(TFT) Natives and National Identities

["Jay Carlisle" <Jay_Carlisle@charter.net>]

In one of my old Atlases (The Readers Digest Great World Atlas 1962) the end 
papers have a section of the Descellier world map from 1550.
This Atlas was made for the Canadian market and the section of the map shown 
is an area of Canada.
Which area is an interesting question as apparently the French from the mid 
sixteenth century was spelled in much the same manner as the English of the 
age.
I'm no linguist, so while some things like Region Froide make sense to me, 
much of the inscriptions have been about as clear as mud.
Stuff like "As it was not possible to trade with the people of this country 
because of their aloofness and the intemperance of the land and small 
profits, they had returned to France and hoped to come back when it pleased 
the King."
Well, it turns out that this inscription refers to the first attempt at a 
French colony in Canada under Cartier and Roberval from 1541 to 1543.
Quite a little disaster, including Cartier returning to France with a hold 
full of pyrite and quartz "Aussi faux que les diamants Canadiens".
Cartier had explored this region previously and reported that it was 
well-populated with peoples who were "as obedient and friendly as possible, 
and just as familiar as if they had been brought up with us forever.", as 
well as being abundant in wildlife and fish.
He also made important note of the story of the "kingdom of the Saguenay" 
who possessed great stores of gold and copper.
This is really interesting because the Spanish mention in report on French 
activities in the Atlantic that Cartier encountered hostilities from the 
start of his arrival in 1541 owing to his treatment of the natives during 
his second scouting voyage.
It seems that his choice of camp location during the second voyage was 
established without deference to the locals.
Resentment was further inflamed by his kidnapping of 10 individuals whom he 
took back to France.
Soon after his 1541 arrival the situation degraded into open conflicts that 
resulted in heavy losses of manpower for the French, and Cartier withdrew, 
abandoning the colony at Cap Rouge obviously hoping that his discovery of 
"gold and diamonds" would motivate a stronger force to return to the area.
Meanwhile, the second half of the expedition arrived under Roberval in 1542, 
having been delayed for the better part of a year by the appointed governor 
for a stint of privateering.
At first, Roberval faired better in relations with the Indians, managing to 
trade for a huge store of fish when provisions ran short.
Perhaps this was owing to the natives directing their enmity against Cartier 
personally, and perhaps Roberval's stronger military complement prevented 
the open attacks that plagued Cartier but nonetheless trade and relations 
deteriorated quickly.
For example, Roberval's contingent was decimated by scurvy, a disease that 
the natives had saved Cartier's second expedition from by showing them how 
to brew a tea of white spruce.
No such assistance was offered Roberval.
Now I maintain that the hubris cuts both ways, but the French had been 
operating in this area for many years with whaling and fishing boats.
Contact with the natives was not unknown, and the region was commonly 
labeled 'Tierra de los bretones', 'C. del Breton', or variations thereof on 
maps of the age.
Of course these were working class people, not the aristocrats that were in 
charge of establishing colonies and it seems that although elaborate 
preparations were made for the colony, they were made on the old world model 
with little or no attempt to consult those with direct experience of the 
area other than explorers with vested interests in "rosy pictures" of 
conditions and opportunities.
The quality of colonists that were available were also a major contributing 
factor to these early colonizing failures.
This first expedition was strong in official and commercial support, but the 
French public imagination was interested in activities in Brazil centered 
around the trade in dyewoods and consequently the body of colonists was 
recruited mainly from prisons.
Interestingly the first impressions of the colonists were actually somewhat 
civil.
The St. Lawrence natives were initially noted as being more advanced than 
the naked natives of Brazil because they wore clothing, with one Frenchman 
reporting that he thought the Indians resembled images of Hercules.
Misunderstandings were quick to lead to antagonism however.
In an early example, the French were at first amazed at the Amerindian 
gesture of hospitality of carrying newcomers on their backs as they entered 
their village or wished to show their visitors locations that were difficult 
to reach.
At least some of the Frenchmen came to expect this as a kind of service and 
one particular Frenchman developed a habit of ordering a particular Indian 
to take him for regular walks in this manner.
On one such occasion, the native slipped on a rocky path near the river and 
the Frenchman responded by beating the Indian with his cane.
Without a word the Indian turned and strangled the Frenchman.
Another colonist, witnessing the attack, drew his sword but the Indian fell 
upon him quickly and choked him to death too.
This led to a spat of murders of natives "for a pastime by 'brainless' young 
members of the colony".
By the time Roberval abandoned the colony he noted that the natives were all 
naked even though they wore breeches, arguing that skins were not apparel.
Not all of these misunderstandings were results of direct interaction.
Colonists were shackled for offenses and at least one man was hung for 
theft, practices the Amerindians reserved for enemies rather than 
compatriots.
The French had three colonial failures in rapid succession during this 
period and all seem to follow roughly these same themes in the causes.
Even when the Europeans believed they were unquestionably aiding natives the 
results often led to conflict.
In the attempt in Brazil (1555 - 1560) the leader Villegaignon made every 
effort to purchace war prisoners from allies so that they would not be 
eaten.
This seemed to be an obvious act of grace to the Europeans who proceeded to 
beat the Indians into wearing clothing and then used them as slave labour, 
often overworking them to death.
It baffled the colonists that the natives would prefer their traditional 
fate.
By 1557 the French leader wrote to Calvin that the Brazilians were "a fierce 
and savage people, far removed from courtesy and humanity, very different 
from us in learning and doing. So much so that it has occurred to me to 
wonder if we have fallen among beasts in the form of humanity."
In his recruiting campaign, Villegaignon had played down the cannibalism of 
the Brazilians noting that if Europeans were sometimes eaten this was 
because they had offended the Indians with their avarice and ambition.
The give-and-take that had made the brazilwood trade possible for over 50 
years was again absent within the colony.

I'd suggest that the native cultures were operating under goals (or a 
Charter) that was axiomatically significantly more local in its 'world view' 
than that of the Europeans, who were much more implicit in defining their 
goals, primarily the extraction of resources and wealth for the mother 
country (primarily through the investors.)
The natives were living in their native country and likely had a difficult 
time even conceiving of the purpose of many of the colonists actions.
I would set it up where the alignment of the Indians was centered around 
Happiness (maintaining the culture of their forefathers), while the 
Europeans were motivated by Fortune as an overall group.
This isn't saying that the cultures in question couldn't be broken down into 
sub-cultures and smaller Units.
> From what little I know of Amerindian culture the warrior subculture might 
often be motivated more by Fame, as might be likely for many of the 
explorers as well, while many colonists likely took part on the promise of 
Happiness (practice their own religion) in the new world.
Of course, a Unit can perform Actions that they aren't aligned for.
I divide the experience for a successful Action in half.
Figures/Units only get a full award for Actions that fully agree with their 
Fame/Fortune/Happiness ratio.
A basic example would be volunteer gladiators.
A gladiator with the "purest" motivations would have 100% focus in one of 
the three.
Some people just like to kill.
A gladiator who fights for Happiness (love of combat) 100% receives a full 
exp. award for winning a melee (against a roughly equal opponent), 50% for 
basic success and 50% for garnering the success in their alignment focus.
A gladiator who fights for Fortune 100% gets the other half of their award 
if the result of the combat garners them sufficient money to meet their 
current threshold.
I currently use 2 weeks average workers pay times the fighters level. (some 
Thai boxers fight almost every other week)
A gladiator who fights for fame garners aligned experience for combat viewed 
by a population sufficient to meet their current threshold.
I currently set the audience required equal to the number of experience 
points needed to obtain the next character point.
Of course most individual Figures aren't likely to be one hundred percent 
focused like this, but as a rule of thumb most Units will tend toward a 
myopic focus, especially the larger ones.
Also bear in mind that all of this is taking place in a closed environment 
instead of the traditional open model where resources aren't limited.
Experience can be used to adjust a Figures F/F/H ratio.
Units ratios are adjusted via Nomic with moral effected by how closely its 
Charter matches the average ratio of its members.
I don't worry much about "balance" at all.
I find most of the best "stories" or opportunities for interesting Actions 
and effects come from environments that aren't very well balanced and in a 
period of change.
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"