Nice open topic this one, inspired by a comment on another thread, where the PDF of feudal worlds came up. And this for me is a topic where my opening guff is purely speculation. Please don’t take any of what follows as gospel. It’s just intended as some talking points to get the ball rolling.
But it got me thinking. Even in an empire as vast as The Imperium, surely a Feudal World is at the very least an under exploited resource? In the grand scheme of things, and compared to other Imperial Worlds, its natural resources may well be more abundant. Certainly not as depleted as Industrial or Hive Worlds.
An argument could be made that particularly for Astartes Chapters, they make useful recruitment worlds, the natives being used to greater hardship and use of initiative than many other types of worlds. But surely not on the same level as a Deathworld?
I for one just don’t understand why a Feudal World (not bagsied by a Chapter) isn’t simply transformed into an Agri-World or Industrial World?
Remember, just some talking points to provide some vague focus. Now it’s your turn.
Possibly not worth the investment. Remember that a feral world was able to build a Lunar Class Cruiser - if they can do that as-is, is there any point 'upgrading' them?
The local nobility likely finds a primitive world easier to control. A cheap autogun or lasgun is basically an invincible divine weapon in such world and they control all the guns.
The IoM meanwhile simply doesn't care. It isn't known for investing in planets unless said planets are in some advantageus strategic position that warrants the investment. And most worlds aren't in such position.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I think more Feudal Worlds, as they’re that odd point between primitive and advanced, being not quite one or the other.
Gotcha.
It is an odd one, as in our own example we passed through "feudal" (in the 40k planet classification sense, not the strict sense of feudalism) in a timeframe >1000 years but I'd say less than ten thousand. That would suggest most Imperial feudal worlds should have advanced to civilised by the time of 40k without outside influence (esp. as the Ad Mech doesn't usually care about "primitive" tech development).
Having said that, feudal worlds are rare, some feral worlds would have become feudal, and local planetary conditions and external pressures may prevent development.
In addition, feudal worlds rarely seem to also be worlds with significant mineral resources to extract, as these tend to get rapidly developed as mining worlds and generally have an industrial technology base. I am sure they do sometimes get converted into agri worlds though- the Imperium tends to exhaust existing agri worlds then build new ones.
To be honest, most feudal worlds are probably backwaters with little value beyond military tithes of manpower, that are part of the Imperium more symbolically than meaningfully.
It's entirely possible that a feudal world is short on one or more crucial resources that would allow an industrial society to spring up. Like coal and/or oil. Unless you can convince the Admech to cough up a bunch of fusion reactors or solar arrays, you're kind of screwed for energy supply needed to industrialize.
Because in the end 40k has got a strong fantasy vibe and what best way to make it manifest than having literal middle age in your sci fi!
Other than the fact it's cool, lorewise, I'd agree with the idea that these are worlds that wouldn't be profitable to actual exploit for one reason or another.
Hypothesis: could a few of them be kept as such by the Imperium to make hardy soldiers? At least I imagine you could fancy it and make a personnal story around it and still be lore-friendly.
Finally, I'd like to highlights the Imperial Knights on certain feudal world. The knights' pilots are the ruling class. Since feudal mindset and excessive conservatism are engrained into their mind, they will therefore tend to keep progress as minimal as possible on their world. See the example of Alaric for example.
However these are only some feudal wrolds so this is not enough to explain the phenomenon at large, I agree.
The Imperium isn't in the business of maximising potential or uplifting worlds, it needs the bare minimum results to sustain itself mostly because it's so decrepit it can't do anything else.
A Feudal world exists because it's enough to provide a tithe of some sort and exists as yet another example of mankind's dominance of the galaxy.
Personally the Imperium is to decentralized of an entity to directly govern every single world within its domain which is why in most cases planetary governors are given free reign to rule their world as they see fit as long as they meet their tithe quotas and remain loyal (most planetary governors being from the world they govern would generally keep things the way they always have been).
On top of that there is the logistical side of it (which we all know the Imperium is THE BEST at logistics!!!). Say there is a isolated feudal world and it's discovered that the world is rich in a valuable mineral but also has a relatively low population with technology unsuitable to harvest the resource, in order to extract that mineral in any significant quantities the Imperium would need to mobilize and supply significant manpower, vehicles, equipment, technology, training, ships, navigators, time and money just to begin harvesting all of which would probably take decades at least as well as setting up the infrastructure to support all of this new industry. And the pay off would have to be absolutely MASSIVE to justify that, never mind the forces needed to protect those assets in route to and from this isolated world as well as protecting the harvest.
And that's all assuming some clerk in The Administratum doesn't accidently hit a 2 instead of a 3 and sends all of those resources into the middle of a warzone instead of the intended planet!
From the Battlefleet Gothic lore. The feral worlders merely mined materials, the ship was actually built in orbit, presumably by a more typical shipyard under Ad Mech supervision.
Another point, just as there are worlds not worth investing resources in to uplift; don't forget that a lot of the Imperium runs on local politics and resources. So it might well be that some feudal worlds are simply nestled within the territory of a regional governor who simply hasn't got the finances to uplift the world.
If the planet isn't strategically or minerally important to the central powers, then regional ruling powers are left to their own devices.
Heck there might even be political reasons that they'd snub/ignore/otherwise not want to invest in the world. It could even be something insanely ancient, some old feud between two worlds and the winning one has simply kept the status going for generations
The interesting part is feudal worlds themselves not causing their own uplift. Of course when you consider how technology is viewed and taught this can explain much of how new, different, not authorised inventions could be suppressed to keep a feudal world from developing naturally on its own. Missing key resources, influence from outside powers (do you really want to consider that world on the fringe inhabited by poor famers; could one day rise in power to rival your own world's dominance of a local system - best just keep them "caged" in a feudal era)
Another potential reason that a world stays at the feudal level for a while is that it’s on the waiting list for development. As vast as it is, the Imperium is not going to be able to do everything that is needed right away.
Even worlds with strategically important materials on it would be stacked up for later exploitation when existing supplies become a bit more scarce. So you plant a simple colony, put some infrastructure in orbit to stake the claim and deter raiders, and otherwise leave the colony to it. If they get on well, great and development happens naturally and maybe the resources are a bit easier to get to in due course with minimal external assistance. If things go badly, then back to the dark ages until Sector Command can get around to sending relief ships.
Another alternative is the good old warp storm gambit. A planet gets cut off from outside assistance for centuries or millennia and it regresses, rather like Caliban.
Tyran wrote: The local nobility likely finds a primitive world easier to control. A cheap autogun or lasgun is basically an invincible divine weapon in such world and they control all the guns.
This. Knight worlds are the perfect example. Their rulers like to LARP as medieval kings and the Imperium's bureaucracy doesn't care as long as the tithes are paid.
Heck this is a setting so vast with certain power groups having such insane wealth that some of the more, tame, regions might even just flat out have "LARPING" Worlds. Or rather holiday worlds where the rich can go relax whilst being a king for a few years (not forgetting regeneration programs means some of the ruling cast will live for centuries, so what's 5-10 years running around being king and having fun when you're young).
Heck in Necromunda some of the ruling cast dress up in super-power-armour and go fight in the underhive for sport; and the Underhive, whilst not fully medieval in tech, is vastly behind the upper spires in tech
Yeah, so while it has some sci-fi applications, I always thought this was a blatant crossover kind of thing, encouraging WHFB players to dip their toes into 40k.
The 2nd ed codexes are full of crossover units. It was one of the cool things about the GW game universe before it went full-on Gordon Gekko.
Tyran wrote: The local nobility likely finds a primitive world easier to control. A cheap autogun or lasgun is basically an invincible divine weapon in such world and they control all the guns.
This. Knight worlds are the perfect example. Their rulers like to LARP as medieval kings and the Imperium's bureaucracy doesn't care as long as the tithes are paid.
That's basically how I pictured most feudal worlds working. The imperium finds their favorite sympathetic party when bringing the planet into compliance and gives them a modest supply of tech that they can then use to maintain their authority. The imperium gets a politically stable planet, and the puppet they chose gets to be in charge.
I imagine that some feudal worlds probably have some minimal amount of advanced tech here and there. For instance, a single space elevator or landing facility so that imperial ships can scoop up some fresh air/water while they're in the neighborhood, or maybe some remote (even orbital) defenses or communication stations. The main factor (other than messy paperwork) that a feudal world remains a feudal world is probably just that no one has decided it's worth investing in yet. The imperium is big, and supplies are stretched thin. You could probably get a ton of resources if you sent some bulk haulers full of equipment to a given feudal world, but you might get even more resources sending that same equipment to a different planet or asteroid belt or whatever.
Defense is probably a consideration too. You don't want to invest in a bunch of mining equipment or whatever if you're just going to leave the equipment and supplies vulnerable to raiding xenos and heretics. So then you have to add the cost of sufficient defenses to the cost of the equipment. "Optimizing the output of feudal worlds is probably on everyone's to-do list; it's just never quite high enough on the list to actually get around to.
In a galaxy this big, there's going to be exceptions to everything, but...
I would expect that feudal worlds are those where the 'resources' the Imperium wants to exploit can be exploited without further development AND further development would also have a cost that the Imperium doesn't want to pay. That sounds vague, so let me give some examples:
A world where the resource is tithed soldiers, but one where increasing the tech level increases the odds of a rebellious society, or contamination from off-world travel (either cultural contamination or even actual mutations from advanced industry).
A world where the resource is mineralogical, but where creation of a modern, space-faring economy creates the possibility of a economic competition for those resources (if the natives can't sell offworld, there is no resistance to selling to the Imperial traders).
A world where the resource is simply a stable planet near a stable warp access point. The Imperium may conduct all their business in orbit and not need to worry about liasing with local planetary traffic at all.
Something just struck me, but I think how technology works in the Imperium could be a cause of this, mostly in cases of regression.
If you haven't got or no longer have got mechanics representative, who have taken care of all equipment and jealously kept all knowledge of it as a secret, whenever they get killed or moved away, then the world hasn't got anyone anymore actually trained at building or maintaining most technology. In that case, it must start all over again and gradually rebuild it through reason and science. Which takes time. Much time.
On worlds with techpriest complements, then the worlders are not free to do whatever they pleases I think, the local mechanics representative will "steer", or more likely watch over there potential technological progress and if someone finally finds out a super duper windmill but it's brand new and not an stc he might have the governor to make a drive by and ruin the windmill because it's tech heresy.
Finally, their are the issues with the machine spirits. If you assume that they are a very important part of the lore (I like it so I do), remember for instance that the Manticore is explicitly said to be capricious because of it's machine spirit.
In this case, if we leave the realm of logic to simply follow along the lore as written, it is possible that even with the mechanical knowledge to do so some technology is unusable without the mechanics rites. Considering how many of these buggers there are and how beliefs work in the setting that could be part amof the obstacles keeping a low tech world low tech.
Another thought. The thread title uses the word “persist”.
Passage of time needs to be considered as well. Taking a snapshot in time and there will be feudal worlds. Move on a few hundred years and there will still be feudal worlds, but they may be entirely different worlds.
Feudal worlds often also provide guardsmen for the Imperial Guard. Sure, the world might not have more than feudal levels of technology, but a few hours of training can teach an ignorant savage how to operate a lasgun.
So they'd still be useful for the same reason a chapter would find them useful. Hardy people used to combat conditions.
But even considering there being no incentive to keep them at a feudal level, they might persist due to any number of factors.
1) Regression as mentioned above. Perhaps a feudal world was once a vital source of materials, but the mines ran dry hundreds of years ago and the infrastructure collapsed. The remaining population regressed without steady outside support beyond the single starport where the Imperial Governor lives and whose sole function is now to occasionally raise a guard regiment from the populace, who largely squabble among themselves in petty kingdoms who are subserviant to the governor who they view as some sort of High King who rules in the name of the "God Emperor".
2) Perhaps the world is only primitive now, but there are ongoing(if slow) efforts to colonize the place. But of course its a process that takes centuries so the planet is still largely feudal with pockets of higher tech areas.
3) Perhaps the star it orbits around has a particularly strong EM field which causes interference with advanced technology. Landing shuttles and operating tech is still possible underground or at night when the surface is facing away from the sun, but for the bulk of the populace they are forced to live analog lives on the surface.
They excist to make 40k even ritcher. It is also something funny with the dark dystopian humor that some one somewhere decided that the industrial evolution was to god for that plannet.
Perhaps they are conserned for the bloom in pollution and carbon emissions. Come 200 years of industrial evolution and you get ekstreme weather not suite for much, less alone crops. (Not unlike the way the earth is heading.)
Don't industrialise and you have a rich agriculturall world.
Why do we seem to be assuming that feudal worlds are primitive? Feudalism is a socio-political construct, not a technological one. Its entirely possible (and in fact represented in some sources of fluff) that the feudal serfs are toiling in the fields and forges using the same tools and technology that their counterparts on hive and forgeworlds do. What differs is the structure of the social and political system that they serve under.
I for one, have never understood "feudal world" to automatically mean "a planet with the technology and development of Europe between the 9th and 15th century AD". Instead I've always understood it as "a world in which the local social and political systems are patterned after that of real world feudal structures, such that the masses are bound in serfdom to a manorial system ruled by an elite local nobility, and the political power structure is divided and governed by oath, fiefdom, and vassalage in a complex and interrelated web which governs resource allocation and taxation".
chaos0xomega wrote: "the masses are bound in serfdom to a manorial system ruled by an elite local nobility, and the political power structure is divided and governed by oath, fiefdom, and vassalage in a complex and interrelated web which governs resource allocation and taxation".
That describes the social structure of a lot of worlds in the Imperium, including many industrialized or hive worlds like Necromunda. Just because they work in a factory instead of a field doesn't make them any less serfs.
I actually agree with you, but for the Imperium's world classification and taxation purposes they have defined the label "feudal world" to mean something specifically lower tech and pre-industrial. It's a textual short hand for the reader to at a glance understand what kind of stereotype to apply to the world. It's not even as detailed as for example Traveller's UWP codes.
chaos0xomega wrote: Why do we seem to be assuming that feudal worlds are primitive? Feudalism is a socio-political construct, not a technological one. Its entirely possible (and in fact represented in some sources of fluff) that the feudal serfs are toiling in the fields and forges using the same tools and technology that their counterparts on hive and forgeworlds do. What differs is the structure of the social and political system that they serve under.
I for one, have never understood "feudal world" to automatically mean "a planet with the technology and development of Europe between the 9th and 15th century AD". Instead I've always understood it as "a world in which the local social and political systems are patterned after that of real world feudal structures, such that the masses are bound in serfdom to a manorial system ruled by an elite local nobility, and the political power structure is divided and governed by oath, fiefdom, and vassalage in a complex and interrelated web which governs resource allocation and taxation".
It’s the 40K definition of a low tech but not feral world, basically arrested at a pre-industrial technology base.
chaos0xomega wrote: Why do we seem to be assuming that feudal worlds are primitive? Feudalism is a socio-political construct, not a technological one.
The Imperium defines feudal worlds based on technology base rather than social structure. Broadly speaking, a feudal world has a technology base that is around the level of black powder (either a bit before or a bit after).
There are worlds with a feudal socio-political structure that are more technologically advanced that the Imperium does not classify as a "feudal" world. To the Imperium, a feudal world is a world with technology between a feral world and a civilised world.
chaos0xomega wrote: Why do we seem to be assuming that feudal worlds are primitive? Feudalism is a socio-political construct, not a technological one. Its entirely possible (and in fact represented in some sources of fluff) that the feudal serfs are toiling in the fields and forges using the same tools and technology that their counterparts on hive and forgeworlds do. What differs is the structure of the social and political system that they serve under.
I for one, have never understood "feudal world" to automatically mean "a planet with the technology and development of Europe between the 9th and 15th century AD". Instead I've always understood it as "a world in which the local social and political systems are patterned after that of real world feudal structures, such that the masses are bound in serfdom to a manorial system ruled by an elite local nobility, and the political power structure is divided and governed by oath, fiefdom, and vassalage in a complex and interrelated web which governs resource allocation and taxation".
You are technically correct. However, I don't think GW is using the term in the technically correct way. They're using in a way which the average person might use the word feudal, to describe the technology level of an area. It's not the 'correct' way to use the word, at least for now. As language changes the word feudal will almost certainly gain this as a secondary meaning and you'll have to distinguish between Feudal technology and Feudal social structure.
Feudal worlds in the context of 40k lore has always appeared to have meant worlds at a medieval-ish level of technology, and usually an accompanying feudal social structure. https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Feudal_World
Are there worlds with feudal governments/societies and modern technological levels in the Imperium? Definitely, but they're not classified as Feudal worlds by the Imperium.
This is language changing in action here. A word takes on a new meaning.
chaos0xomega wrote: Huh. Thats weird. I would have called it a Medieval World over a Feudal World, personally.
Now that you've pointed this bit I agree with you, but I think for the sake of all understanding each other we should stick to GW's denomination although it is incorrect.
chaos0xomega wrote: Huh. Thats weird. I would have called it a Medieval World over a Feudal World, personally.
I disagree as the term "Medieval" is associated pretty heavily with the European Middle Ages, in fact, it literally means middle age as in between the Roman Empire and the Renaissance. In contrast, Feudalism is a political/social concept that survived past the European Renaissance, for example in Japan and China where the latter only ditched its feudal society in 1911 with the fall of the Qing dynasty.
By focusing on the societal ideology rather than a specific time period, it means that people don't have to stick to specific cultural ideas and designs.
Yes, but the problem is that the defining characteristic of a feudal world in the fluff evidently is not its socio-political structure, its the tech base instead - and the tech base in 1911 China is vastly different from the tech base of England circa 1200 AD, is it not?
Really, the hypothetical problem you've identified with the usage of the word "medieval" is the actual problem that is currently occurring with the usage of the word "feudal" - GW is using it in reference to the level of technology that existed explicitly within the context of the European Middle Ages, not inclusive of the feudal serfdom of 18th and 19th century Russia, China, Japan, etc.
You're looking too hard at this when it's very simple.
Medieval refers to the European Middle Ages.
Feudal systems were not restricted by geography or specific time periods with fancy names.
My point with regard to Japan and China was that they both retained feudal systems long after the medieval age was finished.
Therefore, medieval is not an accurate term to use when applied to planets with a pre-industrial technology base even if they might have the odd Las-Pike or resident Space Marine Chapter.
In the end both words don't work perfectly when you take modern real world meaning and impose it on the 40K setting. The 40K setting has taken the word and adapted it to mean its own thing within its own setting and context.
In that sense it doesn't matter if they used Medieval, Feudal, Barablongle or whatever term - the word used isn't as important as the connection and meaning behind it within the setting and how readily its picked up on by readers.
Feudal works - it brings some real world understanding with it and then builds upon it to present the concept for the 40K universe
chaos0xomega wrote: Yes, but the problem is that the defining characteristic of a feudal world in the fluff evidently is not its socio-political structure, its the tech base instead - and the tech base in 1911 China is vastly different from the tech base of England circa 1200 AD, is it not?
Really, the hypothetical problem you've identified with the usage of the word "medieval" is the actual problem that is currently occurring with the usage of the word "feudal" - GW is using it in reference to the level of technology that existed explicitly within the context of the European Middle Ages, not inclusive of the feudal serfdom of 18th and 19th century Russia, China, Japan, etc.
What I think he means is that what since games workshop names more or less categorizes feudal worlds not on society but as a planet with roughly european middle age tier tech, even if it has got a wide range of historical inspiration.
What he suggest is that in regard to this emphasis on a tech level rather than a society, it would be more accurate to name them after said tech level, rather than after a social hierarchy.
chaos0 did I get you right?
Automatically Appended Next Post: But GW terminology is often vague or approximate anyway, so well, that's but a minor detail and it leaves you ample space to create your own view of a medieval/feudal/whatever world
The most advanced Feudal Worlds use black powder weapons, which were used up until the very end of the 18th century so just using Middle Age Europe is dumb.
GW also doesn't just base it on technology but the society as well.
A world with multiple kingdoms, a largely agricultural economy, and a population between 10-500 million people, but the various armies are equipped with Las Pikes is still a Feudal World because it ticks more feudalism boxes than non-feudalism boxes.
A world with a central governing power, an industrial-based economy, and a population in the billions but no armies with firearms is not a Feudal World because it doesn't tick enough boxes.
Knight Worlds are a separate category because they mix the feudal ideology with the advanced technology needed to maintain Knight suits and often have large Mechanicus populations. They are the exception to the rule.
You have to remember that some feudal worlds are exploited. Advanced mining operations overseen by the Ad-Mech and they just keep the local population out. Sometimes the population themselves are just used as slave labour.
Another point to mention is that citizens from feudal worlds would make better soldiers than most other planets. They'd be stronger, have better diets, and have survival skills compared to a hive worlder who lives on recycled food. You just train them once they're tithed into the Imperial Guard.
Jarms48 wrote: You have to remember that some feudal worlds are exploited. Advanced mining operations overseen by the Ad-Mech and they just keep the local population out. Sometimes the population themselves are just used as slave labour.
Another point to mention is that citizens from feudal worlds would make better soldiers than most other planets. They'd be stronger, have better diets, and have survival skills compared to a hive worlder who lives on recycled food. You just train them once they're tithed into the Imperial Guard.
At the same time a Hive worlder is going to know about electronics, machines, robots, mutants and if from an underhive, likely a good amount of violence.
A Feudal worlder might know how to fight with sword and shield in formation; but they won't have a clue about guns; machines; tanks; mutants and that's just the people they are fighting alongside let alone the ones against them.
Plus there are many many worlds where people aren't living in hive cities. The Imperium has everything from worlds that are a paradise to almost literal hellscapes. People from all walks come to the Imperial Guard - some will be healthy and fit; some will be unhealthy; some will come preloaded with survival and fighting skills; some will be pretty raw and even if trained on their own world for the muster, they will be green and totally inexperienced in actual combat.
True and they likely do want people with a more base/blank slate as that's much much easier to indoctrinate and train up. Plus the process of becoming a Marine extends life so they have more time to play with.
Imperial Guard if anything have a much shorter lifespan so they don't want people so fresh that they can think a servitor is a god or something. They want functional troops that can hit the front lines and do something useful almost as soon as they are mustered into the ships
chaos0xomega wrote: Yes, but the problem is that the defining characteristic of a feudal world in the fluff evidently is not its socio-political structure, its the tech base instead - and the tech base in 1911 China is vastly different from the tech base of England circa 1200 AD, is it not?
Exactly.
We know that there is some sort of aristocracy on various worlds, and that tithes and tribute are regularly extracted in a decidedly feudal way.
So it's not a political system, it's pure tech.
It's also worth pointing out that China in 1911 wasn't "feudal" it was fragmented. The Empire had been falling apart for a century, and regional warlords held no titles of nobility, nor were they bound by oaths of allegiance. They were strongmen, pure and simple, hence the term "warlord."
At the same time a Hive worlder is going to know about electronics, machines, robots, mutants and if from an underhive, likely a good amount of violence.
Other than mutants and violence, I'd argue most mid and lower hivers won't know much about those. Just whatever relates to their profession. Life in the hives is very similar to the slums of Victorian England. With multi-generational and multi-family dwellings, child labour, high child mortality, malnutrition, etc.
A Feudal worlder might know how to fight with sword and shield in formation; but they won't have a clue about guns; machines; tanks; mutants and that's just the people they are fighting alongside let alone the ones against them.
Doesn't take long to teach people how to use guns, that's why the world shifted to muskets instead of bows. Far easier to train. Tanks again, doesn't take long to train how to defeat one. Just look at the experience of WW1. Soldiers quickly adapted to the new threat and formed tactics to destroy them. Ironically the hardest part is probably teaching a feudal worlder how to read and write. As I would assume their literacy rates would be similar to a Medieval Europe.
At the same time a Hive worlder is going to know about electronics, machines, robots, mutants and if from an underhive, likely a good amount of violence.
Other than mutants and violence, I'd argue most mid and lower hivers won't know much about those. Just whatever relates to their profession. Life in the hives is very similar to the slums of Victorian England. With multi-generational and multi-family dwellings, child labour, high child mortality, malnutrition, etc.
A Feudal worlder might know how to fight with sword and shield in formation; but they won't have a clue about guns; machines; tanks; mutants and that's just the people they are fighting alongside let alone the ones against them.
Doesn't take long to teach people how to use guns, that's why the world shifted to muskets instead of bows. Far easier to train. Tanks again, doesn't take long to train how to defeat one. Just look at the experience of WW1. Soldiers quickly adapted to the new threat and formed tactics to destroy them. Ironically the hardest part is probably teaching a feudal worlder how to read and write. As I would assume their literacy rates would be similar to a Medieval Europe.
I wasn't meaning about operation or understanding theory of how they worked; I was more meaning that culturally speaking someone from a world that doesn't have electronics, tanks, machines, mutants and soforth is going to have a LOT of trouble adapting just because of the alien nature of the world suddenly around them.
People from a developed Imperial world are going to adapt to life on board starships and on other developed worlds and using developed weapons and such much more readily than those from a world with a much lower level of development.
Heck its not even the big things; consider just how to cross a road; how to turn on a light; how not to stick metal things in a plug socket; how to access and use a cogitator. The Feudal World serf has a vast amount they have to learn just to function and that's before you shove a lasgun in their hands.
Also its not that they cannot learn, people are very adaptive and most certainly can learn. It's that they have so much more to learn. It makes them less attractive to muster from compared to a more developed world. If you're going to muster from a feudal world chances are you've got to seed that muster much earlier so that the troops you get are trained in life inside the rest of the developed Imperial universe.
Culture shock aside, standard IG training should be easy enough to ingrain into them, especially their world has a pre-existing warrior culture.
Which again is the strength of the not-at-all-humble Lasgun. If you can work a Crossbow, you can most certainly work a Lasgun, which in certain respects is probably more user friendly. Heck, any one who can effectively shoot a bow from horseback should be able to do the same with a Lasgun?
I think we could also argue someone from a Feudal world is going to be more used to proper equipment maintenance and the overall importance thereof.
Even artillery may not be that much of a stretch, if they have trebuchet and ballista. A Lascannon Tripod, Basilisk and Medusa type stuff all work in almost the same way (line it up, calculate your parabola, let fly)
But hey. They’re still human and as such pretty adaptable. Sure they’d almost certainly find it tough going at first, but one has to assume some accommodation exists for such issues.
Plus training is done mostly en route to combat zone abroad the ships, at least a big part of it, if I remember correctly. And you still get the enhanced physical abilities and endurance of a rough life. To then determine if the administratum decides to put a chapter to make the best or leave it as it is for IG recruitment purposes is another question, that'd be a planet by planet answer, as more than one must quite simply be only reminded about when the time to count tithes arrive.
Though I suppose if your home world still relies on Form Line, Form Square? That’s a military approach you may need to drum out of them first. Unless the IG as a whole has a place for such tactics?
Considering that their uniforms, tanks and tactical doctrines come right out of WW1 which was famous for "just run at the guns like we used to do" kind of tactics. I figure that whilst medieval Shield Walls aren't a thing; they are certainly going to have Napoleonic style all the way to early/late WW1 style battle tactics.
But its messy because whilst they have that; they've also clearly got advanced combined arms and air support which are much more modern warfare tactics.
In the Cain Novels, the Valhallan 597th are a Mechanised Regiment with Chimera transports for each squad. And, when fighting on an Ice World, they’re described as ambush fighters par excellence.
Tanith 1st and Only are of course described primarily as Scouts and Light Infantry.
So yes, some Regiments (not even necessarily tied to specific worlds) will adopt WW1 style tactics. But by no means all.
In fact a regiment levied on a feral world raises more question in how good they'll perform in combined arms evironment with all the tech it implies (fliers, tanks, comms) with other people who may be more used to these. That's quite an overall problem of the guard though.
For reference, here is the canonical view of a feudal world classification:
Here is a feral world:
The distinction is mainly technological, but also includes larger-scale political organisations for feudal worlds (not specifically feudal political structures). The Iatter would probably count iron-age Earth as "feudal".
This is language changing in action here. A word takes on a new meaning.
Nah, its just GW using terminology incorrectly.
It really isn't anything like linguistic drift over time, because its a game setting term assigned by people in the late 1980s.
An Imperium feudal world is going to have anachronistic cultures and technologies that don't match up with our understanding of 'Feudal'. Its never just going to be Charlemagne in space.
Haighus wrote: For reference, here is the canonical view of a feudal world classification:
Here is a feral world:
The distinction is mainly technological, but also includes larger-scale political organisations for feudal worlds (not specifically feudal political structures). The Iatter would probably count iron-age Earth as "feudal".
That is honestly useless. No (or few) boomsticks, some international politics doesn't even map well to feudal Europe! (for one thing, political structures and international reach were a degradation compared to what came before the feudal period. Using Europe as a baseline you'd actually expect a 'feral' world to be more sophisticated and interconnected.)
That isn't a classification (even assuming a set technological path that mandates black powder weapons as a given level of achievement), that's whistling in the wind and just picking up a classification stamp at random.
It doesn’t need to map well to history. It is just a name that GW has used to refer to a classification of world that they made up in a fictional background.
Flinty wrote: It doesn’t need to map well to history. It is just a name that GW has used to refer to a classification of world that they made up in a fictional background.
Yes. It needs to be consistant in its own in univers logic, and/or to be cool.
It's a fiction, what's more a half sci fi half fantasy bastard. It's meant to be founded over stuff that is either not real or misuse. It is nowhere intended to be historically accurate or a reflection of our world just as fantasy is not supposed to. And its fine as long as it retains consistancy so you can picture it and enjoy it.
Flinty wrote: It doesn’t need to map well to history. It is just a name that GW has used to refer to a classification of world that they made up in a fictional background.
Yes. It needs to be consistant in its own in univers logic, and/or to be cool.
It's a fiction, what's more a half sci fi half fantasy bastard. It's meant to be founded over stuff that is either not real or misuse. It is nowhere intended to be historically accurate or a reflection of our world just as fantasy is not supposed to. And its fine as long as it retains consistancy so you can picture it and enjoy it.
Not only that but its a single generic term used on a galactic scale. It is going to have exceptions on nearly every world classified as such because its such a sheer vastness that even rare feudal or feral worlds are going to exhibit variations based on local setup, ecology, geology and a billion other things.
Gert wrote: Not sure why there's the fixation on Middle Ages Europe when as has been said, Feudal nations existed well into the 19th century.
Well, it clearly was what GW meant. Look at the picture they chose!
As for recruiting, I think we already know the answer: European colonial armies were able to rapidly turn people with no experience of firearms into reliable troops able to run modern weapons. They didn't need to understand why the thing worked, or read a manual, just turn the bolt, insert a cartridge, close it and pull the trigger.
They key element (which one of the cards even says) wasn't tech level, but the society's approach to warfare. The British in particular keyed in on whether a given tribe or people had a warrior tradition and if they did, those lads got kitted out and used against everyone else.
If there wasn't a warrior tradition, it was harder, but it was still possible to get good results. Check out the Ever-Victorious Army in the Taiping Rebellion.
Perhaps an even better example is how Japan went from a technologically stagnant closed society to designing its own modern weapons within 40 years. The Type 14 Nambu is something of a glass hammer, but the Arisaka rifle is brilliant.
By your logic, all Death Worlds are jungles because this picture is a jungle:
Doesn't matter about the text because the picture shows a jungle so they can only be jungles right?
Those were the archetypal examples GW used. Feudal was clearly patterned after their very European-centric fantasy game and of course Catachan was a Rambo/Predator send-up.
They left it open-ended for further potential expansions, but those were the examples they held up as emblematic.
My point in that post was pointing out the absurdity of saying that every single Feudal World had to be based on Middle Age Europe because of one example image.
If you'd read the thread you'd see that I've been pretty clear in my opinions on this subject.
Gert wrote: My point in that post was pointing out the absurdity of saying that every single Feudal World had to be based on Middle Age Europe because of one example image.
If you'd read the thread you'd see that I've been pretty clear in my opinions on this subject.
Yeah, and I think you're wrong. Feudal China bears very little resemblance (if any) to feudal Europe. The concept of feudalism is rooted in European culture and it was used as a way to explain other cultures without having to dig too deep into them.
GW's cultural touchstones are remarkably shallow, and while I freely admit I've read zero of their novels, I would be highly interested in all the feudal worlds they mention that are Chinese, Japanese or African in character.
Haighus wrote: The only feudal world we ever got models for is Attila, which has rough riders inspired by Eurasian Steppe peoples.
Right, and that's evidence that the term was referring to technology rather than political structure because the origins, culture and social organization of the Hun people are lost to history.
GW wanted horse cavalry (which could reuse fantasy molds!) and that provided the excuse..
Commissar von Toussaint wrote: Yeah, and I think you're wrong. Feudal China bears very little resemblance (if any) to feudal Europe.
Yes. Because they are different cultures but the concepts remain the same because Feudalism is not a European-only ideology. The Chinese were practicing it from 500 BC.
GW's cultural touchstones are remarkably shallow, and while I freely admit I've read zero of their novels, I would be highly interested in all the feudal worlds they mention that are Chinese, Japanese or African in character.
Feudal Worlds don't make for good settings for large-scale stories or big fights. You might get the odd Knight world but they are different. There was a short story published in WD where a world had been infiltrated by both Chaos and Genestealer Cults in the guise of warrior orders, a concept not unique to Europe.
The reason GW has largely not done non-European cultures is because the company has largely been staffed by middle-class white men for the last 30 years. As the hobby has grown, the staff pool has widened and we're now seeing stories written with more non-English influences.
Yes. Because they are different cultures but the concepts remain the same because Feudalism is not a European-only ideology. The Chinese were practicing it from 500 BC.
Chinese culture is so radically different from European culture as to render the term "feudalism" almost meaningless. Yes, if you read the Spring and Autumn Annals, you see references to "dukes" and "counts" but those terms are at best loose approximations of social rank. The apogee of European social status was the landed warrior gentry; the apogee of Chinese social status was the scholar-administrator.
In Europe, the martial class was celebrated while in China people went to great lengths to escape from it. You may want to check out my book on Chinese military history to see just how profoundly different Chinese political/social systems were from those of Europe.
Feudal Worlds don't make for good settings for large-scale stories or big fights. You might get the odd Knight world but they are different. There was a short story published in WD where a world had been infiltrated by both Chaos and Genestealer Cults in the guise of warrior orders, a concept not unique to Europe.
Right, so you're admitting there is no actual lore supporting your contention. Thank you.
The reason GW has largely not done non-European cultures is because the company has largely been staffed by middle-class white men for the last 30 years. As the hobby has grown, the staff pool has widened and we're now seeing stories written with more non-English influences.
No kidding. You may want to read the whole thread because I have repeatedly pointed out that GW's understanding of feudalism is based on Europe, which is what the staff knew best.
Commissar von Toussaint wrote: Chinese culture is so radically different from European culture as to render the term "feudalism" almost meaningless. Yes, if you read the Spring and Autumn Annals, you see references to "dukes" and "counts" but those terms are at best loose approximations of social rank. The apogee of European social status was the landed warrior gentry; the apogee of Chinese social status was the scholar-administrator.
In Europe, the martial class was celebrated while in China people went to great lengths to escape from it.
You must be real fun at parties.
I've used both China and Japan as examples of Feudal states that were non-European as they are the more popular cultural choices for that type of society when you move away from European cultural influences.
And while the term is European in origin but that doesn't mean it isn't accurate for use on a broad scale, which is how 40k operates.
1500s Japan wasn't exactly like 1200s Europe but it shares enough similarities that having a Feudal World in 40k based on Feudal Japan would be entirely reasonable and understood by a wider audience who doesn't have intricate knowledge of Japanese history because that is how 40k works.
It's like when people tried to "um, ackchyually" the White Scars into not being influenced by the Mongols and other Steppe Nomads because Jaghati Kahn would be too heavy to ride a modern horse, despite no background ever actually saying the people of Chogoris ever rode horses.
Boohoo GW isn't writing every single possible planet and definition for its fictional setting with 100% historical accuracy in all things. Build a bridge and get over it.
Right, so you're admitting there is no actual lore supporting your contention. Thank you.
In the same way there's nothing saying it supports yours yes. You have one picture of a dude in a helmet with a castle behind him and have declared that all Feudal Worlds must be European-styled. Not exactly stellar logic there big fella.
I've used both China and Japan as examples of Feudal states that were non-European as they are the more popular cultural choices for that type of society when you move away from European cultural influences.
Yeah, and they're bad examples, especially China. Chinese culture and state structure was completely different from that used in Europe.
Because Japan's social structure granted prestige to the warrior class (which China conspicuously lacked), the analogy fits better, but once again, a planet based on 1500s Japan would be dramatically different from one based on 1200s France in terms of social structure.
Now, their technology base would be similar, which is clearly what GW was referring to.
It's like when people tried to "um, ackchyually" the White Scars into not being influenced by the Mongols and other Steppe Nomads because Jaghati Kahn would be too heavy to ride a modern horse, despite no background ever actually saying the people of Chogoris ever rode horses.
Well, since I'm not saying that and don't agree with it, I'm not sure why you're bringing it up.
Boohoo GW isn't writing every single possible planet and definition for its fictional setting with 100% historical accuracy in all things. Build a bridge and get over it.
You're the one claiming something for which there is no documentary evidence. Feudal political structures are very common within the Imperium and have no relation to the technology level. Therefore your definition of the term robs it of descriptive value.
In the same way there's nothing saying it supports yours yes. You have one picture of a dude in a helmet with a castle behind him and have declared that all Feudal Worlds must be European-styled. Not exactly stellar logic there big fella.
I have lots of evidence. The first run of codexes list optional armies of feral or feudal worlds in the back. You can use actual Chaos Warriors and other fantasy miniatures. That's what GW clearly meant. Orks and Eldar also had this feature. What are Exodite Knights other than Cold One Riders with brighter paint jobs?
The crossover is unmistakable, and I'm not sure why you insist that something for which there is no evidence is more logical than the commonality of miniatures shared between the games and fluff supporting it.
You seem to be incapable of grasping the fact that the term Feudal World is a broad strokes classification, one that works perfectly fine for the layman who doesn't spend all their time reading history books.
Your average Joe likely couldn't describe the Edo Period of Japan but could describe Feudal Japan.
That is why GW uses those terms, for us mere mortals who don't spend all our time reading (or writing) history books.
If we could all put our history books aside and get back to the setting?
I’m still not persuaded there’s much call for a Feudal World to be left as a Feudal World.
As demonstrated above, it’s a catch-call term of a technological level around pre and immediately post black powder technology.
It strikes me that just like the real world, they’re only a single technological/industrial revolution from getting to more or less where we are today. Especially if the worlds tend to avoid the warfare we’ve experienced.
Though granted certain of our important advancements have come through war and its necessity of innovation. But I must stress that by no means require war for them to be found. Just funded particularly well.
What use is a permanent feudal world to the Imperium overall?
It's more effort to change it than to let it be. A Feudal World is already settled and culturally accepted into the Imperium as it is. All the Imperium has to do is bring the Ecclesiarchy down to keep the locals in line with the faith and send a Munitorum official every so often to make sure the Tithe gets paid.
It also acts as a largely militarised outpost for the Imperium. An Agri World might have a PDF but it won't have as many forts, castles, strongpoints and holdouts as a Feudal World will.
In theory a Feudal world is sub optimal in its output. It won't ever out-compete other worlds in terms of mineral, production, research nor even raw population.
However its important to realise that the Imperium doesn't run every world to its maximum capacity. Feudal worlds are simply those that are advanced enough to have organised social structures and where investment to uplift it to a higher level is beyond local interest/capacity and where the world doesn't warrant attention from greater power bodies within the Imperium.
Basically the world "works" and its just not cost-effective right now to invest more into it
If we could all put our history books aside and get back to the setting?
I’m still not persuaded there’s much call for a Feudal World to be left as a Feudal World.
As demonstrated above, it’s a catch-call term of a technological level around pre and immediately post black powder technology.
It strikes me that just like the real world, they’re only a single technological/industrial revolution from getting to more or less where we are today. Especially if the worlds tend to avoid the warfare we’ve experienced.
Though granted certain of our important advancements have come through war and its necessity of innovation. But I must stress that by no means require war for them to be found. Just funded particularly well.
What use is a permanent feudal world to the Imperium overall?
I'd say it's not of any particular use other than for tough dudes to enlist, which is still mostly a byproduct most of the time although as we said above they make perfect recuitment grounds for space marines and guard.
Otherwise I think it is mostly lack of ressources, administrative decisions taking litteral ages to be implemented, terraforming technology being hard to access and long to work, and general negligence on the part of the imperium for worlds that won't bring enough payback for the efforts deployed.
There are also those worlds that might be in wait for deeper exploitation
But by and large, really feudal worlds are kind of worthless I think.
Worth isn't really something that needs consideration when it comes to the dogma of the Imperium though.
The Imperium doesn't really care if Frankius Maximus is producing less Grox Paste than Agrius Prime because it's still another world in the dominion of man. The manifest destiny of humanity has claimed another world.
Gert wrote: Worth isn't really something that needs consideration when it comes to the dogma of the Imperium though.
The Imperium doesn't really care if Frankius Maximus is producing less Grox Paste than Agrius Prime because it's still another world in the dominion of man. The manifest destiny of humanity has claimed another world.
I disagree. I think it depends too much on context.
The Imperium of Man as in the central administration parts of Terra regarding a fringe world - yeah they probably only care its theirs; heck they probably don't even know its theirs for a very long time.
The local governor of a central set of systems who enjoys fine dining, great riches and generally only has to worry about providing a tithe from a few worlds - probably likes to keep it as a backward playground to entertain his guests.
The system governor who is managing a set of worlds on the fringe and is constantly under pressure for troops and resources. Probably would REALLY like that world to be more useful, but lacks the resources to invest into uplifting it in any meaningful way and thus focuses on worlds that are already further ahead and more viable.
I'm sure people care; by how much they care and how much influence and resources they've got to make a change is where the issues will set in.
I would put it down to a number of factors as to why the persist.
1. Ignorance, most people in setting have very little, knowledge of anything outside their own experience, deliberately so. So if you are on a feudal world you know no different and if you are on an advanced planet you may not know feudal ones exist at all. Even at quite high levels on said planets.
2. Incompetence. The imperium isn’t known for its big thinking leaders and planners.
3. Indifference. Many with the ability to change the power base and levels of a planet just don’t care or even worse want it as a downtrodden backwater because it suits their needs for whatever reasons. For example, ferris is listed as a feudal world according the example previously, it is not in the space wolves interests to drag the populace out of that way of life and it would be very difficult given the death world nature of the planet but the marines want simple easy to manage folk who are hardy but cause no trouble and are biddable.
@Overread
I'd still argue that it's not a concern.
If we take your example of a Sector Governor, the chances of them even having a Feudal or Feral world under their remit is pretty slim to begin with as these worlds are rare and even then often fall under the control of Astartes Chapters.
If they do have one, it's one out of maybe twenty worlds all of which are going to be a higher Tithe grade and a lot more trouble to run than a Feudal or Feral world.
Throw in a limited amount of resources that Sector Governor will have to keep these planets in line and producing for the Imperium and having a world with a small population that doesn't cause problems isn't so much of a burden. Hell, the Governor might even use it as a holiday destination.
Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote: I'd say it's not of any particular use other than for tough dudes to enlist, which is still mostly a byproduct most of the time although as we said above they make perfect recuitment grounds for space marines and guard.
This alone is reason enough for them to exist. Civilization (and its associated decadence) have long been associated with the loss of martial spirit. That's why pre-industrial armies were recruited from the peasantry rather than urban poor. They were stronger, healthier, and were considered to have better fighting spirit.
Since we're on an Asian kick, look what happened to the Mongols when they finally conquered China: their armies went into steep decline. Southern China was terrible for horses, which made it difficult to retain that capability, and the immense wealth wrecked their hard-edged warrior system. I suspect the Imperium sees things the same way.
Otherwise I think it is mostly lack of ressources, administrative decisions taking litteral ages to be implemented, terraforming technology being hard to access and long to work, and general negligence on the part of the imperium for worlds that won't bring enough payback for the efforts deployed.
There are also those worlds that might be in wait for deeper exploitation
But by and large, really feudal worlds are kind of worthless I think.
I think you're leaving off the potential for massive agricultural surpluses. Just because they don't have guns doesn't mean they can't have mechanical skill or advanced, planet-wide irrigation systems designed by tech-priests. A tithe in kind would be hugely useful in feeding hive planets and regular drafts of population for warfare and workers would keep the population in balance
All that said, I still maintain it's purely a gaming function to allow crossover from WHFB, but there is a way to rationalize it within the fluff.
Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote: I'd say it's not of any particular use other than for tough dudes to enlist, which is still mostly a byproduct most of the time although as we said above they make perfect recuitment grounds for space marines and guard.
This alone is reason enough for them to exist. Civilization (and its associated decadence) have long been associated with the loss of martial spirit. That's why pre-industrial armies were recruited from the peasantry rather than urban poor. They were stronger, healthier, and were considered to have better fighting spirit.
Since we're on an Asian kick, look what happened to the Mongols when they finally conquered China: their armies went into steep decline. Southern China was terrible for horses, which made it difficult to retain that capability, and the immense wealth wrecked their hard-edged warrior system. I suspect the Imperium sees things the same way.
[
The author tackles this concept of the "barbarian" warrior being better than the civilized, which he disagrees with and argues is a myth with the few outlier examples of such non-settled peoples triumphing sticking in the memory over all those other times when they failed against sedentary people and their states.
Eh it is complicated and depends on which historical context you are referring to. It definitely isn't some universal rule but there were some quite famous examples.
Industrialization did meant a considerable drop in living standards, so there is the argument that a feudal warrior is likely individually better than a hive worlder.
But historically speaking said drop wasn't permanent and eventually was reversed and further improved. A modern fully trained soldier will clean the floor with any "barbarian warrior" because the modern soldier benefits from vastly superior training regime, food quality and all that.
Tyran wrote: Eh it is complicated and depends on which historical context you are referring to. It definitely isn't some universal rule but there were some quite famous examples.
Industrialization did meant a considerable drop in living standards, so there is the argument that a feudal warrior is likely individually better than a hive worlder.
But historically speaking said drop wasn't permanent and eventually was reversed and further improved. A modern fully trained soldier will clean the floor with any "barbarian warrior" because the modern soldier benefits from vastly superior training regime, food quality and all that.
The idea of the nomadic or barbarian warrior being better is also based on a paradigm of warfare in which the general day to day skills of this warrior (i.e. hunting, horseback riding etc...) are generally applicable also to warfare. This becomes less and less true the more technical warfare becomes.
The Mongols themselves struggled initially against fortified walled cities. They overcame them through the use of conquered or mercenary auxiliaries that had skilled engineers versed in siege warfare.
However its important to realise that the Imperium doesn't run every world to its maximum capacity.
Exactly this.
Yes, I'm sure it would be optimal to get all feudal worlds out of their backwards state and to maximum output. But the problem is that doing that would take time, resources, and bureaucratic procedure. All of which are valuable commodities for the Imperium.
For those who have played Stellaris, the Imperium is playing a heavily modded game on a galaxy sized at billions of stars and possesses roughly a million individual planets. It is also not playing with any system automation because screw that noise, so it is manually running its worlds. Lots of them are getting largely ignored because they can't devote the time to it.
The Imperium almost certainly does pull planets out of the Feudal classification all the time. But it needs a reason to do so. Its not going to do it "just because". If a planet is discovered to have a rare and valuable resource or the local sector needs a new planet of a specific type then they'll do it.
Perhaps the local sector is experiencing a large population growth and projects they will outgrow their current Agri-world production in 100 years. They have a feudal world in the sector which has been largely left to its own devices, but it has an abundance of agricultural land on it. Boom! In go the settlers and Mechanicus to set up the industrial farming equipment. An Imperial guard regiment is requisitioned to aid in the suppression of any rebellious locals and ensure that the populace is integrated into the new workforce or just moved to areas that are not going to be used for agriculture where they will probably be left alone other than when it comes time to raise a guard regiment. Within a few decades the local culture has fully modernized and integrated with the Imperium as an Agri-world.
The same might happen if they discover massive Iron, Promethium, Adamantium, etc... deposits.
Heck, worlds might be slated to have this happen, but the paper work to get things moving has been stuck in the red tape that runs the Imperium for centuries because the limited amount of equipment and specially trained individuals who specialize in educating those who are being fully integrated into the Imperium can't be everywhere at once, and more valuable targets keep appearing all the time. So Kappa 9 Delta has to wait for its inevitable enlightenment.
I agree that it must have been in their minds that a WHFB crossover was too cool to go by.
While I also agree on the agricultural potential, I'd tone this one down a little. They may hav wide planetary agriculture, but not necessarely all that advanced either. Plus lower technology would mean more difficulties harvesting, packing, and exporting said production.
At least however, and that brings back the "no time to care" part, it is also a world relatively self sufficient, so again it doesn't cost the Imperium much.
Iracundus wrote: The author tackles this concept of the "barbarian" warrior being better than the civilized, which he disagrees with and argues is a myth with the few outlier examples of such non-settled peoples triumphing sticking in the memory over all those other times when they failed against sedentary people and their states.
I'm not saying it's true, I'm saying the fluff does have some real-world support. R.E. Howard was all about how Conan the Cimmerian's pure wild fury would always defeat decadent civilization.
A huge part of the bias in favor of "barbarians" was the success of nomadic raiders against sedentary peoples. It is true that in the pre-industrial age, the premier "weapons system" was a horse archer trained from birth to his trade. Very hard for anyone to stop and impossible to eliminate since the vast Eurasian continent provided limitless strategic depth into which they could withdraw.
The development of superior ranged weapons (crossbows at first, later artillery) combined with the loss of that open space due to the encroachment of civilization resulted in their obsolescence.
But even before that happened, there were examples of how nomads could take empires but not hold them.
Getting back to fluff, one of the clearest proofs that "feudal worlds" are rooted in marketing rather than any kind of world-building is the presence of horse cavalry. Horses are really, really hard to support, and as soon as mechanical substitutes were available, horses fell out of favor. Indeed, one of the great limiters on nomadic raiders was the availability of foraged, which limited their area of operations.
I'm not saying the Imperium couldn't use some form of biological mount, but the choice of horse was rooted in the fact that they already had the plastic kits in production for the fantasy line and could just make some new riders for them. Same for the Exodite dragon-riders.
Commissar von Toussaint wrote: I'm not saying the Imperium couldn't use some form of biological mount, but the choice of horse was rooted in the fact that they already had the plastic kits in production for the fantasy line and could just make some new riders for them. Same for the Exodite dragon-riders.
The Imperium is supremely lazy at recruiting. If a Feudal World has a preference for mounted combat, then it will raise Rough Rider regiments from that planet because it's easier than training the people to be front-line grunts or tankers.
It does the exact same thing with Feral Worlders where they get given a gun but aren't even slightly expected to use them because the Imperium needs bodies and the Feral Worlders provide that.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Culture shock aside, standard IG training should be easy enough to ingrain into them, especially their world has a pre-existing warrior culture.
Which again is the strength of the not-at-all-humble Lasgun. If you can work a Crossbow, you can most certainly work a Lasgun, which in certain respects is probably more user friendly. Heck, any one who can effectively shoot a bow from horseback should be able to do the same with a Lasgun?
I think we could also argue someone from a Feudal world is going to be more used to proper equipment maintenance and the overall importance thereof.
Even artillery may not be that much of a stretch, if they have trebuchet and ballista. A Lascannon Tripod, Basilisk and Medusa type stuff all work in almost the same way (line it up, calculate your parabola, let fly)
But hey. They’re still human and as such pretty adaptable. Sure they’d almost certainly find it tough going at first, but one has to assume some accommodation exists for such issues.
You've failed to factor in transtechnological dread
Something else to consider is that all primitive worlds in 40k have regressed to that state- stone-age tribes didn't make it to some far flung world in their current state after all. They all arrived on advanced space craft.
That means something happened that drove the regression (such as lack of access to a key resource) which may explain why the worlds are unable to advance further again.
It probably also explains why there are very few worlds with a stone-age level of technology but with significant political organisation (like early real polities like Sumer or the Aztecs)- once you have the knowledge of metalworking, it is very unlikely a politically organised state would lose that unless there were no accessible ferrous sources on world. Iron metalworking is fairly easy with the knowledge of how to do it. Stone age ferals worlds are probably very rare because they have to have regressed to almost no organised society in order to not be able to support metallurgy.
Remember, these worlds will not match our historic cultures, because they have dropped from a level of tech with interstellar travel. With that caveat, historical nations anywhere from the Roman or Seleucid Empire through to Napoleonic France or the Tokugawa Shogunate would likely be considered feudal worlds if they existed as single planets in the Imperium. Probably even up to nations like the Confederacy that were just starting to industrialise. Nations with a technology level akin to the Athenian Empire or Ancient Egypt or the Incan Empire likely wouldn't exist in the Imperium with any sort of regularity, because worlds with that level of organisation would be unlikely to lose the ability to work iron. Feral worlds seem to be distinguished by a lack of urban centres, yet still often have metal weapons despite a political organisation no greater than villages.
Iracundus wrote: The author tackles this concept of the "barbarian" warrior being better than the civilized, which he disagrees with and argues is a myth with the few outlier examples of such non-settled peoples triumphing sticking in the memory over all those other times when they failed against sedentary people and their states.
I'm not saying it's true, I'm saying the fluff does have some real-world support. R.E. Howard was all about how Conan the Cimmerian's pure wild fury would always defeat decadent civilization.
A huge part of the bias in favor of "barbarians" was the success of nomadic raiders against sedentary peoples. It is true that in the pre-industrial age, the premier "weapons system" was a horse archer trained from birth to his trade. Very hard for anyone to stop and impossible to eliminate since the vast Eurasian continent provided limitless strategic depth into which they could withdraw.
Cavalry ruled the Steppe, but horse archer forces rarely penetrated far outside of it where different forces were more effective. This is just an example of environment dictating tactics. Equally, horse archers and cavalry in general suck at taking fortifications (for example), which is why Hungary massively strengthened its castles and walled settlements after the first Mongol invasion, and suffered much less in the later ones. The aformentioned issues with forage mean you could wait out a horde of cavalry with enough stockpiled food.
The other factor that was key in the decline of massed horse archers was the development of the war wagon. Mobile cover paired with light, mobile artillery and other ranged weaponry was nearly impossible for purely cavalry forces to defeat. The concept was developed by the Czechs but later Cossacks used war wagons to great effect against Tatars and similar steppe peoples.
I already touched about this somewhere above, but the absence or lack of mechanicus to see to the world's tech as it works in 40k and with how secret they keep all technology for themselves, a world bereft of a mechanicus complement will inevitably decline for lack of knowledge an facilities. And, or, if the imperium doesn't ship necessary ressources any longer that would allow technology to be maintained.
May not be the only reason but from the top of my head seems like the most plausible. The how and why htey were left to rot or cut of in the first place will vary however.
You can start out super advanced on a high tech space ship; but once you're feet on the ground you've got to survive. If you assume most specialist understanding is held by few people in the colony ships then if those people die early; or are rendered unable to think clearly; then you've lost that knowledge.
IF a Warp Storm sets in then you can't replace those people. If you have a society like the Imperial one that is outright against the sciences; treats invention like a religion and original thinking close to a sin then its very probable that you will regress pretty quickly.
Heck a world might not have ready access to certain fuel sources so suddenly all those reactors and fuel engines might fail on you because you don't have the means to extract it.
Indeed you can argue that the more advanced a civilization becomes the more at risk and the further it has to fall once it has a resource or knowledge gap.
Heck because the Imperium has a tiered society you could easily have food or drink reserved for the upper classes. If that became contaminated or degraded too far you could have a mass poisoning event that suddenly wipes out a portion of the upper ranks. Suddenly a huge knowledge base is lost. You could have the cogitator sitting right there with all the info you need, but if you don't know the password you cannot get inside it to get that information.
Technological recovery was also probably hampered by the impact something like an STC would have over generations.
In essence, if this wonder machine does it all for you (especially the more advanced ones which also fabricated the goods), you’re probably gonna lose human knowledge of the process. So once the STC is removed? Your technological goose is cooked.
I also think the earlier point about worlds perhaps lacking critical resources is a good one. The immediate temptation is to consider any newly settled world to be pristine. But that’s not accounting for the millions of years we know sentient life existed in the galaxy. So it’s possible that whilst all trace of a previous colony or culture has gone? The planet’s resources may be denuded as well.
Yep, the above sounds totally correct to me. And then, when degredation has escalated and the world degenerated, the input of ressources from the Imperium to uplift it is simply not worth it and the Imperium says "oh, ya know, might as well..."
