Is there any justicifation for a society in which the dominant force of the land are raiders and barbarians, and the establishment of largescale law, order, and governments continually fails despite the efforts of settlements who are forced to remain divided and huddled behind walls?
Asking this for both medieval and post apoc.
Yes, there's several. For example: internal strife is too strong to allow any established government the chance to effectively project power outside its borders, or even walls. Think sparta as an example.
And don't forget that those outside forces can actively work, even together, against the ones trying to establish order. Divide et impera.
>>47898122
Not enough fertile land is available to the governments. They can't specialize enough, become complex enough, or have enough people to really push the barbarians out.Guns, Germs, and Steel if you want to know why exactly this happen
>>47898122
That's how the government functions. Leaves most of the minor settlements out to dry so the ones it has the ability to control are easier to keep under heel.
Didn't Genghis Khan basically make this happen?
>>47898122
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagaudae
you can get lots of bandits if your civilization is so grindingly unpleasant that your peasants are constantly running away to join them due to debt, nobles being cunts, etc, although that would constrain what you can do with the civilized parts of the setting.
>>47898552
The Mongols had a strong central government actually. It's a Chinese myth that they were nothing more than barbarians.
Fucking Chinese.
>>47898587
Not even bandits. This happened all the time in Southeast Asia because the rice farming states were basically built on slavery. People would routinely fuck off and go tribal or anarchist in unoccupied (and general wild and uncultivated) territory.
>>47898122
Perhaps the leaders representing the forces of law and order don't have what it takes to unify the land. Putting an end to the chaos is neither an easy nor a clean task. They may either lack the wisdom or the willingness to be brutal that's required for such a position of leadership.
>>47898122
Well, it really depends on what you consider raiders and barbarians to be.
Just look at the state of Europe around the fall of Western Roman Empire. Raiders and barbarians were the dominant force because Rome became too bloated and politically fragmented.
And post apoc is basically a hard reset on society. You could always explain it as raiders forming a joint horde whenever someone tries to organise a new civilisation in order to wreck it so that their prey remains weak and vulnerable.
>>47898386
TALON COMPANYBecause as evidence, they are doing their job a lot better than those fuckwits at the regulators
>>47898776
That was one thing that bothered me in FO3. Talon Company is huge enough to go toe in toe with suprr mutants in D.C, but they never got developed enough in game. They just sat there being cannon fodder. Talon Company could have been something great.
Same time I do know the answer: Bethesda
>>47898998
They even had an artillery piece.
>>47898595
Because everyone who didn't follow Chinese culture were barbarians.
>>47898122
Not for a long term unless technology is really advanced because of food alone. A population of 1000 needs to eat about a ton of food each day. This means that you need to generate 365 tonnes of food each year. That's a fucking loof of bread, potatoes and so fucking fourth. If raiders and barbarians are the kind in fallout, then no, widespread starvation would start quickly.
Basically, fallout does not make sense as a barren wasteland, stored food would last less than a year. Most likely less than a month if refrigerator units failed.
The problem with Fallout is that raiders are nameless, unrealistically violent, and generally separate from the non-raider population.
This is why New Vegas is superior to 3 and 4.
"Raiders" should be a faction just like any other, with their friendlyness and hostility depending on how you act against the group. There shouldn't be 'raiders' at all, just different tribes and groups and some of those groups don't mind murdering other groups on sight for resources just like in real life.
>>47899100
Assuming of course that the barbarians are not like the most historical barbarians, that is they occupy a territory like everyone else, just happens to not share your culture.
>>47899117
New vegas was great in that at least the first few hours appeared to be like that with the powder gangers. Sure, later you ran across people who were to hopped up on stims to do anything but. But at least it was accepted that they were madmen and basically a created market by the khans.
>>47898122
Fallen society where the towns have atomic shielding, but are massive pussies inside. Barbs are rad poisoned and mad, but numerous
>>47899143
The gangers worked too, because while they were raiding and shaking down caravans for supplies, there are notes everywhere in the area where they are trying to unite because they know that their condition can't exist long-term, and they need to establish something more long-term right away before they starve.
And the fiends were pretty much contained to one small area, living off drugs and whatever they can manage to steal and basically dying of starvation and addiction.
>>47899117
The presence of bandits/raider groups in New Vegas makes sense because it's a lawless frontier like the old wild west. All the criminals and low-lifes set out there to ply there trade because there isn't as much order.
>>47899370
There was a lot more order bent organizations (Namely NCR and Legion) than there were in the Capital Wasteland.
>>47898122
Just google somalia.
>>47899406
Exactly, and they brought in supplies that could be pillaged. There were bandits in the American West because there were farms, towns, and trains to rob, despite the law attempting to reign them in. There were never many bandits in Alaska, because its fucking cold and theres very little to steal. Those are outlaws at most, people who fled the law and functionally went into exile for fear of reprisal. Same should apply to Capital Wasteland, theres nothing being grown, there aren't many settlements or much money, and at most there should be migrating hunter-gather tribes
>>47900265
They didn't rob farms and townspeople. Bandits usually had good relations with them so they could escape
>>47900946
This is also true.
Many of the famous criminals of the wild west were able to blend into their surroundings for a good reason.
It's generally not a good idea to set yourself up where everyone and I mean EVERYONE is supposed to hate and fear the ever loving shit out of you.
Generally, no. To greatly simplify it, whoever ends up on top of the heap tries really hard to set up rules that keep them on top of the heap, and that *becomes* the law and order.
>>47898122
It's called warlordism and it's very common, basically the default state of humans
>>47898998
Just like the gunners. They had a chance to make a really cool faction but they just made more raiders.
>>47898122
That pretty well sums up the history of the Waziristan region for the last 3000 years or so
>>47907294
3000 is certainly stretching it.
>>47898122
Depends on how you do it. Rule of thumb; if the barbarians and raiders grow their own food (or at least have a part of their population do it, willingly or not) and just raid for stuff they can't make on their own (and women and slaves and for shits and giggles), then yes. It works pretty well because that's what usually happened at early stages of civilization or during periods of collapse after a period of relative prosperity.
Though, it would likely be better for a bronze age setting than a medieval setting. Post apoc can work, but the land needs to be farmable (or at least can grow grass if you're using pastoral nomads).
>>47898122
A population that relied on lost, advanced technology to feed and sustain them, most now compete for the smaller amount of food available. Best way to get a bigger share? Kill the other guys, less mouths to feed.
No? Not in the long run. Eventually barbarians and raiders form their own laws and create order. These groups couldn't be a dominating force without a form of government.
With all the raiding and raping or appropriating, as well, eventually the raiders don't need to raid anymore.
>>47899117
>>47899143
>>47899370
FO4 ALMOST had something really cool with the Raiders.
You could read terminals and shit at their bases that revealed they had interesting conflicts and allegiances, and clearing out bases or taking valuable positions would change how they interacted
