Greetings!

India. Currently, last I read, they are the most populous nation on the entire planet, with 1.5 Billion people. China has like, 1.2 Billion. In studying India--for me, especially Ancient India--is especially interesting. You know that Hinduism is the oldest organized religion on earth, at 5,000 years of history? Sanskrit is also the oldest written language we have records for. Damn, you know? Way back, 4-5,000 years ago, ancient kingdoms in India had mass irrigation, mass agriculture, multi-story urban buildings, huge cities, with paved engineered roads, plumbing, too, for god's sake. Ashoka--a mighty ancient King in India, had armies of hundreds of thousands of troops? Ashoka was also a brilliant philosopher that came up with a brilliant form of racial and religious tolerance a "universal human rights" philosophy 2000 years before America, or the United Nations. This majestic King had some of the philosophy inscribed on giant stone monoliths that stand in testimony to this present day. Amazing stuff, really. This King also launched wars, led armies, and slaughtered hundreds of thousands of people, by his own admission. He unified much of India, and possessed absolute power. He had all the power, all the glory, all the gold, all the women a man could ever dream of.

And you know what? This King abdicated his throne. He laid all that down, after reigning for like 25 years. He was still fairly young, in his 40's or 50's when he did it. He laid it all down, and retired to an isolated cave on the edge of nowhere and lived the rest of his life pondering nature, peace, love, philosophy, and Buddism. Doesn't that just blow your mind?

And while I certainly believe that history and natural observation shows us the physical limitations of women as warriors when compared to men--I find it fascinating that some other powerful Indian King of a mighty kingdom had a personal bodyguard regiment of like, 5,000 women. Exclusively women warriors. They were armoured, armed to the teeth, trained in combat, and traveled with the King wherever he went. Wherever he went, groups of these women warriors would be sleeping or on guard in every room, every hallway, every door and stairway. Primary sources explain that when questioned about this very unusual policy, the King said, the women warriors protected him well enough, and were fanatically loyal to him, and would not be corrupted by temptations of sex, gold or power--unlike men. Damn. Oh, yeah, I imagine he had sex with lots of them, too. No doubt. How the women managed all that social drama, the sources don't really say. The sources also say that many of the women warriors were beautiful; most of them were Indian, but not all. Some were Greeks, Black Africans, Persians, and Central Asians. Interestingly, while many were noted for their beauty and charm, besides their martial skills--all of these women were from lower social classes, or foreigners. Meaning, according to Indian laws and customs at the time, there is no higher social or political status they could ever hope to achieve in life, again, due to them being born poor, for the Indian women, or being born as a foreigner for the others. So their cache within the larger political and noble network was zero. A Royal Bodyguard Regiment of 5,000 beautiful women warriors!

You no doubt have experience with DM's or folks that say something like, "A kingdom could only have a small army of 5,000 or 10,000 troops, and most of them will be worthless peasants." and so on. Well, lets see. Take 1066, Western Europe. The Normans from Normandy conquered England with an army of roughly 10 to 15,000 soldiers. In 326 BC when Alexander the Great led his Macedonian army in an invasion of northern India, contemporary reports at the time informed Alexander that beyond the lands of Porus and the Hydaspes, there were dozens of powerful, rich Indian Kingdoms. Each with hundreds of thousands of warriors, finely equipped with infantry, archers, cavalry, and each with hundreds or thousands of trained war elephants. Yeah, this was 326 BC, and this is the kind of armies that the kingdoms of India had--1300 years before the Normans set foot in Britain.

The old "Mesopotamia is the Cradle of Civilization" thing? That's out now. Now, the theory seems to be there was multiple "Cradles of Civilization" because the evidence shows Mesopotamia, India, and China all had booming urban-based civilizations all basically doing the same stuff, at roughly the same time periods, 3200-4000 BC. So, India was making cities long before Greece or Rome. My Roman professor would no doubt bristle--but the Indians were engineering paved roads, gutters, sewage tunnels and plumbing before 3000 BC. Just amazing stuff.

Philosophically, India is amazing, too. Long before the European "Age of Enlightenment", 1700 AD, did you know that way back, say between 1200 BC and 500 AD the Indians all had developed entire schools of philosophy that discussed, debated, and wrote about not merely esoteric philosophy, but theology, economics, politics, the role of government, all the things we tend to think of as "modern political and social issues"--the Indians were debating about all that stuff long, long before anyone in Europe even thought such was important? Or mostly so. I just think it is fascinating how deep, how complex the Indian philosophers were debating and thinking about this kind of stuff. They had their versions of conservatives and liberals, too. It's like, damn, they were arguing about the same shit we do! LOL.

Arms, Steel, and Weapons. I didn't know this before, but the ancient Indians were apparently master armoursmiths and master weaponsmiths. In listening to professor Michael Wood--a Brit!--interview an Indian Bronzesmith that has been making Bronze stuff for generations--he has family names, records and history that go back literally hundreds and hundreds of years. Anyhow, the Indians experimented with every kind of type and style of armor ever thought of in the West, usually long before we in the West got around to it. Same thing with weapons. They had dozens of different styles of axes, swords, polearms, daggers, you name it, they probably already invented it. And such inventions were not limited to just theoretical prototypes. They used all of this stuff in battle, over and over, to really learn about the performance. For awhile, some Indians really liked RHINO ARMOUR. Yeah. Apparently, Rhino armour looked fierce and cool, and it provided good protection as well, so it was effective. However, the Indian soldiers and armoursmiths ultimately stopped using Rhino armour because when compared to other armours available, the Rhino armour was hot, made you sweat buckets, and reduced your mobility. According to the historical records, within the Indian subcontinent, the Indians developed weapon and armour techniques and skills that established a reputation of high quality in armour, and very lethal and efficient weaponry. Their armour and weapon skills and quality were equals--or superior--to  to anything produced in Europe, China, the Middle East or anywhere. And that this martial tradition of excellence and technological mastery was just as true, whether it was 300 BC or 1200 AD. Europe, China, Japan--they had nothing on India.

Have you used Indian history or stuff in your games? I think it is kind of sad that for the most part we in the West are absolutely clueless about the various knowledge, heritage and accomplishments of Indian civilization over thousands and thousands of years. Certainly, our cousins the British have a fine expertise of India, but I mean in general, and in American education and cultural awareness in particular. Gamewise too. Damn, the Indians have so many different religious traditions and philosophies. Yes, there is Hinduism, and Buddism, and Jainism, but there are dozens of weird offshoots and mythologies. It's just staggering in the mythological and spiritual diversity!

Anyways, I've rambled on good enough for now. What are your thoughts and experiences with Indian culture and such in your campaigns?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Check out Arrows of Indra, written by the RPGPundit.

Quote from: CRKrueger;1059203Check out Arrows of Indra, written by the RPGPundit.

Greetings!

Good to meet you, CRKrueger!

I have read some good things about Pundit's Arrows of Indra. I think that Pundit going for doing a book like that takes creative and artistic *balls*. What do you think of Arrows of Indra? Have you worked with the material in your campaigns?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Ancient India is a fascinating setting. We are learning more and more about it, with archaelogical discoveries hinting at sunken cities straight from Hindu myth and so on.

One of the problems I have with poblishing it as a setting is that Hinduism is a living religion with a lot of people who could be offended at a RPG portrayal of the religion. Now, I know that the same claim could be made for Christianity, Islam and Judaism, and they have been portrayed in RPG Supplements/Settings, but I have always found that Hunduism is more of a minefield. From a RuneQuest/D100 background/point of view, polytheistic Hinduism is perfect for a RQ Cults portrayal, with each deity having a cult, granting spells and having modes of behaviour, but I have the feeling that such a depiction would be grossly insensitive and a lot of Hundus would be offended by it.

Quote from: soltakss;1059242Ancient India is a fascinating setting. We are learning more and more about it, with archaelogical discoveries hinting at sunken cities straight from Hindu myth and so on.

One of the problems I have with poblishing it as a setting is that Hinduism is a living religion with a lot of people who could be offended at a RPG portrayal of the religion. Now, I know that the same claim could be made for Christianity, Islam and Judaism, and they have been portrayed in RPG Supplements/Settings, but I have always found that Hunduism is more of a minefield. From a RuneQuest/D100 background/point of view, polytheistic Hinduism is perfect for a RQ Cults portrayal, with each deity having a cult, granting spells and having modes of behaviour, but I have the feeling that such a depiction would be grossly insensitive and a lot of Hundus would be offended by it.

Greetings!

Archeology has been discovering some very cool things, as you mentioned! Perhaps I saw the same documentary? I saw this one show where they have found huge cities off the coast of India, down under the water. Huge blocks of stone, thick walls, a kind of roadway. It's amazing. And, it's like 5,000 years old or more.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: soltakss;1059242Ancient India is a fascinating setting. We are learning more and more about it, with archaelogical discoveries hinting at sunken cities straight from Hindu myth and so on.

One of the problems I have with poblishing it as a setting is that Hinduism is a living religion with a lot of people who could be offended at a RPG portrayal of the religion. Now, I know that the same claim could be made for Christianity, Islam and Judaism, and they have been portrayed in RPG Supplements/Settings, but I have always found that Hunduism is more of a minefield. From a RuneQuest/D100 background/point of view, polytheistic Hinduism is perfect for a RQ Cults portrayal, with each deity having a cult, granting spells and having modes of behaviour, but I have the feeling that such a depiction would be grossly insensitive and a lot of Hundus would be offended by it.

Greetings!

How do you think a fictionalized portrayal of Hinduism would be a minefield, Soltakss? I happen to personally know a good number of Hindus. In my experience, they have proven to be exceptionally well-educated, thoughtful, and gracious. A friend of mine--he and his wife are both Hindus--he was explaining to me about their wedding, and He smiled at me, and said, "Please, my friend, do not be offended. We believe in Hinduism, as you know, so we have many gods and traditions, and our wedding was held in one of our temples devoted to a goddess. I know America is a Christian nation, and you are my good friend." I mean, damn. Not only is my friend thoughtful and eager to share details of his wedding and his religion to me, but he wanted to make sure I wouldn't be offended by his mentioning of their beliefs and customs. I was like, "Ammit, you're my friend. No worries, brother!" He would confess to me that he knows that many Americans find Hinduism to be a strange, alien religion, and a bit weird. Anyhow, I think Hindus are wonderful people, and I don't think that they are...*unperceptive*. Not exactly what I'm thinking of. I suppose it is better to just say, Hindus have a sense of humour--they know Hinduism is kinda weird to westerners, and we don't often understand their religion--and they are Ok with that. They don't demand that we do fully undertstand their faith, or get everything right. In truth, they argue and fight about all kinds of things that we in the West can't even comprehend. At the same time, they are very devoted to their faith. They don't buy into our typical Post-Modernist anti-religious attitudes at all. So, they cheerfully speculate that there's trainloads of people in the West that *Just don't get it* That's more aimed at the Post-Modernist crowd. For devout Christians, they respect Christians seriously.

Just some thoughts though.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1059201Greetings!

India. Currently, last I read, they are the most populous nation on the entire planet, with 1.5 Billion people. China has like, 1.2 Billion. In studying India--for me, especially Ancient India--is especially interesting. You know that Hinduism is the oldest organized religion on earth, at 5,000 years of history? Sanskrit is also the oldest written language we have records for. Damn, you know? Way back, 4-5,000 years ago, ancient kingdoms in India had mass irrigation, mass agriculture, multi-story urban buildings, huge cities, with paved engineered roads, plumbing, too, for god's sake.

Nothing I didn't know but it is impressive to see it all together in one place. Sad though they were so advanced and then they fell to a third world country and are still clawing their way back with a foot in the second world, one toe in the first world and the other foot in the third world even now.

Population wise China is ahead but that will change soon.

QuoteWorld Population
7,525,295,622

TOP 10 MOST POPULOUS COUNTRIES (July 1, 2018)

1. China                1,384,688,986     
2. India                1,296,834,042     
3. United States          329,256,465     
4. Indonesia          262,787,403     
5. Brazil                  208,846,892     
6. Pakistan          207,862,518
7. Nigeria                  203,452,505
8. Bangladesh          159,453,001
9. Russia                  142,122,776
10. Japan                  126,168,156

2,425,846 per year increase

Some really densely populated places on that list, it is truly amazing that some of those places don't have 10's of millions die every year from starvation.

I am reminded that both Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan's Mongols both failed to conquer India. I don't know why, but I have always felt that it would have been better for the world had the Mongols conquered all of India, all of SE Asia, along with Egypt. all of North Africa and all of southern Europe.

Is your portrayal of Hindus in the RPG basically accurate?
Does it avoid anything obviously incendiary?
If yes to both, most Hindus would not blink.

But more importantly, do you have a Hindu at your table?
If you do, then talk to them beforehand.
If not, none of this matters since its doubtful a table of non-Hindus would know enough to be offended or not.

And if you have a table of SJW asshats who leap at any chance to be offended, then burn the table and find another group.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1059488Is your portrayal of Hindus in the RPG basically accurate?
Does it avoid anything obviously incendiary?
If yes to both, most Hindus would not blink.

But more importantly, do you have a Hindu at your table?
If you do, then talk to them beforehand.
If not, none of this matters since its doubtful a table of non-Hindus would know enough to be offended or not.

And if you have a table of SJW asshats who leap at any chance to be offended, then burn the table and find another group.

Greetings!

So true, Spinachcat! Burn the table down!!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1059346How do you think a fictionalized portrayal of Hinduism would be a minefield, Soltakss?

I once quoted an old joke that mentioned Mahatma Gandhi and ended up with an outrageous pun "Super Callused Fragile Mystic Plagued with Halitosis" and had a large number of emails from Hindus who, very politely, pointed out that I had insulted every Indian and that Mahatma Gandhi was treated as a religious icon by many Hindus, so I took the joke down. Now, imagine the response when describing a cult for a Hindu deity that is still worshipped.

Personally, I am of the opinion that a RQ-style writeup of Hindu deities could be done in a sympathetic way that works in a RQ-style setting. However, I am sure it would be seen as being blasphemous to many devout Hindus.

Quote from: wranderson;1059440I am reminded that both Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan's Mongols both failed to conquer India.

The Moguls did conquer much of India and they were descended from the Timurids, who were descended from the Mongols.

Quote from: soltakss;1059914The Moguls did conquer much of India and they were descended from the Timurids, who were descended from the Mongols.

Greetings!

The Moguls are a fascinating empire as well, Soltakss. Very true. They ruled over much of northern India for quite awhile. They accomplished a lot with the military, architecture, the economy, as well as artistic contributions.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: wranderson;1059440I am reminded that both Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan's Mongols both failed to conquer India. I don't know why, but I have always felt that it would have been better for the world had the Mongols conquered all of India, all of SE Asia, along with Egypt. all of North Africa and all of southern Europe.

Greetings!

Just a note: Alexander the Great did not "fail" to conquer India. Alexander successfully invaded India, and conquered several kingdoms and territories, before deciding to return to his Imperial capital of Babylon, in Persia. At the time, Alexander's Empire was larger than even what the great Persian Empire had ruled over. Alexander the Great was never defeated in any battle, by anyone. It is not an exaggeration--Alexander the Great was INVINCIBLE. In his whole career of his campaigns, starting at the age of 18, no enemy forces proved able to defeat him. No enemy general outmatched him. No great fortress, from Tyre to Babylon, to mountain fortresses in the Hindu Kush, could resist him. Nature itself could not even resist him--Alexander the Great triumphed, and led his army by sheer force of will and majesty, to march and overcome forests, deserts, marshes, steppes, jungles and mountains. This is why to this day, Alexander is known as Alexander the Great.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

You should definitely check out Arrows of Indra.

It's not a generic India-based fantasy setting. It IS India, as presented in the era of the Indian Epic of the Mahabharata.
So it's not just "india!!" but India in a specific time and place, based on epic Indian Myth.

Quote from: SHARK;1059983Greetings!

Just a note: Alexander the Great did not "fail" to conquer India. Alexander successfully invaded India, and conquered several kingdoms and territories, before deciding to return to his Imperial capital of Babylon, in Persia. At the time, Alexander's Empire was larger than even what the great Persian Empire had ruled over. Alexander the Great was never defeated in any battle, by anyone. It is not an exaggeration--Alexander the Great was INVINCIBLE. In his whole career of his campaigns, starting at the age of 18, no enemy forces proved able to defeat him. No enemy general outmatched him. No great fortress, from Tyre to Babylon, to mountain fortresses in the Hindu Kush, could resist him. Nature itself could not even resist him--Alexander the Great triumphed, and led his army by sheer force of will and majesty, to march and overcome forests, deserts, marshes, steppes, jungles and mountains. This is why to this day, Alexander is known as Alexander the Great.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

True, but - and obviously directly relevant to this thread - Alexander's army took a real kicking at the Hydaspes.

It is very possible that this perceived pyrrhic victory was the straw that broke the back of the Macedonian army's morale, forcing Alexander to turn his army around before he risked facing a genuine mutiny.

[video=youtube;jrmgas_MDzc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrmgas_MDzc[/youtube]