How do I make a state/empire seem incompetent without them being ridiculously so? Pic related.
>>44487572
Make them good at reacting to problems that have come up, but bad at proactively preventing them.
Strong bureaucracy that can't do its job. You need to get written permission from someone who needs written permission from someone who needs a notarized paper from the person who you asked in the first place (Who didn't tell you that because they didn't know).
Sometimes it gets completely bypassed by military commanders or local governors who quietly sweep the regulations under a rug, but often there's little coordination and a lot of confusion about who actually needs to sign off on official documents and what documents are needed to get shit done.
>>44487572
Put words on their flag.
>>44487572
Give the players an example of how fucked the alternative is. If a dictatorship tries to reform, that's often the most dangerous time for its existence, so it would make no rational sense for the ruling class to attempt more than the absolutely minimal necessary political and social reforms. And, cripping from the French Revolution, often times the shit dragging down an ossified old state are the compromises and deals that increased freedom back in the day - like all of the special local governments and province by province differences in law and tariffs in France. It wasn't a matter of the Kingdom being a centralized absolute monarchy, but of liberal free market reforms (or socialistic minimums on grain, or even just effective taxation) requiring the sweeping away of all these traditional protections on French freedoms.
One man's corrupt and incompetent local king or duke is another man's sovereign government that has maintained independence from the central imperial government for years as part of an ancient contract.
>>44487572
Have them be conquered.
>>44487572
If we're talking armies, your pic related from WWI might make a good example of a realistically incompetent bureaucracy.
They had internal problems, which they thought they could only solve through application of military force. So they took their military force and tried to employ it, except:
It had unforeseen and far-reaching consequences beyond their capacity to handle (WWI happened).
Their mobilization was slow, and to boot it was constantly redirected to different objectives at the last minute causing substantial logistical problems.
They mobilized too many farmers, which meant they needed to de-mobilize a lot of farmers so as not to starve their country by accident.
And then they got bopped by Russia and Serbia for like a year or two until Germany came and helped them.
The take-away here is that an incompetent bureaucracy functions like a normal bureaucracy, except it does everything just slightly wrong. It lacks foresight, is often wishy-washy or non-committal, and tends to react to problems with either a much too small or much too large response.
The redeeming factor is that individuals are often still very competent. Even Italy in WW2 had excellent individual soldiers - it was their leadership that was borked.
So, I would suggest to focus on making the bureaucratic elements do shortsighted things and then react to the inevitable problems either way too hard or not hard enough, and then change their plan like 3 times in 3 weeks, and only then actually carry on in a reasonable way. And remember that individuals are often trying their best and doing fine, it's the system that sucks.
>>44487572
BUILD
A NEW
SUPERWEAPON
EVERY TIME IT GETS
DESTROYED
>>44488008
Someone get this hothead outta here.
>>44487572
>without them being ridiculously so?
>Pic related.
I hate to be the bringer of bad news but they were ridiculously incompetent
>>44487572
your pic related had the 'best' beaurocracy in Europe at it's time, meaning the alrgest and furthest reaching while still being comperatively(!) uncorrupt.
What that meant was that everything moved with the slow pace of a giant leviathan of a beaurocratic machine, every innovation, every expansion, every new idea had to go grind itself through not an oppressive, but just an unavoidable swamp of red tape. Not oppressive because the beaurocracy wasn't brutally efficient as it would be portrayed in some video game Empire, no, it was downright accomodating with it's exceptions and special rules, time tolerance and general generousness for individual failure, and so bypassing it wasn't really something that would improve your quality of life.
On top of this, through almost all of it's lifespan, it was ruled by a all-beloved and quite sharp Emperor that nonetheless had an extreme aversion against technology, riding in a horse drawn carriage until his death. And as generous but thourough as the beaurocracy was towards citizens, so also was he to the aristocracy.
So this bread an atmosphere of contentment and lack of ambition, an Empire that was, to speak with Musil 'content to be only the second weakest of the super powers' and the capital city of which was 'the smallest a city could be to transcend being a large city into being a world city' (badly paraphrasing).
And that's how it survived. For a bit. All the preassure it had, from inside by a dozen peoples that wanted their own independence, all it had from outside to stay relevant in a rapidly industrializing Europe, it could bear for the few decades it was alive by sheer lazy contentness, by putting things into perspective and assertaning that things aren't all bad, all things considered, and would likely be a lot worse were anybody to change.
Do it like that, anon. Do it like the Austro-Hungarian Empire did.
>>44487572
Make them deal with it first hand. Nothing infuriates players like a good roll of red tape. Make their lives as PCs, adventurers, transients, whatever a hell of paperwork and busy-bodies.
>>44488231
That's what I meant.
>>44488303
>while still being comperatively(!) uncorrupt.
>anything in relation with Hungary
AHHAAAHHAAHHAAHHAAHHAAA
>>44488343
don't think the current state of things is somehow an eternal always-has-been.
Sure, Hungary got the worse end of the deal, but you gotta differentiate between pre- and post-Soviet states of affairs. these people not yet had a tradition of only being able to survive in any reasonable luxury by means of corruption, they still operated in a frame where they could earn actual wages.
Not that they weren't hugely corrupt anyways, it's just the comparison that makes the difference.
>>44488460
I live here, most of our history is about how we find the backdoors (and fail) corruption and the like was always with us. big time
>>44488558
If you say so, I'm not about to try to convince somebody of something he doesn't want to believe on 4chan of all places. But you might wanna look up the 'Habsburg effect' as used in contemporary economical history.
It describes the tendency of eastern European areas that used to be under Habsburger rule to be less corrupt comperatively to those that didn't. That, so the theory, stems from the mindset a populace adopts when living under a well working beaurocracy that doesn't need additional 'grease' to do the things it advertises.
But as I know you'll disagree with that I'll just concede to your anecdotal non-comperative evidence.
As one of the unfortunate souls to have been born into Hungary, I believe I have the experience to answer your question.
Since you're not after the same level of incompetence and idiocy as this country, you have the following ingrediants for your shit-soup: incompetence, self-obsession (on both a personal and national level), procrastination, authoritarianism, pettyness, ignorant cruelty, xenophobia, conservatism, and a constant level of rage and fear (people here are constantly afraid of/hating something, with the discipline of OCDs). Take your picks based on the given situation and you're good to go.
Another way of going about it is the following checklist:
1, "What would Team Rocket do?"
2, Make it even more incompetent and self-destructive, while keeping them alive through the combination of luck and the selflessness of its not retarded citizens, resembling plot armour.
Then rinse and repeat.
Dirt poor lower class, pointlessly rich upper class, no upwards mobility
>>44488804
if we go with poland, there IS upwards mobility. And it comes from one of the other problems it has: The HUGE petty aristocracy, with multiple titles lost with death and having to be squabbled over after.
It was a constant shitfest of political posturing, and not only for a small upper class but for a huge portion of the non-peasent population.
>>44487572
Why do they need to be incompetent?
>>44488865
presumably so they fit the role the GM wants them to fill
>>44488303
damn this mess of writing and points gets across how an incompetent overburden beurocracy works with the jumbled way you wrote it well done anon well done
>>44489087
that literally wasn't the problem of Austro-Hungarian bureaucracy though.
The bureaucracy wasn't overburdened, it did fine. The Empire was overburdened with the bureaucracy, it was too big and too far reaching.
>>44489007
That tells me exactly nothing.
>>44487572
Just give them too many problems happening all at once
Herbert Hoover wasn't incompetent by any means, but he is remembered as such for overseeing something which was in many ways beyond his control.
>>44489368
don't ask meaningless questions then
>>44489412
Fuck you jackass it was for the OP not some random fuck who knows as much as everyone.
>>44489430
I want them to fit a certain role in the story, also to make them more believable.
>>44489538
Incompetent kingdoms are conquered by less incompetent kingdoms.
>>44489145
Larger Empires have existed for longer and with less technology. The Austro-Hungarian Empire probably would have lasted into the modern era(likely as a true constitutional monarchy) if it weren't for what happened to it at the end of WWI. It was more the fault of 19/20th century nationalism than bureaucracy.
>>44489695
Or they're large enough to weather the storm through sheer bulk.
Or the external pressure makes them shape up at gunpoint, it's amazing how helpful a foreign army besieging your capital can be when trying to push necessary but not terribly popular reforms.
>>44489766
I learned that from CK2. The moment the Caliph Jihads you all your laws pass, easy.
>>44487572
Well, do what the Austro-Hungarians did: sprinkle some medieval incompetence on top of your empire in a world of modernization.
>Don't centralize authority
You have your king/emperor in charge. Wait, did I say "in charge"? I meant struggling every single day to not be a mere figurehead. The nobility demands respect for their ancient rights, which includes limiting the authority of the emperor. The clergy claims to be above temporal law and expects to be treated as such, which means limiting the authority of the emperor. The bourgeoise wants equal treatment to the nobility if they have the money to back it up, which means limiting the authority of the emperor. The serfs are growing unhappy and want to see the abolition of serfdom, which means... you get the idea.
>Blanda upp like a good goy
At least the army still listens to you... technically. The thing is that the empire is full of various ethnic groups with their own identities and own languages. Of course, appointing bilingual officers seemed smart at first, but now you're learning that the soldiers are more loyal to their officers and generals than to you. The only way to prevent those generals from overthrowing you is keeping them happy, which isn't always strategically advantageous and means limiti- you get the idea.
>Success breeds jealousy
The thing about being the ruler of a gigantic and internally unstable empire is that everyone hates your guts. Sure, you have some relatives on foreign thrones but just because you're related doesn't mean they're loyal to you. If anything, they want to see you dead and take your place through dubious inheritance. As for your other competitors, they "only" want a little slice of your empire.
So that's how you make an empire incompetent without being ridiculous: don't make them streamlined, make it a political nightmare and depict its leader as a noble soul who tries but constantly fails to streamline the system into something that sort of works.
>>44490845
What's that? The empire still isn't unstable enough for you? Then consider the following:
>Kniggers gonna knig
The old warrior aristocracy is still around, even though changes in warfare made them obsolete. Despite being less than qualified, they still demand high positions in the military or they throw a hissyfit. Great, on top of having questionable loyalty your generals are now also laughably incompetent.
>How do you want your empire, senpai?
The father of the current emperor was a lazy, fat sack of shit who died snorting opium off the breasts of some prostitute. His son, though amazingly competent, still has to carry around his fathers legacy.
>JUST MERC MY SHIT UP
What do you do if you can't trust your own armies? You hire mercenaries, mercenaries who are loyal to coin and coin alone. Your payment is a few days late? They sack your shit. The enemy offers them a better deal? They sack your shit. You station them somewhere for too long without a good fight? They sack your shit? Even if everything goes as planned, they might just sack your shit.
>Le happy merchants
Your empire is, to make things even worse, landlocked and only barey able to sustain its population due to horribly backwards agricultural systems. You try to reform, but the aforementioned obstacles make it nearly impossible. Your trade partners know this, and use this to squeeze a few more coins out of you than they deserve.
Internal problems related to competing interests can result in completely understandable incompetence of a nation. Just remember that, not even within the empire, all of its subjects profit from the empire flourishing.
>>44490965
>The old warrior aristocracy is still around, even though changes in warfare made them obsolete. Despite being less than qualified, they still demand high positions in the military or they throw a hissyfit.
This is one of my favorite things. I once had a setting where the most powerful kingdom was a centralized absolute monarchy that developed a small but efficient bureaucracy after a breakthrough in weapons technology led to the infantry being much better-armed than the noble commanders who clung to old ways and basically died off because they wouldn't wear newly-developed armor good enough to protect themselves and they kept dueling each other to the death with the new weapons.
