the Carolingians a bit of a supergroup, culturally speaking. Part ofme wants to break up the Carolingians to make it more diverse, but I'm not sure anything can be usefully merged. Finno-Igrics and Balts seem to be the most likely candidates for a merger; Carolingians into Franks and Germans the most likely candidate for a split.



http://wiki.alternatehistory.com/lib...ch.php/843.png

[Michele]

Interesting lists.

An important consideration is whether Europe is the whole world for this campaign's purposes. Because if the characters can ever stray outside this, the number of Cultural Familiarities becomes really excessive.

Even then, 10 Cultural Familiarities for what is essentially the game world are a bit too many for my own, personal tastes. Those listed here seem to be based essentially on ethnic grouping. I'd consider religion, in this century. An argument could be made that a guy living in Seville who did not speak more than a smattering of Arabic would have much in common, culturally, with a guy from Mecca, if they both are Muslims, whereas two guys of Germanic stock would have not much in common, regardless of the possibility of talking similar languages, if one is Christian and the other pagan.
Personally, I'd find it sufficient to have:
- Western Christianity,
- Eastern Christianity,
- Islam,
- Paganism.
Educated members of the first three groups will be able to understand each other in their own lingua franca (Latin, Greek, Arabic) regardless of their ethnic group.

[Ashtagon]

Ten is the magic number in terms of game balance and points cost, oddly enough.

And you're right that individuals in a given CF region may have a personal culture different from the region they are in. Regions are not monoliths. I can quite imagine central Spain having a mix of "Carolingian" and "Islamic" CF people present, and southern Italy having a mix of "Carolingian" and "Rhomaioi".

If we are doing it by religion, then by this point in history, Scandinavia will be a mix of pagans and western Christians, and Slavic populations a mix of pagans and eastern Christians. Changing the paradigm of how you define a CF from ethno-linguistic to religion still doesn't change the problem that within a given region, ordinary people won't all fall into the same group.

Based on the map I linked to, those ten I proposed are sufficient for any adventure extending as far as north Africa, Arabia, the Middle East short of Persia, central Asia, and Russia as far as the Urals. For a campaign centred on Europe, that is plenty. I've no problem with additional CFs for more exotic areas; 10 is the magic number for CFs that the heroes should reasonably expect to visit, not for every place ever in existence (theoretically, even for a modern campaign Atlanteans and space aliens could exist; we don't count those among the ten CFs).

[Michele]

Aside from the conversation concerning 9th-c. Cultural Familiarities, I have to admit I missed the reasoning behind the idea that 10 CFs are good per se. Could you explain or provide a pointer? Thanks!

[Ashtagon]

Originally Posted by Michele

Aside from the conversation concerning 9th-c. Cultural Familiarities, I have to admit I missed the reasoning behind the idea that 10 CFs are good per se. Could you explain or provide a pointer? Thanks!

I don't have my books to hand, but briefly, the point cost of a CF is x points, and there is a talent (or whatever the proper term is) that allows a character to function as if he had every CF in the game, which costs 10x points. As such, fewer than 10 CFs means there is never a reason to purchase that talent, and more than 10 CFs means there is no reason for a party "face" not to purchase that talent.

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by Michele

Personally, I'd find it sufficient to have:
- Western Christianity,
- Eastern Christianity,
- Islam,
- Paganism.
Educated members of the first three groups will be able to understand each other in their own lingua franca (Latin, Greek, Arabic) regardless of their ethnic group.

I might break up the barbarians a bit, giving the peoples east of the Baltic and the peoples of the steppe their own CFs (or two), but otherwise yes. I would treat Scandinavia as the Northern CF (with a few members who happen to be Christians, just like some people in Frank-land happen to be Jews or pagans).

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by Ashtagon

I don't have my books to hand, but briefly, the point cost of a CF is x points, and there is a talent (or whatever the proper term is) that allows a character to function as if he had every CF in the game, which costs 10x points. As such, fewer than 10 CFs means there is never a reason to purchase that talent, and more than 10 CFs means there is no reason for a party "face" not to purchase that talent.

That really depends on how much they travel and how much the Face wants to interact with lots of other cultures. In a game with 50 cultural familiarity specialties, but a particular character, even if highly social, only expects to interact with 3, it's still a waste for him to buy that talent.

And as for the fewer than 10, is it so vital that this talent be "balanced" with the rest? In a typical TL 8 action game, for example, I rarely see a face bother with cultural familiarity unless we're particularly wide-ranging in our game or I want to specifically leverage cultural familiarity for some reason.

Some games really turn on cultures and misunderstandings (merchant games, captain-n-crew games) and a lot don't. Just because something exists in the game doesn't mean it has to be used.

[The Colonel]

Originally Posted by Ashtagon

On the principle that there should be exactly ten...

1. Northmen (Danes, Swedes, Goths, Vikings, etc.)
2. Finno-Ugrics (Finns, Sapmi/Lapps)
3. Celts and Britons (Britons, Bretons, Gaels, Celtiberians, Picts, etc.)
4. Slavs (Poles, Pomoryans, Serbs, Veleti, Sorbs, Czechs, Russians)
5. Balts (Prus, Pomeranians, Lithuanians, Letts)
6. Carolingians (NE Spain, N Italy, Franks, Germans, Lotharingians)
7. Islamics (Cordova, Levant, Spain)
8. Rhomaioi (Greece, Anatolia, S Italy)
9. Turkics (Khazar Khanate, Avar Kingdom, Kingdom of Bulgars, Volga Bulgars, Pechenegs)
10. Magyars (proto-Hungarians)

Yes, this does make the Slavs and the Carolingians a bit of a supergroup, culturally speaking. Part ofme wants to break up the Carolingians to make it more diverse, but I'm not sure anything can be usefully merged. Finno-Igrics and Balts seem to be the most likely candidates for a merger; Carolingians into Franks and Germans the most likely candidate for a split.



http://wiki.alternatehistory.com/lib...ch.php/843.png

Am I going blind or have you missed the Saxons out of that? It's a little early to be lumping them into the Northmen as Anglo-Danes but they're likely to have been at least as significant a culture group as the Celts...

[Ashtagon]

Originally Posted by The Colonel

Am I going blind or have you missed the Saxons out of that? It's a little early to be lumping them into the Northmen as Anglo-Danes but they're likely to have been at least as significant a culture group as the Celts...

Oops. I had intended to lump them in with the "Celts and Britons" group. The Angles should be there too, come to think of it.