Phil Eklund
United States
Tucson
Arizona
-
I have been asked to compare my game "Origins" with other worthy Civ-Lite games, such as "Through the Ages".
To start with, Origins is in its own genre. It is a game about mankind, not civilization. Thus the scale is grander. Other Civ variants start perhaps 10,000 years ago; Origins begins 120,000 years ago, at the dawn of Homo Sapiens, with turn lengths of 1000 years. Believe it or not, this game investigates how humans came to have big brains, emotions, pair-bonding, art, consciousness, and ideas. (I used Minthrin's theories on how language and concepts formed, Jaynes' theory on how consciousness developed, and Jared Diamond's theories on the prosperity of civilizations.) The Eras are grander in scale as well. In Origins Era I, players take the role of different species, by Era II, they assume the role of language groups, by Era III, they assume the identity of religions, and finally by Era IV (expanded game), they are competing ideologies.
Origins employs a libertarian view of the role of government. In other Civilization-style games, the players assume the roles of governments, acting as paternalistic bureaucrats. They keep the masses happy, by building coliseums, public artworks, welfare, and the like. They keep the masses smart, by funding public libraries, Manhattan projects, and the like. They gain notoriety for their civilizations, by building "wonders", sending men to the moon, and the like. Origins turns this paradigm on its head. Players take the roles of the populace, whose job is to keep the governments under control. The only role of such governments is to keep the people free: free to be smart, or happy, or entrepreneurs, or whatever they wish. Freedom is regarded as the basic human value: freedom of speech, religion, business, travel, and trade. Thus, by the time the (expanded) game gets to the modern era, the important elements of life are things like Walmart, Disney, and MacDonalds.
A unique feature of Origins is how it ties women’s values (love, pair bonding, fidelity, monogamy, child raising) with population demographies. It also features an unusual economy: instead of having a treasury, it bases its GNP entirely on the numbers and productivity of its specialists. (This was necessary, because the game predates currency.) Another singular concept is a unit's "Footprint", by which wandering herdsmen are distinguished from agriculturalists of various levels of sophistication. Another striking feature is that Origins adopts the Far Eastern "dynastic" theory of progress. This interprets cycles of dark and golden ages as periods when major change disrupts the populace, clearing the way for advancement into the next era. In other words, chaos is sometimes necessary to progress. While Origins has no military units as such, there are migrant units that act as hunter-gatherers, refugees, slaves, soldiers, and explorers. (However, unusual cavalry units can occur, with militia riding on zebras, mastodons, or elephant birds!). Disease resistance is handled exactly as depicted in "Guns, Germs, and Steel": by increasing immunology based upon exposure. I claim, perhaps arrogantly, that the rules are within medium Euro-game standards, even while simulating a staggering array of global trends: climate change, idolatry, ice ages, cholera, prostitution, desertification, astrology, sports, urbanization, cold war, aircraft, the green revolution, globalization, nuclear weapons, and terrorism. By March 1, I should have living rules posted at www.SierraMadreGames.com.
-
Breno K.
Brazil
Brasília
Distrito Federal
-
phileklund wrote: Thus, by the time the (expanded) game gets to the modern era, the important elements of life are things like Walmart, Disney, and MacDonalds.
How depressing.
-
Erik Nicely
United States
-
Thanks for your review Phil. Origins has been on my radar for a couple months and I think you just pushed me over the edge, I'll be getting it soon. GNP being determined by the population and number of specialists sounds like a great way to do it. From what I've read your game might actually make physical and cultural anthroplogy interesting.
-
Nick Warcholak
United States
State College
Pennsylvania
-
I've been interested in this for a while now and look forward to the living rules.
-
Breno K.
Brazil
Brasília
Distrito Federal
-
On the issue of the roles of the government, it only applies in the era in which governments exist, right? In my first quick read of your text, I imagined cavemen arguing about freedom of bussiness and religion.
Individual freedom is a concept that hardly makes sense in any context other than the modern world (modern as in what comes after the medieval times).
This sounds like an interesting game, though. I hope I get a chance to try it (I`m hopeless at imagining a game by just reading the rules).
-
Paul O'Connor
United States
San Marcos
California
-
Very nice ... this game just went onto my want list.
-
Frank Strauss
Germany
Berlin
Unspecified
-
BrenoK wrote: phileklund wrote: Thus, by the time the (expanded) game gets to the modern era, the important elements of life are things like Walmart, Disney, and MacDonalds. How depressing.
Isn´t the most important element in life "Boardgamegeek.com" ?
-
Phil Eklund
United States
Tucson
Arizona
-
The definition of government (that I used in the game Origins) is: the group that has a monopoly of force in a given area. So a neighborhood gang can be the government if that's the group that arbitrates what goes on in an area. From that perspective, governments have been around since humans have formed cliques. (likely over 10 million years, since chimpanzees form cliques). Era I, the start of the game, predates the invention of concepts and names. Strange to imagine "names" as something that had to be invented! Just giving members of one's troop names, thus storing their identities in memory under a verbal label (a breakthrough in psycho-epistemology), establishes the vestiges of a government in Origins. I agree with Breno that individual freedom was not possible until the concept of the individual was first developed (quite late, this breakthrough established the first conscious beings that kick-starts Era III).
-
I am happy.
United States
Milford
Ohio
Be Good, Play Happy
By the power of Greyskull!
-
phileklund wrote: Other Civ variants start perhaps 10,000 years ago; Origins begins 120,000 years ago, at the dawn of Homo Sapiens, with turn lengths of 1000 years.
Right around the time when man conquered the dinosaurs!
-
Russ Massey
United Kingdom
-
Boss Happy wrote: phileklund wrote: Other Civ variants start perhaps 10,000 years ago; Origins begins 120,000 years ago, at the dawn of Homo Sapiens, with turn lengths of 1000 years. Right around the time when man conquered the dinosaurs!
I think you'll find that was 1,000,000 years BC, at the time of the invention of the fur bikini.
-
Tom Lehmann
United States
Palo Alto
California
-
Interesting read, Phil. If I understand you correctly (I haven't played Origins yet, but am interested in the idea and so read your article above), you've taken some of Diamond's ideas, but have ignored others (zebras can't be domesticated, due to not having an "alpha" hierarchy for man to place himself at the top of, or that governments arose not to provide freedom, but basic personal safety from extended family feuds and casual murder). Do you not believe these ideas of his are valid? If so, could you provide pointers to relevant literature?
-
Phil Eklund
United States
Tucson
Arizona
-
Hello Tom,
Jared Diamond's 9th chapter is named after the Anna Karenina principle, which he restates as: "Domesticable animals are all alike, every undomesticable animal is undomesticable in its own way." The upshot of this is: "A player cannot tell beforehand which animals are domesticable and which not." Therefore, I included a variety of megafauna to the Origins map (some of which have since gone extinct) and its up to the roll of the die which animals are suitable. Some (like cattle and glyptodonts) are more easily tamed, some are more likely to be war animals, and some are more likely to be ferocious (and to go extinct).
I disagree (somewhat) with Diamond's answer to "Yali's question" (Why are some societies great and others impoverished?) "Guns, Germs, and Steel" advocates geographical determinism, that is, great civilizations became such because of geography and resources, especially animal and crop resources. That thesis is largely true in Era II (The Bicameral Age), but only mildly true in Era III (The Age of Faith), and largely untrue in Era IV (The Age of Reason). Ever since the invention of ideas (which heralds the start of Era II), ideas have been increasingly more important than resources. Because ideas literally create their own resources, they allowed the rise of great resource-impoverished societies such as England & US (19th century), Japan, Hong Kong, Antwerp & the Netherlands (15th thru 17th centuries), and Liechtenstein & Switzerland (today having some of the world's highest GNPs).
For your political question, I agree with Diamond (and the U.S. founding fathers) that a valid government is one that defends individual freedom, from those who would negate it, including feuding relatives and casual murderous thugs. All of the aforementioned lands attained their wealth largely through freedom-oriented ideas such as free-trade. Diamond admits that globalization, begun by the Dutch explorers and traders, has made the old rules of wealth obsolete. My bibliography is contained on the last page of the Origins rules, that I hope to have (in living rules format) up at my site on March 1.
-
Ken Waters
United States
Aloha
Oregon
-
phileklund wrote: (I used Minthrin's theories on how language and concepts formed, Jaynes' theory on how consciousness developed, and Jared Diamond's theories on the prosperity of civilizations.)
Wow, never thought I'd see a game that includes the breakdown of the bicameral mind (Jaynes), now I gotta get this one for sure....
-
Andrew Chapman
Australia
Norwood
SA
-
I'm tempted, too. But I don't understand why you chose Jayne's theory, which has to be one of the most wacky and evidence-free ideas about the development of consciousness. Perhaps it makes for good game play. Great to see that Diamond's ideas have finally made their way into a game, though. About time! I'm sick of the grand dictator version of Civilisation games.
-
Phil Eklund
United States
Tucson
Arizona
-
The idea that consciousness is a product of language (rather than the other way around) has plenty of testable evidence. I will mention two: the fact that humans are born without able without a sense of self and unable to picture themselves performing tasks until they learn to speak, and the fact that memories are stored in the brain in lingual form, and converted to images when recalled. As for the alternate theories of how consciousness comes to be: well, actually, there ARE no competing theories, Jaynes has the first (that doesn't invoke supernatural agents). Besides the origin of consciousness, his theory is the only one to explain hypnosis and the universal appeal of poetry & music. It also explains the whys of earworms and jingles, hallucinogens, gods and demons, oracles, tombstones, the universal ancient practice of treating the dead as if alive, speaking in tongues, imaginary friends, iconoclasm, and the quest for authorizations including God, & many other things with no obvious survival value & no analogs in the animal world. Most of these elements are in this game!
-
Phil Eklund
United States
Tucson
Arizona
-
Deodand wrote: About time! I'm sick of the grand dictator version of Civilisation games.
Yes, the idea that each player is a supreme dictator that benevolently micromanages the citizenry of his empire is so very soviet. In Origins, management is from the bottom up, rather than the top down. Players assume the roles of species in era I, languages in era II, religions in era III, and ideologies in era IV.
-
Doug Acker
United States
Hartwell
Georgia
-
I stumbled upon this while looking for rules for High Frontier, and I am delighted to learn about a game that includes Julian Jaynes and Jarrod Diamond. I will order this today.
-
|
|
