continued from a debate here http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=18609&start=15

look away if you can't stand it any longer!

Feudal is poetic, you say. It evokes the feel of a medieval world.

Poetic evocation or literal application it makes no difference.

We already have a god damn medieval world!

Did the flat top arnold schwarzenegger hair cuts of space marines in the old days blind you to that?

The imperium in 40k translates all famous medieval elements, emperor, church, god, messiah, pope, crusades, crusaders, nuns, lore steeped monks etc into a High Tech universe. It's a about as gothic as you can get (you can pretty blame John Blanche for all that) And nothing, but nothing says medieval more than Knight!

If you need low tech to evoke medieval then you need to exclusively stick all these things on low tech 'feudal' world.

Forget about the technology already, don't let it blind you.

Yes the society of the Imperium is medieval in nature but not the level of technology.
The classification of a world denounces what level of technology it is and/or what it's purpose is.

We have(source: Wh40k 3rd Edition Rulebook):

mu-Class (Hive World): most of the world is covered in Hive Cities.
gamma-Class (Civilized World): Modern day level of technology.
alpha-Class (Agri World): produces only food. Almost no big cities.
phi lambda-Class (Feral Worlds): Stone Age level of technology.
delta-Class (Dead Worlds): Liveless rocks. Only good for mining and Mechanicum research outposts.
delta tau-Class (Death Worlds): Worlds with very hostile environment.
roh-Class (Reasearch Facility): Well what it says. Could be an Steroid, aliveless planet, etc with a Research Facility.
nu-Class (Feudal Worlds): Medieval level of technology. Have a higher tribute ratio than Feral Worlds because of more expanded agriculture.
phi-Class (Forge World): Produces almost everything except food.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Like I said, the technology level is not important. You don't need a technology level to define medieval, nor do you need it to define feudal. We know this because it's already and successfully been done (twice at least, once by GW and once Frank Herbert)
You could, as Zombo has suggests, use feudal with poetic license to mean low tech medieval if you want, but I don't see any reason to constrain THE signature item of the medeival world to such worlds. That simply smacks to me as being cheesy and as I've said from an author who hadn't spotted the thick medieval nature of the imperium, as sooo many people didn't spot in the old days; wirth such things as Imperial scientists! The technology level wrong footed them.

Start from scratch - you can translate medieval to some kind of misty eyed, rustic, rural notion if you want
But the horrendous, deeply dark, deeply ironic vision of John Blanche is a much better and more interesting translation in my opinion.

As an example of how I see knights in use I'm going to write something up.

Something involving Lord Helmawr of Necromunda and his 'noble' and 'aristocratic' house in a massive war against another hive of necromunda who's lord need to be brought to heel due to gross disobedience to both Helmawr and then Emperor.

Note, it's just an example. I wouldn't want to rewrite the canon history. I just want to show knights in use on a well known and 'top class' planet and how it would work.

It depends on what you mean by "medieval in nature."

It has lots of medieval and gothic affectations. It's certainly intended to give a pop culture dark ages feel of hardship, oppression and lack of technological progress.

However, the empire not feudal or medieval (as those terms apply to European history) in structure. It's statist and totalitarian. The good of the Imperium supersedes the value of any individual life, or even entire star systems. The emperor is the absolute, unquestioned ruler. Centralized planning and control is fetishized as it is in fascist and communist economic systems.

There are parts of the empire that slip through the net of control control for lesser or greater periods of time. There are even arguably some feudal elements in the governmental structure. However, the escape from control and the "mini-kingdoms" of things like the Ministorum or Mechanicum is not the same as the independence granted to a feudal vassal. The de facto independence is never legitimized as it is in feudalism. Likewise, the interdependence and mutual obligations of feudalism do not exist, even in theory.


So, to me, having the knight worlds function with a true feudalistic subculture and social structure where there is a network of mutual duties and support in keeping with the value system of European feudalism is distinct from the overarching medieval/gothic elements of the 40K verse in general and the Imperium in particular.

I see Knights (ie, the Knightworld list) as a cultural remnant, not a progression forward. The GRIMDARK (tm) world of GW isn't one where planetary leaders (military governors, imperial bureaucrats) aren't interested in the concept of single combat. Because to me, that's what a Knight represents, the highest level of individual warfare. There are more economically effective ways of waging war.

While effective, I don't see them as particularly efficient. Much like the Concorde supersonic transport, which did it's job better 30 years ago than modern planes are capable of, but maintenance and operational costs kept it from being extensively used, and eventually retired it.

While I don't see the Knights fading out, I see them limited to those whose cultural experience promotes pride over practicality, and have the technological capacity and training to do so. I see the training of Knight pilots to be extensive, taking many years, and requiring a great deal of skill (and genetics), further limiting where Knight colonies are found.

Morgan Vening

Read up on how feudalism works. Yep, Kings, Emperors and Popes don't usually personally fight. That's passed down to the Barons. They don't fight either, That's passed down again. It's called knight service. Now when called upon you don't have to provide knight service by actually fighting. You can simply provide armies, or more abstractly you can provide food or equipment. Sometime huge sums of course cash will do. When not needed, there is no need for any high level knight to fight, except , as your suggest for honour.

Now remember this, as every general knows, you need discipline in your army Discipline and fervour. The presence of nobles on the field of battle can dramatically help.

Additionally, Those have have the most to lose - the really rich - will, when push comes to shove, be personally present at a battle. Sometimes even a prince, Sometimes even an emperor. And sometimes they will actually fight!


We're talking about epic battles here. Huge, historically significant wars. Not the petty actions of 21st century.
Monstrous, Desperate, Apocalyptic affairs. . And some people have more than just their lives to lose.

I agree yes, that to use knight armour takes considerable training and rare technology. Same thing goes for Space Marines. Same thing goes for the knights of old. They're not going to be common, just as Marines are by no means common.
But if anyone can get access to it then the great houses can. Even if all they have now are heirlooms.

Remember overall, technology doesn't matter and how it effects society with regard to war and politics. That's
already been ignored. The technology is there yes, but it hasn't changed anything. The only thing that matters is the vision.

Don't make the mistake of thinking modern or futuristic. The Imperium is set in the future yes. It has advanced technology yes, but that's as far as it goes and it's all irrelavent. There's no modernity. There's no progression. It just is, and if anything it's regressing.

Anyway, at the end of the day it's up to you mate.

Btw if you don't believe in lords and top military men getting involved in single combat (bureaucrats and administrators yes, why would they?) then you're going to have to re-write a lot of 40k history.

The important thing to remember is this; it's GW's call, whether it makes sense or not. They've decided that "feudal worlds" is the name they want to use for mediveval or early gunpowder level societies, and that's all there is to it.

As to knights; in all honestly they just don't really fit into the modern 40k universe very well at all. The only references we have to them in modern literature is during the heresy I believe.

Indeed this is true, however certain trends are present that allow a little extrapolation.

As the great crusade wore on, Knights were less requested by the Imperial armies, until by the time of the Heresy they were mostly spending time as garrisons on the Forgeworlds. Post-heresy, we can assume something similar, that Knights are still in existence, but only used as garrisons on Adeptus-Mechanicus planets and facilities.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

You are right of course but that was a long time ago - and they've left it on the back of the shelf ever since. And GW have had the bravery to change a lot since those days (pissing off many fans in the process)

I wonder what GW would do with Knights these days... if they ever will?

I would have believed GW would drop them entirely (they've already got knights, they just don't use that word) except that I believe they would make good models to sell to apocalypse players.

I take it that the background has changed since the days of the Post Heresy Titan Legions box set where a massive pile of knights was included in the box, presumably for general use.

This is my viewpoint, as well. The 40k universe is hierarchical, but that doesn't make it feudal. As Neal points out, there is no sense of mutual obligation.

I personally like the medieval theme for Knight worlds.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

You gotta be kidding right?
Emperor<-->Mechanicus for starters