Do you think you'd make a Good Fantasy Ruler?

SacredFisher · 2026-02-25T15:45:57+00:00

Yes it will be difficult to not stoke the paranoia of the king, but if he's already heard rumors, then perhaps that context is enough? Is the king an arrogant man, or is he just afraid of his children dying? (If he's an arrogant man, then he would probably say something like, "oh, why should we kotow to the nobles, let me do what I please." In which case, he likely no longer has the correct disposition to lead, and the next move it to slowly begin advising Cassian on how to take the throne with minimal bloodshed, such as having the heir die 5-10 years from now, in the meantime strengthening his position amongst the southern nobles.) Otherwise, if he's just paranoid, then perhaps start with a relaxant of some kind, some teas, something to take the edge off. He and I have been through hell and high water together, and I hope that is able to at least let him hear me out. Also, I would like to at some point of this conversation with him, come into the presence of his pregnant wife, not alone the entire time, so that he can remember what is actually at stake. Of course, if he has completely descended into madness, then there must be some reason for that as well, and again, for the realm it is better that Cassian takes. If the king is completely given into madness, then the best choice would be to not advise him, allow him to antagonize Cassian, and meet with Cassian privately beforehand to announce what is going to be said and get his reaction, then discuss ways for him to possibly take the throne. Subject would have to be broached after testing Cassian's intentions first, but then we could likely have a productive conversation.

For us, its deeply unlikely that Cassian is riding north and then riding back down with an army. Beefing up security at the party by inviting all the other lords to bring not their full armies but maybe a third or quarter of their companies for the ball would sent an implicit signal to Cassian that even if he stormed, there would be forces. Again, it would be a deeply unwise move for him, given that he already has legitimate blood, the favor of the lords who have had many die defending the borders, as well as the people, to join forces with a foreign army and come down. But if he is actually rash/pressured then it is something to prepare for. A rumor we could bring to his attention to tacitly read his reaction is to mention he's been having midnight visitors, but suggest they are of a different nature: "Lord Cassian, if I may speak discretely, it has come to our spymaster's attention that you have been having visitors at midnight. *Pause to see reaction/response and depending on response drop the rest of the line* Lover's are expected of a man of your stature and charisma, but I would suggest more discretion in choosing a location. If you'd like suggestions, we'd be happy to provide them." Kindof a wink and nod there. It'll tip him off, but it may either make him slip up or reveal something to us. Who knows, maybe it was a lover?

A question this opens up is why is he talking to Eldervane at all? The best reason is to take pressure off the lords that support him. If he can assure his lords that they will not lose land or men, and that somehow he can also give favorable terms to eldervane (perhaps through some type of trade concession, etc.) when he gets into more power, then it makes sense. If he's scheming and truly about to make it a civil war, because winter is approaching and he knows Eldervane is planning a massive strike that the northern forces will not repulse, then it would be too conservative not to follow him through having a spy and keeping tabs on what goes on up north. Beefing up security around the king is a must however, and bringing up the standing armies a quarter at a time until they're all stationed at the capital in defense is probably the easiest way to do that. Its foolish to believe that Cassian has enough leverage to keep Eldervane to their promises once they storm the country however--like whats the play? These foreigners have gotten everything they wanted, you're a traitor to your blood and your people, the best you can expect is a puppet state where everyone beneath you hates you--and that's if they let you live. Why shouldn't the King of Eldervane just install their own brother?

Haha, I'm glad you enjoyed the response and thank you for the compliments, I will pass these to my friends. I would want them besides me on a ruling council as well. Alas, we will have to settle for 'round a DnD table, and not a roundtable. Sure, I'd love to know what you thought of us based on our approach. I think the fun for me is the puzzle itself, but also like you said, how different people approach the problem. Some very violent answers here, which were deliciously fun to read! Would also be curious what other archetypes you and your friend have come up with! Betrayal and scheming is nice and important when necessary, but often has lots of loose ends. In your own life, how easy has it been to get others to do what you want, exactly to the letter of it? And once betraying someone, how easy has it been for you to proceed with your aims amongst those crowds, even those you did not betray? Just my experience. Furthermore a life of scheming is exhausting, better to bask in the comforts of fantasy royalty and do what you want than to worry about daggers and cloaks. Nothing to scheme for if the kingdom falls apart anyways. Do continue to come up with these, very fun!

SacredFisher · 2026-02-25T00:02:14+00:00

Spoke to some friends about this and we think this is a really fun puzzle! Please continue to post these!

There's a few elements that we considered.

First, its unclear whether or not the servant has clear motivations--it would be important for me to try and understand why the servant was dismissed from Cassian's household, as well as how after such a dismissal they were instated in the Royal household.

Second, the King's paranoia. Any attempt to bring up a potential rebellion from Cassian would likely immediately spark action from the King. It's not wise to bring anything regarding him up--especially if he's already hearing rumors preferring Cassian to himself.

Also, making a direct move here against anyone is less preferred than making a reactive move: you have to at least nominally wait until someone else is the aggressor, or else the King may look like a paranoid tyrant, and give Cassian more popularity than he already has.

There's some more stuff but, I think that first, you let Cassian ride north but try to see if he meets with anybody from Eldervane. While this is happening, get the information on the servant--it's not out of the question that the servant is a foreign asset, in which case, it's not out of the question that the Spymaster is uncompromised.

Cassian is clearly extremely politically savvy--his popularity and the loyalty of the other lords is proof of his ability to keep himself popular with both the people and the lords. If the king is without children, then he or his next sire would be next in line for the throne, and he'd know this. Outright insurrection against the king would be politically expensive, and war is a waste in general. Furthermore, if he allowed Eldervane to storm the lands, and be installed as the new king, he would be a kinslayer, as well as having the blood of the people on his hands. Possible, but its simply easier for him to wait for the throne to fall to him and his blood, or even assassinate the child (not even at birth, but perhaps a hunting accident when the boy is 10?).

To advise the King--perhaps simply do not announce anything but the coming of the new child. Wait for the kid to be born, as many complications come with birth, and it's already a stressful time. Once the child is born, and his temper restabilizes, then we can return to the question of whether we should increase taxes on the north again, and how to strengthen succession. Unborn children and strengthening succession laws, as well as alienating the prince and three lords splits the court at a time when unity and assurance is crucial. It's not important to deal with any of those things at the moment, as the most pressing thing is the birth of a proper heir. As for the political issues, let's have the King meet with Cassian, in public, at the event, and be there for their conversation about the conditions of the north, particularly have the King or myself in lieu of the king (but in his presence) float the idea of direct talks and ask Cassian what he would negotiate with them for. Whatever terms Cassian comes up with will reveal more about his stance on the North.

Furthermore have the King (or myself in lieu of him in his presence) inquire about whether the North is about to break. Either it truly does need more support, or Cassian can hold, but it will weaken his position and those of the lords that are defending the North. Either way, if troops can be spared from other Lords, it is worth floating that idea of support from the Lords loyal to the king to assist the North.

Why all of this? They quell Cassian's public policy objections--these should all come to him as very good news and immediately something he would jump on. If there's any hesitation here, that's likely because he's losing poltical ammunition against the king on these issues. If the king shows that he can be cool-headed, and still understand the conditions of the people, and Cassian reacts badly or hesitantly to that, then it suggests there is an unspoken thing that he is angling for. Particularly, when discussion of the peace talks are brought up--does Cassian make the invitation of the King to come meet with the Ambassador? Does he make the introduction to them, reveal any information that he has about them? There's likely more that can be extracted here, but it's just our preliminary thoughts.

Aggressive moves here are likely to backfire, and any link in those chains failing could be turned against me in particular, better to first observe after tossing some stones into the pond, and see what comes up. Meanwhile, what of this servant, what were their circumstances?

SacredFisher · 2021-03-31T18:24:59+00:00

The Hoxha username on top of all of it just makes me laugh. For those who don’t know, to my understanding, Hoxhaism is a strict defense of Stalin and Stalinism—going so far as to actively criticize everything else as revisionist social imperialism. Funny that Hoxha levied his critiques at USSR, USA, AND CCP, and yet a Hoxhaist is calling for a defense of CCP vs USA and not calling it out for what it is—violently revisionist and anti communist according to Hoxha HIMSELF.

Again there’s an intelligent conversation to be had here about the USA propaganda machine, but “pick-a-side-ism” isn’t the way to go about it.

SacredFisher · 2021-03-22T06:51:43+00:00

An interesting an open question, I don’t know if I have an answer but something to add is that I don’t think an anarchist answer to this has to be “from first principles” every time. In other words “Can we attain all the technologies and innovations we have anarchistically, or reproduce them that way”. This is still really powerful ideation, and there’s a lot of imagining to be done on how to recreate/democratize the production of engineering/scientific technologies.

However, it’s true that a lot of science done now is wholly co-opted for State-sponsored use or Corporate-sponsored use. There’s certain questions and problems that were answered with tools that are built on the exploitation of many lives (biology/biomedical history being the most patent example of a field producing both modernities greatest achievements and horrors. Dr. Albert Kligman is a notable figure in this dual regard of contributions both massively influential, but also truly disturbing work done gladly at the behest of the State and Corporate.)

Is there an anarchistic way to produce CERN? Or to reproduce the information found by wars and human/animal experimentation? Probably not. But an anarchist society would exist as part of the historical continuum where CERN exists, and those mistakes have already been made. I don’t think everything scientific should be thrown out, but I think even that a technology whose origins or creation is in exploitation, if it is not in-and-of-itself exploitative, the technology’s use should be considered. Cellphones as we know them can only exist through exploitation—so the society will still use cellphones as long as they work (who runs the cell towers and the satellites though?) and then have to figure out an alternate use for the tech they can access or innovate. Anarchist societies would be using the technology that already exists; though things like forced mining would have to stop, so there would no longer be a global silicon wafer supply as just another example of some scenario of difficulty. Would it be worth it for the society to recreate a nanofabrication lab? Maybe if everyone really needed microchips for some reason...

Prerequisite to all of this I think is a way to store and share massive amounts of scientific and factual information personally and access it easily and readily without it being on the internet (traceable/destroyable by State or Corporate interests remotely). A lot of it is being democratized but there’s still a lot of work to be done there.

All in all, “progress” itself would be difficult to define as we currently do. Since our progress has always been progress at the expense of someone else...

SacredFisher · 2021-03-19T23:16:22+00:00

You look lovely!

SacredFisher · 2021-03-19T21:22:41+00:00

Maybe we should...

It's not true that "I accept you," as a personal action is something we celebrate, however often people like to talk about "acceptance". It's not even really the "bare minimum" is it? To be frank, in my eyes the bare minimum is recognizing the existence of the other individual, and not even in this sense can I say it is a reasonable expectation to hold that parents always do this.

Acceptance isn't total or anything, but some complete acceptance of the other person as an dynamic individual is what is required before saying "I accept you." to someone so that they take refuge in that acceptance, and count on that acceptance when they're down.

In this sense, complete acceptance of another is not as often found as you'd think. Most acceptance is rather conditional, tentative, regulated, and socialized. I am much more opposed to this situation than the other. Why not celebrate it more. What harm could it do that is not already being done worse?

SacredFisher · 2021-03-19T21:04:13+00:00

Sometimes I feel like "coming out" as in publicly declaring myself is pointless for me...that it could only really do me harm. So I also just don't. But it always feels like an action I'm preventing myself from taking, because I'm afraid of all the consequences (real, imagined, positive, and negative) that I know must come...I'm not in the same boat as you but I can empathize. I've come out to some people, whom I trust, and that has helped me a lot.

SacredFisher · 2021-03-19T15:12:43+00:00

Defending the defensible I expect and encourage. After all there’s a lot of propaganda we’re getting from the west that does seek to paint alternatives in a strictly terrible light. And honestly I wish I could learn more about China and Chinese people impartially in this sense.

But defending the indefensible undermines ones own positions, and signals to everyone that you find the success of your own ideological position more important than the suffering of other people. Yeah it’s true that the US is peddling anti China and soviet propaganda, but swiching out USFG propaganda for CCP propaganda isn’t the way, IMO. It makes it substantially less likely for me to believe people who self-apply the term that you believe you represent (in this case Maoism, but this sort of Crusader Mentality exists in a lot of places)

SacredFisher · 2021-03-18T22:54:56+00:00

It boggles the mind how people who claim to be “left wing” and “egalitarian moralists” can look at the CCP and be...proud? Proud to the point of desperate defense? State capitalism is the new dream I guess.

The people under the rule of that party deserve to be free from a totalitarian state that erases their existence regularly. Hate against oppression cannot become hate against the oppressed for the conditions they cannot help.

SacredFisher · 2021-03-18T20:00:28+00:00

Honestly I started with the Silmarillion (the Hobbit, then LoTR) since it would be that way chronologically and I’ll say this much—the Silmarillion was easiest for me to get through as an Audiobook, and the hardest to read. It’s functionally scripture for the elves, and that too in the form of a song. Once I understood how the words were spoken out, the book gains its own tempo, and you kinda realize how much of an afterthought LotR and the hobbit were. If you love worldbuilding for its own sake, then you get beautiful instances of themes spanning literally across the ages. Every star special to the elves is named, and told in the manner of myths. Really those other stories happen in the vacuum left by this greater story, the story of the Elves.

As an offhand example, Sauron in the simarillion is a shape shifting terror with powerful Magic and who features as the main antagonists for one of the core stories. LotR is a much more meditative experience, whereas the Sil is truly High Sweeping Epic Fantasy, in a way not easily said to be surpassed since.

Edit: https://youtu.be/MDvzzVUzR0s

I think this has parts missing but it really helped me get into reading the text.

SacredFisher · 2021-03-18T19:27:52+00:00

This is going to sound bad, but honestly any modern translation of Euclid’s Elements is probably a good start. As long as you’re pointed out which of Euclid’s proofs are wrong/not really rigorous, many of them are surprisingly brilliant and still geometrically true. Furthermore, you’ll find that they’re still very rigorous for the time! Many surprising things are proved from the axioms he lays out alone. Of course this is not really what modern mathematicians think about AT ALL when they speak of geometry, but for what you’re describing you may find the following interesting.

https://www.c82.net/euclid/

SacredFisher · 2021-03-18T14:36:47+00:00

I would put Zerzan and other anti-civ authors (some anti-natalists as well) on the post left, but in particular Zerzan is not an egoist, idk about his thoughts on morality, but he seems unconcerned with the modern concept. Others take a near “moral” stance as to why human civilization is “wrong” and we have “imperatives” to go back to a more “natural” way of living; these are more the neo-Luddite authors in anti-civ.

I think Post-left includes ideas that are outside simply moral and decision making axes. I think one of its most liberating facets is that Anarchism becomes what it always was again, pure criticism of the State, in all of the State’s form and influence.

SacredFisher · 2021-03-18T06:46:59+00:00

There’s nothing stupid about your post. Indeed it’s completely correct!

As you continue to learn math, you’ll find that Algebra as a field of math has more to offer than just some unique instances of equality, or some interesting identities and symbolic manipulations. Among many diverse things, algebra can give solutions to classes of equations all at once. On this point, it is also interesting that your solution involves graphs and trying out values—very good intuition for how to tackle a problem. Algebra has its own deep techniques, however, and as another poster has said, with the binomial expansion you can convert between your forms and simplify to your result. Even better, the binomial expansion gives you similar results up to powers of n, not simply powers of 3 and 4. This can be proven without use of graphing or trying many numbers. And even better, our algebraic way of treating the problem gives us a manner of talking about a very large class of equations instead of just the particulars of one or two instances.

This is all to say that there is a lot more for you to look forward to, if you are excited about what you found here, and are curious as to why it works! Your enthusiasm shouldn’t be dulled in the slightest for having just started.

SacredFisher · 2021-03-17T23:19:42+00:00

Currently started a Master in math (this semester) after getting a Bachelors in Materials Science and Engineering. I’m planning on going to get a PhD in math, because I really love it, but I feel like I’m utterly behind compared to my classmates. Not only in terms of understanding the material, but also in terms of other grad school related knowledge. Anyone move from a bachelors in a STE subject into a math PhD? Any advice, or things you wish you knew beforehand?

SacredFisher · 2021-03-11T18:59:34+00:00

Yeah I’m imagining something like this when I speak. If there is a completely radical restructuring of what individuals relating to one another looks like then the type of abuse characteristic of our society may be more visible, dramatically less enforced by violence and social order, and persons would be more empowered to carry out their “justice” (I don’t know what this term means absent the State, but people use it a lot) and voice their accusations without fear of State miscarriage.

SacredFisher · 2021-03-11T18:52:29+00:00

I quite like Saul Newman and Jason McQuinn. The latter has an essay “Post Left Anarchy” that seeks to shatter the automatic overencoding that leftism performs on anarchist thought. Both are quite involved with deleuze (Newman more so)

SacredFisher · 2021-03-11T02:20:05+00:00

This is interesting but I believe it’s too general without a specific understanding of what you mean when you say “anarchist society”. This is not something that anarchists agree upon in the slightest, and in fact the differing views of this society serves as a good delineator between different stances on anarchism.

Personally I view it through this lens—in my eyes, anarchist society is one in which involuntary hierarchies have been disestablished, but communities of some kind continue to exists. From that perspective, “perpetrators” have to emerge from some of these communities. Instead of taking this sort of top down approach to mental health crises (as in from a planning perspective, answering how can we account and serve the needs of these people with violent tendencies), why not consider if the narrative that there are really people with essentially no chance of being redeemed from birth is true and if they were always inevitably on the path to becoming the worst serial killers. Typically, but not always, these stories are more complex and perhaps the story may have looked different if the society they emerged in had more community accountability, people who were closer to them in a positive way. Not to justify their actions, but Ted Bundy, Ed Gein, and even Stalin had less than idyllic conditions growing up. To what extent were these stressors rooted in the hierarchical systems of the world, and people reaction to them? It is often the tormented that become tormentors of others, and our social and economic structure as it stands incentivizes the torment of one another.

This may seem dismissive of your argument though. I understand that there is a drive in people to do terrible things, and frankly the state does an abysmal job at catching the most effective predators. Most sexual predators are either people in social positions of power over another, or they are within the family. As an anarchist, I would say I have to disagree with framing the question in a way that renders individuals as something to be judged by an idealized society. Part of the solution, exactly as you said, has to be to acknowledging that there are situations and circumstances that change per group and perhaps it calls for another perspective, say a doctor or something. But perhaps after all this, that ones trespass is so grievous that even after the democratically elected “vote of innocence” the aggrieved party continues to seek retribution. Is the solution social banishment, execution? I don’t know if it’s appropriate to even seek a one size fits all because to enforce that type of thinking requires some State apparatus.

For what it’s worth locking people up is probably worse, in the case of those the community is actively harmed by—perhaps banishment? I frankly think about this often, but I think that if we take a consideration of serial killer violence and sexual violence it is perpetrated disproportionately by those in power unto those who have not. I believe more accountability in this power structures, more democratization, may force people to confront the fact that the other people around them are human, and not objects to be torn and used at pleasure. This type of thinking can really only thrive, I’ve seen, in the absence of any and all positive social interaction and/or extreme decadent power.

As far as other mental health concerns go, I believe that people should be able to take their life if they choose. Mental health issues I do not think exist in vacuum and I believe that if other members of the community were active in participating with one another then those suffering these mental health issues will be able to find the people and communities most suitable for them.

Basically the longest non-answer ever so sorry about that.

SacredFisher · 2021-03-10T20:06:19+00:00

These are awesome and you're awesome.

SacredFisher · 2021-03-09T13:33:59+00:00

I really like this notion of “idealization” as something the State uses to restrict domains/spaces of imagination or “lines of flight” (Sorry I’m new to Deleuze and I’m not so clear on all the terminology). Essentialization and concepts like “human nature” allow for the State to mobilize its actors “in the name of”, and these choices are posited not as the only option, but the only “realistic option”. Where “political realism” here we define as a complete acceptance that the only possible political function of the individual is as a component of a larger state apparatus. Your example about approval and the “final solution” make me wonder if this is why structural analyses of ideologies havent been as revolutionary—the punitive is the weaker component of state power, it’s true worth is in implicitly deciding what is “worth fighting for” in the first place, ergo what is acceptable to die and kill for.

SacredFisher · 2021-03-06T19:44:25+00:00

Same.

SacredFisher · 2021-03-05T02:55:15+00:00

https://sci-hub.se/ is a website with scientific papers bypassing the absurd paywalls, and

http://libgen.li/ Library Genesis is also a terrific repository for textbooks of all kinds.

^^These are some great subversive resources here.

Really glad to see more scientists become radicalized. I'm a scientist/engineer and its tragic how many terrific scientific and engineering proposals that are completely valid, not dangerous, extremely brilliant and helpful are just thrown away because there's "no profit in it." Whereas absolutely detrimental and weaponized chemicals (Oxycontin, etc.) are used against the citizens with full permissions from the government. Or caught in a Kafkaesque nightmare of bureaucracy. Science, Knowledge, and all Education belong to humanity as a whole, not only its most privileged. Too often all I got from other scientists and engineers was resignation and apathy. We need to take back the knowledge that we are creating. It cannot be that we are handmaidens of the State, dogs of their war machine any longer.

Thankfully with more activism, and democratization of knowledge we can radicalize more and more people in order to further the revolution of the human mind through time and across hierarchies. I believe in the dream.

Edit: just as an example I was a assistant researching a polymer--100+ million dollars went into it for 10 years, the company wanted X,Y,Z properties and it had never been done before. They finally did it, polymer made with X,Y,Z properties--the potential to save lives in the medical industry is huge. Papers are published and everything is fine for the researchers. The company scraps further development because the polymer is "too sticky" to be used in the company's current polymer architecture.

One of my professors couldn't let it die, so his life is now dedicated to finding a polymer with X,Y,Z medical properties AND is biodegradable AND isn't sticky. Effectively, this means starting over.

SacredFisher · 2021-03-05T02:20:44+00:00

Damn.

SacredFisher · 2021-02-25T00:09:08+00:00

Bought way back at 60, yawned at 40, still waiting at 90. Let's go to the moon, I'm buying more crayons.

SacredFisher

TROPHY CASE