Quote from: Jackalope;242230It's the little things you'd notice first.

My version of the World of Darkness for my Hunter campaign is a little more subtle I think. It's set in an indeterminate present but the roots of the present malaise can be traced back to the 70's or thereabouts. Nixon didn't resign. There an occupation army in the Middle East. The big conspiracy is what happened to Apollo 13. In my design notes for the setting I concentrated a lot on culture to reflect what was going on in the world. I mean little details like, Spielberg wasn't even in the picture, the smartest boy in the classroom was a kid called Lucas who directed Star Wars and then Empire before becoming a Brian Wilson-like recluse only to come out of hiding to a direct a picture called THX 1138. A paranoid director named Stone had a massive cult hit with a film called 13. The Black Panthers were actually a group of Hunters obsessively hunting for something called White Noise....

Quote from: David R;242235My version of the World of Darkness for my Hunter campaign is a little more subtle I think.

Probably.  This was created a for a four-color comic book campaign after all.  It's "three pages subtle," meaning you could keep the ruse up for about three pages in your average 70's comic before the big reveal.

It's also not the main campaign world, so the character get far less opportunity to interact with it.  I've used references to the world in maybe a dozen adventures, but actual PCs have only gone there twice, for a total of maybe six sessions.

Interesting background, Jackie. This is why we love our Site, btw - we can think someone's Off Topic persona is a total douche (or possibly a turd sandwich) but still find interesting ideas in the RPG section, and still get to enjoy (or loathe) either one without the Mods bringing down the smack. Bravo.

Riffing off the Emperor Norton idea...

California and the Western Territories were built on the idea of rampant Capitalistic pursuit of wealth.

We also know that said wealth was a)limited, and b) sought after by the Government Back East.

Once it became clear to those on the West Coast that the gold and other wealth was theirs and their alone - and the Bluecoats were the only thing standing between them and Independence...

Well, do the math. A bit less tolerance of the interference from Back East and...

Civil War I - Circa 1850?

Slavery plays second fiddle to the hard currency potential of the Western Territories, and the fact that the "East" can't project power that far...

Where do England and France fall on this spectrum? Is this the moment that Spain has been waiting for after a century of waining influence?

Quote from: Werekoala;242631California and the Western Territories were built on the idea of rampant Capitalistic pursuit of wealth.

We also know that said wealth was a)limited, and b) sought after by the Government Back East.

Once it became clear to those on the West Coast that the gold and other wealth was theirs and their alone - and the Bluecoats were the only thing standing between them and Independence...

Well, do the math. A bit less tolerance of the interference from Back East and...

That could be very interesting.

Ultimate success would hinge on the Rocky Mountain states -- without meaningful air support, the Union armies would be bogged down in the Rockies forever...if they sided with the West coast.  As goes Colorado, so goes the nation...

The West coast would find it hard to raise a meaningful army.  They would have to be extremely open to accepting blacks, indigenous peoples, and the Chinese, which could have long-standing social implications.

It wouldn't even necessarily require less tolerance from the East.  A charismatic leader with sufficient financial backing could have theoretically lead a West coast secession movement, capitalizing on the resources of the union being tied up in the conflict with the confederacy.  While probably supported by the neuvo riche elite of the West coast, the movements popular face could present itself as not succession but a "withdrawal" from the chaos on the other coast.

Did you know that Thomas Jefferson, after reviewing the findings of Lewis and Clark, proposed that at some point in the future America would have to split into separate nations (the landmass being too large for one federal government), and proposed the name "Pacifica" for what is now the Pacific Northwest?

I definitely think there is some potential in this idea.