What would be a good reason for the majority of states to be city states?

What would be a good reason for the majority of states to be city states?

Other urls found in this thread:

urbis.wikidot.com/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

See Renaissance Italy.

Massive population growth making cities grow tremendously in size.

I asked myself the same question when I was designing a new campaign setting. I ended up with a world wherein 5% of humanity is ageless and society advances a bit slower compared to our timeline in societial stuff. They've got magic and shit though - not the ageless people, they don't get magic nor mysticism, but they've got a whole "ancient conspiracy" thing going on and get sorta witcher-like mutations, plus the whole not-dying-of-age thing.

Slow means of communication and travel. Your reach as a political entity is capped by your means to coordinate people.

Tippyverse.

Poor siege technology, excellent defensive technology, massive aquifers, fertile country.

Or ancient Greece. Or pre-Rome Italy.

Lack of a strong central authority.

Do remember that even in the times of Hellenistic Greece and the Italian Renaissance, not all city-states were created equal, and one or two cities would have a disproportionate amount of power, either cultural, financial, or military.

This is the correct answer

Both very good examples, although most fantasy setting tend ores toward Renaissance and Medieval than Classical.

Wizards. Massive offesnsive / defensive power, but they don’t like travelling or going on campaign and anyway are much more powerful when left up in their towers. Result: cities patronising their wizards are nigh-invulnerable but no good at conquering the next city over.

>Slow means of communication and travel.

Owww... The stupid burns...

Extreme political fragmentation, relatively low population in the area, getting out of feudal period, favourable geographical conditions (a lot of barriers)

Essentially, being Ancient Greece or Renaissance Northern Italy or Late Medieval Hanseatic League.
And remember - city states eventually turn into small states and/or keep integrating further, so it's NOT a permanent state of affairs. There are going to be regular, if small, states out of it eventually.

Which is a moot point once horseback mounting becomes a thing or you even organise a literal runners to carry messages. Fucking Incas worked around, controlling two thirds of Andes and those are steep fucking mountains. All while not having access to horses.
So the right anwer for your point is - "being too stupid, weak or outright unwilling to organise"

- I will take "Things everyone knows, but forgets about" for 500
- Medieval organisation of free cities, focused on trading
- What is Hansa?

>Wizards

Hmmm... this is a goofy idea...

Let's say ley lines are very important for magic. mages, wizards, and the like can do all the "small stuff" away from them, but for the really "big" and "showy" stuff you need to either be sitting on or be near a ley line and/or ley line node.

Nodes are more powerful because more lines are involved at nodes, so cities sitting on nodes have better defenses and other magic-based "services".

Could that be a basis for more city-states or would larger polities just conquer additional nodes and/or colonize along lines?

Why not both?

Sure, why not both? CIty-states and expanding/contracting larger polities.

It's not an original idea, mind you. When the other user mentioned wizards I suddenly realized that ley lines could act like canals in Space:1889.

AnCapistan - every household is its own state.

Terrain, lots of natural barriers to communication. In one of my settings the state of new york has devolved into various city states thanks to its valleys and rugged hills populated by bsndits which are rough and hard to farm. Where as the valleys are relatively fertile and rich with scrap from ruins.

Very fertile land with lots of natural barriers and limited natural highways like rivers.

You need to be able to produce a large food surplus to have cities develop and there needs to be something isolating the cities to make it impossible for some neighboring group to unify and organize which will allow them to just stroll through and conquer the whole shebang.

“King Charles had conquered the realm of Naples, and lost it again, in a kind of a felicity of a dream. He passed the whole length of Italy without resistance: so that it was true what Pope Alexander was wont to say: That the Frenchmen came into Italy with chalk in their hands, to mark up their lodgings, rather than with swords to fight.” -Machiavelli "The Prince"

>King Charles had conquered the realm of Naples, and lost it again, in a kind of a felicity of a dream.

We know more than Machiavelli did.

Charles passed the whole length of Italy because his army had history's first artillery train. In hours or days he smashed the walls which had previously protected cities for years.

Charles left Naples and returned to France because of an epidemic of a new syphilis strain that killed in days instead of decades.

Post sweet city art while you're at it

usually they're an economic center for some lucrative business or banking.

one city has various more feudalistic socieity's economies by the balls or are at least wealthy enough to get a good navy that protects their peninsula or island (they have to have either one for a navy to work) so they keep their autonomy

This is awesome. I always hated how D&D settings never made sense.

A highly influential church that influences events to ensure that no civilization develops beyond the petty kingdom stage.

>Owww... The stupid burns...
Surely a comment like this couldn't have been posted by someone who isn't underageb&

Not sure why so much autism is coming out.

The Incas were not the norm, nor were systems like the Mongolian News Network. Places like Greece technically had runners, but that wasn't any kind of regular system.

It's easy to look back and say 'obviously do this unless you're retarded,' except the combination of centralization, technology, political will, and bureaucracy takes time to develop

The Hansa cities, despite their "Free and Hanseatic city" appellation, weren't free in the sovereign Greek polis sense - they simply answered directly to the Holy Roman Emperor, without going through a middleman lord in between.

>What would be a good reason for the majority of states to be city states?

they are populated entirely by eyetalians

They also had stomped bandits and minor tribes than could raid messengers. Having the capacity doesn't mean it's practical to do so, if your messenger has high numbers to be hunted be a gryphon, bandits or zombies for example, it would make Travelling a lot harder, and thus comunication and trade, unless you use heavily defended caravans. In ancient times centralitzation was a lot harder, because any hill billy could take his weapons when he was low in provisions and try to raid some merchant or rich schmook. And having a horse was kinda of a deal, normally only horse nomads or affluent people in civilized lands had acess to them, so capturing one and then selling it would make the winter more tolerable to a lot of starving hicks.

Monsters, all cities need to be walled cities, the walls must also cover even the pastures, for the farmers to not get attacked and killed, deying food for the city. So, its typically a large and costly endeavor to create a city and they aren't as spread.

>Slow means of communication and travel
How would they even amass the wealth and materials to make a city in the first place?

>diffent regions with different goals/allegiance/beliefs
>cities big, rich and important enough that its becomes the hub of wealth from all over but answers to no central authority bigger than itself
>wealth=power
>city becomes seat of power

Lots of mountains.
Have fertile land that can support a medium to large city and then have and then separate these cities with a bunch of mountains that makes it tough for cities of roughly equal size to conquer each other.

Demigods, demagogues, and patron deities.

Nearby mountain?
A port? (ships still relativity slow)
An pit mine?

The world is just one giant archipelago, where each island is governed by said city states, relying in trade to mantain balance of power.

urbis.wikidot.com/

On that day, mankind received a grim reminder. We lived in fear of the Titans and were disgraced to live in these cages we called walls.

Trade with others is a priority.
Cities rise as hubs trade and culture brought upon by the ease and efficiency of goods and ideas. Doesn't matter if its slow as long as it gets there in schedule.
It would make sense in a region with fractious factions where a central controlling power is limited or non-existent. In an area of limited size, but is a located smack dab in the middle of a trade route. Technically a city state doesn't have a lot of direct external political power, but as the ones holding the flow of moolah, they have a lot of pull.

>I know nothing about Hansa: The Statement

political stalemate where any kingdom that gets to big gets taken out by the rest
constant wars that necessitates people crowding into dense cities for common defense, making organic relations between citizens from different cities impossible
civic identity that overpowers common racial identity
lack of telecom makes centralized administration of multiple cities difficult

setting the game in pre-roman era
Just do it.

Is there setting police standing behind your back that will slap you if you paint your game in pre-christian aesthetic?