Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ What would the world look like without the NAN?

Posted by: Ravor Jan 19 2007, 07:37 AM

I was wondering what people thought the Sixth World would look like in 2070 if the Ghost Dance hadn't won the war and the United States had survived intact.

Posted by: emo samurai Jan 19 2007, 07:43 AM

Hmmm... I'm thinking, war with Japan? Or maybe not. I mean, they probably wouldn't have gone after California if it was still the USA.

Posted by: mfb Jan 19 2007, 07:51 AM

more likely, war with Aztlan. but how intact do you mean? no TT at all? Cali is still a state?

Posted by: Kagetenshi Jan 19 2007, 12:18 PM

Much less interesting.

~J

Posted by: Sir_Psycho Jan 19 2007, 12:51 PM

If not another war with japan, I think the awakened british empire might have come to reclaim the land that the yankees swindled them of. ARGH! REDCOATS.

As for the motherland, I bet if Uluru turned into solid orichalcum, some-one might take some notice of us!

Posted by: Kagetenshi Jan 19 2007, 12:54 PM

Dude, when your continent gets less deadly instead of much, much more, then some 'Runners might be convinced to actually go there.

~J

Posted by: Demonseed Elite Jan 19 2007, 02:06 PM

If I had to design Shadowrun's North America without the NAN, I'd swing to the opposite extreme. Instead of a balkanized and neutered United States, I'd look towards a totalitarian government barely disguising itself as democracy. Today's world (un)fortunately gives a lot of inspiration for that. Between the world powers of the United States, the Japanese Imperial State, and Aztlan, I'd make the American west coast a hotbed for the shadow community and less controlled than the rest of North America.

Posted by: Sir_Psycho Jan 19 2007, 02:12 PM

Also, there could have been another American Civil war, that resulted in the CAS/UCAS split regardless of the Great Ghost Dance and the treaty of Denver.

But personally, I love the whole NAN thing, I think it's damn cool and original, and couldn't have been done in traditional cyberpunk, as Native Americans wouldn't have had the power to do it without magic.

Posted by: Ravor Jan 19 2007, 04:18 PM

Kay, now my understanding is that the Mana Spike generated by the Ghost Dance not only allows the Horrors to come through early, it also increased the natural Mana Level throughout the world right? The reason that I'm asking is because I'm thinking about pushing back the appearance of 'true' magic/meta-humans while still keeping the 2011 Timeline for the start of the Sixth Age. (As an aside, I.E.s either went to sleep like the Dragons or relied on some serious Blood Magic in order to keep their personal Mana Levels high enough to survive, and so are some pretty twisted nut-jobs.)

Now, how do people think Canada would respond to a semi-right-leaning totalitarian state on their Southern Border, especially if Alaska decided to try to cede? (Yes, I already know that I'm going to get at least one Bush joke out of this question, but what the hey. *winks*)

Posted by: hyzmarca Jan 19 2007, 06:07 PM

If the GGD never happened (which only requires removing one half-horror from the picture) then the United States and Canada, working together, would have committed the single worst act of genocide ever, systematically executing all every person with so much as a drop of native blood on the Continent of North America.

It is likely that the two countries would still merge in some form.Once your committed the single greatest act of genocide ever with someone there is really no where to go from there except merging.

Posted by: Cray74 Jan 19 2007, 07:31 PM

QUOTE (Kagetenshi)

Much less interesting.

~J

Potentially very interesting, IMO, because it can move the game to a more international/superpower level rather than a balkanized group of little punk nations on one continent.

Cyberpunk 2020 has done a pretty good cyberpunk scenario where the US is intact in the future, even if it's not in good shape and distinctly overshadowed by Japan and the EEC. The "shadowrunning" drama is either domestic against megacorps (where the presence of other nations is irrelevant) or more global rather than across (former) state lines.

And I like that feel. National borders wouldn't be just a quick excuse for smuggling or to dodge the fuzz in one nation, they mean something on a larger scale. The retained unity of the US would help drive runs to something more international, more cloak-and-dagger Cold War intelligence agency sparring than just B&E and future dungeon crawls. Shadowrun supports this sort of run now, but creating large power blocs positively drives the runs toward it.

Personally, I think there's a lot of potential for shadowrunning in a world made of a few big power blocs instead of the current balkanized setting.

Posted by: lorechaser Jan 19 2007, 07:41 PM

Where as I think that, given our current situation, and the fact that it's a dystopian future, the balkanization is far more appropriate. We've seen that countries are far more likely to segment than to unite. I don't think anyone's talking about the possibility of Iraq and Iran being Iranq, but it's more possible that Iraq will become Shiraq, Suniraq and Iraq....

Posted by: hyzmarca Jan 19 2007, 07:50 PM

QUOTE (lorechaser)

The world under heaven, after a long period of division, tends to unite; after a long period of union, tends to divide. This has been so since antiquity.

Posted by: SL James Jan 19 2007, 09:09 PM

Wow, that's a Hell of a question. I mean, you may as well be asking, "What if Alexanders's/The Roman/The Holy Roman Empires or the Third Reich had survived intact." Harry Turtledove has written volumes of alternate history stemming from much smaller flashpoints. The entire world would be different, not least of all because the United States that signed the Treaty of Denver is a much different United States than RL 2007 (which is something that certain authors in SoNA seem to have completely ignored or not realized). The U.S. in SR never became the global superpower it is now. It never reached a point where the Defense Authorization Act exceeded $400 billion in one fiscal year. To the contrary, it immediately went towards the opposite extreme (although in this instance, similar to what occured in the early 1990s) of slashing the DoD budget by 40%. When the Cold War ended (which is a major retcon from SR1, so let's assume everything from SR2-on is kosher. Working from that one would just make everything even more difficult), it completely disengaged from the world, and never re-engaged the world as a superpower, even to its own detriment. This is a U.S. where a Teamsters strike was not only tolerated by a supposed archconservative, but where it reached such a crisis that there were food riots in New York City. This is a U.S. that was controlled by the Club for Growth—whole agencies, federal corporations, and even a Constitutionally-mandated government service (USPS) were privatized as the government let corporations run roughshod over it because, well, why not? By the time you even get to what would happen to the U.S. had the GGD failed or otherwise not caused the government to surrender, it's already a different country. So, there are a couple of difference premises which determine what the government and country would look like. DE's probably closest to my own impressions, although I reject the notion that this country is edging towards a totalitarian state, nor would I inherently assume that somehow after 2018 that the US would once again become a global power. It only rose to that occassion when it did because it (and the USSR) were the only powers left standing at the end of World War 2. No event in SR has occured that would put the US back in that position (and, in fact, the Crash of '29 would further set it back), nor has there been anything to instigate a sudden desire to flex its power based solely on ideological reasons.

And this is yet one of the reasons why I'm so averse to the half-assed intent on injecting real life events into SR over the last five or six years, if for no other reason that it only happens when and how it is convenient for the author(s) to do so, rejecting any of the supposed understanding of the history of SR so that we can have al-Qaeda and a Yasser Arafat land bridge connect Gaza and the West Bank in Shadows of Asia when there is no reason to expect from all of SR's history that those two, among many other, events would occur given the time and place of when they would figure into SR. Do you honestly think for a moment that an arch-conservative isolationist would give a fuck about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Quick answer: No. Nor do I suppose said President would continue his predecessor's policy of maintaining thousands of soldiers in the region while gutting the military like a fish. But then again, it is the same region chapter that does not mention—not once—Israel's greatest ally, or what happened after said country decided to just give up and let Europe, specifically thtrough S-K (which has zero room to enter the Middle East given the other actors, but that's another story), re-enter and take what it fucked up the first time.

Posted by: Jeremiah Legacy Jan 19 2007, 09:35 PM

QUOTE (SL James)

And this is yet one of the reasons why I'm so averse to the half-assed intent on injecting real life events into SR over the last five or six years, if for no other reason that it only happens when and how it is convenient for the author(s) to do so, rejecting any of the supposed understanding of the history of SR so that we can have al-Qaeda and a Yasser Arafat land bridge connect Gaza and the West Bank in Shadows of Asia when there is no reason to expect from all of SR's history that those two, among many other, events would occur given the time and place of when they would figure into SR. Do you honestly think for a moment that an arch-conservative isolationist would give a fuck about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Quick answer: No. Nor do I suppose said President would continue his predecessor's policy of maintaining thousands of soldiers in the region while gutting the military like a fish. But then again, it is the same region chapter that does not mention—not once—Israel's greatest ally, or what happened after said country decided to just give up and let Europe, specifically thtrough S-K (which has zero room to enter the Middle East given the other actors, but that's another story), re-enter and take what it fucked up the first time.

For the most part, that is correct, and it is important for everyone to remember that the SR world took a turn away from RL in the early 1990's. But, as a note, it is entirely resonable that something else could have happened and that many events would have played out similiarly. For example, Al-Qaeda has been around and declaring war against Israel and the US since 1983.

Another issue is that there are many conservatives that would give up the rest of the world to kill itself, but protect Israel. I could go into the reasons, but they are largely religious and I simply don't have the time to get into a flame war.

Bottom line: Your main point is true, but your example of the Middle East is not.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Jan 19 2007, 09:44 PM

QUOTE (Jeremiah Legacy)

it is important for everyone to remember that the SR world took a turn away from RL in the early 1990's.

Early '80s, you mean.

~J

Posted by: SL James Jan 19 2007, 11:29 PM

QUOTE (Jeremiah Legacy @ Jan 19 2007, 03:35 PM)

Dude...

In 1983 most of the mujahadeen were fighting the Soviets while the Muslim Brotherhood part was still fighting against Egypt. And like Kage said, it diverges in the 1980s.

If anything, the U.S. wouldn't have supported a peace plan. They'd have supported Israel's attempts to KILL Arafat and soldify control over the occupied territories.

QUOTE

Another issue is that there are many conservatives that would give up the rest of the world to kill itself, but protect Israel. I could go into the reasons, but they are largely religious and I simply don't have the time to get into a flame war.

Like they did in the Second Ottoman Jihad?

Oh, wait...

Fucking Fanpro couldn't get politics right if the books were written by CFR fellows.

QUOTE

Bottom line: Your main point is true, but your example of the Middle East is not.

Yeah, I'm the one who doesn't know what he's talking about. Right.

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 20 2007, 12:18 AM

...hmmm, North America without the NAN. Interesting concept. In such a case, I would not see the USA and Canada merging into one nation. I could see a more NEEC type of alliance though. Alaska seceding? Yes they do have the oil reserves, but as an independent nation would not last long before someone like the New Soviet or Japan would look in their direction.

As to the type of government, I don't see the US becoming so much a totalitarian state as a more dispassionate one where policy is highly influenced by the various Megas (look at some of the powerful lobbies we have in RL).

Civil war? Possibly especially if US forces were weakened enough by the fight with the NAN. Though given that Aztlan would still become a major power broker, they may decide that safety in numbers is better. Keep in mind, the missile silos, largest bases, Ares, and Fed Boeing are in the north.

The one other thing I wonder about is, with the GGD failing, what would that do to magic? I would see the Awakened in the US being persecuted or at the very least highly restricted. Magic might be outlawed and casting of a spell a class A felony. Governments tend to react harshly towards a perceived greater threat. With the exception of some of the more showier combat spells, magic is more insidious and harder to detect and defend against. Look at the Red Scare of the last century, instead of "Godless Commies" we have "Godless Mages". A new type of witch hunt could ensue, this would put a new edge to being Awakened (see the Are Your Stories Depressing thread). It would be very easy to do a Telefon-like scenario with the right spells (I have already successfully run one).

I have to give this some more thought. Definitely an interesting campaign tangent.

Posted by: SL James Jan 20 2007, 01:01 AM

QUOTE (Kyoto Kid)

The one other thing I wonder about is, with the GGD failing, what would that do to magic? I would see the Awakened in the US being persecuted or at the very least highly restricted. Magic might be outlawed and casting of a spell a class A felony. Governments tend to react harshly towards a perceived greater threat.

Makes one wonder why it isn't in the UCAS, where the GGD worked.

Posted by: Moirdryd Jan 20 2007, 01:32 AM

Sounds alot like RIFTS actually... and without the NAN, if the US went so totalitarian ect.... can anyone say The COALITION!

Posted by: hyzmarca Jan 20 2007, 06:55 AM

What would the world be like if, instead of the Treaty of Denver, the USA and Canada signed an unconditional surrender, dismantled their militaries, and were occupied by Native Americans?

Posted by: Kesslan Jan 20 2007, 07:05 AM

QUOTE (Moirdryd)

Sounds alot like RIFTS actually... and without the NAN, if the US went so totalitarian ect.... can anyone say The COALITION!

It does sorta sound like the CS, just replace juicers with bioware, and swap out experiments making dogboys and such with.. corp like paracritter variants. Or maybe they did somethign wierd with shapeshifters who knows?

I'd accept a US/Canadian merger though. Or hell, even flat out war between the two, turning much of the annexed Canada into the sort of situation the CAS is. Lots of oingoing war and other parties stepping in for a piece of the pie.

If the US did more or less stay in one piece thoguh thats a huge major re-write of SR history just in north america alone. You have to figgure out what happens with Canada. What happens with the natives, what happens with Denver etc.

Personally I'd probably still see the US/Canada merger going through just say.. 10-20 years later. And an on going war with the native americans. I'm not quite sure flat out genocide would have worked. Hell you might even wind up with North America becomming another Aztlan basically.

Posted by: MYST1C Jan 20 2007, 07:32 AM

QUOTE (Demonseed Elite)

Sounds much like the "fight against terrorists"-based police-state USA from GURPS Cyberworld (written in 1993!) that has been ruled by a de facto dictator called "President" for decades as every election is canceled due to "emergency laws"...

Posted by: SL James Jan 20 2007, 08:09 AM

Wow, that's not cliche at all!

I just find it amusing how people so easily think that the United States can just cease to exist as it is, and that the entirety of the federal government is comrpised of people powerful, competent, and frankly evil enough to snap their fingers and make it happen without any serious counters by anyone in the government, or any of the states that give it power.

Goddamn statists.

Posted by: Kesslan Jan 20 2007, 08:13 AM

What isnt Cliche these days?

Posted by: SL James Jan 20 2007, 08:18 AM

Well, everything it seems. At least around here, where there is quite clearly a distinct lack of critical thinking.

Posted by: Kesslan Jan 20 2007, 08:24 AM

Well, yes. But the thing is. You cant really do something so totally unorrigional that no one thought of it before in a setting like SR without seriously chainging said setting beyond recognition, or at least comming pretty close. And even then you might well wind up cliche.

Future tech? Been done to death, biological modification, nanomodifcation, hell even energy state beings. Lasers, Phasers, Disruptors, Dissasemblers, Plasma guns, Railguns, Massdrivers, Missiles, Bombs, Drones, Robots, Spaceships, God like entities, Magic, Tech so advanced it might as well -be- magic, Psionics, higher states of conciousness, World spanning, galactic spanning, universe spanning empires, corporations, powers, wars, death, disease, destruction, a new dark age, an appocalypse, a utopia, a disytopia, worlds of ice, diamond, other unthinkable combinations. Man made, natrual, other.

We've dreamed it all. To a specific individual it may be a new idea/concept. But as far as actual ideas go. I'm not so sure there's ever really an 'orrigional' one anymore. If there is their exceedingly rare.

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 20 2007, 09:18 PM

...to include planet busting AI bombs that debate phenomenology.

Posted by: Herald of Verjigorm Jan 21 2007, 12:33 AM

QUOTE (Kyoto Kid)

...to include planet busting AI bombs that debate phenomenology.

I can point you to a dissatisfied AI missile of undefined (but big) explosive potential, but I don't remember it discussing philosophical history.

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 21 2007, 01:10 AM

...Pinback sounds the countdown for the bomb drop; but when he pulls the lever, it sounds an alarm heralding the failure of the bomb to drop. He tries again in about 10 seconds and it continues to fail to which he says "DROP DROP DROP!!!" The crew becomes frantic, trying to disarm the bomb, but it refuses. Doolittle contacts the Commander in a comical sequence, and he suggests that they try to teach the bomb phenomenology to convince it not to explode on the basis that what he perceives as real may not truly be real. Doolittle exits the ship to talk directly to the bomb. The bomb returns to the bay, saying "I must think on this further." Doolittle re-enters the ship from the back airlock, causing Talby to be blown out into space. Doolittle attempts to retrieve Talby. Pinback tries to give the bomb new orders; he responds "You are false data." Pinback becomes exceedingly angry and scared. The bomb theorizes that since he cannot prove that anything he knows truly exists, he must be God. He explodes in the bomb bay, saying "Let there be light." The ship is destroyed and Pinback and Boiler are instantly killed in the explosion.

Synopsis of closing scenes from John Carpenter's Dark Star

Is this the same "bomb" you are thinking of...?

...We return now to our regularly scheduled topic already in progress here on Dumpshock.

Posted by: SL James Jan 21 2007, 01:29 AM

Wow. I wonder what drugs he was on.

Posted by: Herald of Verjigorm Jan 21 2007, 01:34 AM

No, I was thinking of an AI missile control system that does not detonate.

Posted by: Sir_Psycho Jan 21 2007, 02:29 AM

Perhaps an AI missile system that turns into a baby sperm whale?

Posted by: RunnerPaul Jan 21 2007, 07:26 AM

QUOTE (Kyoto Kid)

John Carpenter's Dark Star

QUOTE (SL James)

Wow. I wonder what drugs he was on.

Well, in all fairness, it was his final project in film school. It wasn't supposed to have the polish or the marketability of a major Hollywood release.

And while Carpenter directed, edited, wrote the music for, and co-wrote the script, this movie very much belongs to its script's other co-writer: Dan O'Bannon, who was in the same class as John Carpenter. (Dan also played Sgt. Pinback in the movie.) Dark Star is essentially a rough draft for O'Bannon's later work, the script that would make him famous: Alien.

All the major themes are there: the whole "Long-Haul Truckers in Space" vibe intended to be a direct foil to the clean, polished look of previous films such as 2001; a shipboard computer fully aware of the danger the mission is in, but doesn't divulge details until some very specificity worded queries are put to it; chasing a lone alien through dark and disused service areas of the ship, and a large scale detonation of the ship at the end of the movie, leaving only one or two of the crew as survivors.

In short, the only major element that Dark Star is lacking compared to Alien is H.R. Giger's ribbed bio-mechanical aesthetic for the alien itself -- Dark Star's use of a red beach ball with clawed duck feet just does not compare. In fact, it's this choice of Alien design that leads me to believe that the answer to the question of "what drugs were they on?" is "ALL of them. In large quantities."

Posted by: Drraagh Jan 21 2007, 08:42 AM

One thing I've seen about these sort of discussions is that everyone has their own opinions about how things would develop. A friend of mine had discussed how China would not have seperated into a number of city states after all it has done to stay united.

Now, as for the topic of this, I think that there's about a 75-25 chance that Canada wouldn't join the US, maybe 50-50 if you include all the various terrors that happened afterwards. Reason I say that is that while Canada has a fairly decent military, we are nowhere near the power of the US. To use an example, the US goes in and makes the mess, Canada comes in to help clean up and keep the peace. That's how things have been lately. Sure, Canada was big in the world wars, but lately Canada's military is a thing of humor. We've got the Sea Kings, called such because they are always Sea King the ground, or there's their other name, 10,000 rivets flying in close formation. Our subs, well, let's just say I wouldn't be surprised if they do have screen doors.

On the other hand, I can see the same sort of non-aggression that Canada has shown making it less of a target for a lot of the political aggression and various attacks going on. Sure, I can see fear and some racism at the new metahumans, possibly resulting in violence there, but Canada could be left alone, or at least one thing to look at as well is that Canada has, and this may be a matter of opinion, more friends to call upon in time of need. We've got Britain, and I figure there's other parts of Europe we could look to for help if needed (and if they could spare it, given all the issues over there).

Posted by: Jeremiah Legacy Jan 22 2007, 06:55 AM

QUOTE (SL James @ Jan 19 2007, 03:29 PM)

Yeah, I'm the one who doesn't know what he's talking about. Right.

I never said you didn't know what you were talking about. In fact, I pointed out that you were generally right. It was that the example of the Middle East was a poor one.

There are a few isolationists, but as a general rule, political conservatives in the United States today, in the 90s and in the 80s have been pro-Israel, and for a very logical reason. The largest group of conservatives in the US is Evangelical and Fundamentalist Christians. The Bible makes a claim that God will side with those who side with Israel and against those who don't.

The second largest group of conservatives in the US are Orthodox Jews. Same reason (God took sides and do you want to be on the other side of that line?), but with a personal stake in the matter.

Ultimately, this is a futile task; we are trying to decipher a fictional world that has diverted from the real world quite some time ago.

Edited for clarification and spelling fixing

Posted by: eidolon Jan 22 2007, 03:15 PM

QUOTE (Jeremiah Legacy)

Ultimately, this is a futile task; we are trying to decipher a fictional world that has diverted from the real world quite some time ago.

You're my new hero for the day. I can't count the number of times that I've said something along these lines in various discussions. Tech, politics, social issues. It's a fictional world that stopped being "ours" when it was originally written in the 80s. While it gives us great flexibility, it also prevents anyone from being "right" (unless that someone happens to be a writer whose ideas and opinions get written into canon, and even then we as players are free to change, ignore, or use it as we see fit).