Emperors at 20 Paces

[Snowflake]

An Emperor is an emperor. I propose that if there are unsatisfactions within the Senete regarding an Emperor's action, a motion should be filed, a debate should be formed and a decision should be made as to whether the emperor's offense was grave enough to be punished in such ways as forbiddening of any further direct handling of the Roman empire.

[Paddy]

/me is seen mumbling and grumbling over in his chair

then "Here Here, and rightly so" booms across the room

[snoopy369]

Although I'm new to Demo games, and don't know precisely the issue in terms of what changes an emperor can get away with and what he/she cannot ...

I wish to tender only the acts of one Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus, the great Roman leader during the Second Punic Wars. He, and he alone, defeated the Carthaginians, when no other Roman general could defeat any Barca, Hannibal or otherwise. He defeated each Barca, one at a time, and ultimately beat Hannibal in Carthage.

Why do I bring him up?

He beat Hannibal, even when Hannibal still had the upper hand, by going against the wishes of the Senate, and attacking Carthage directly, leaving Italy even while Hannibal was nearing the gates of Rome.

His action was, in hindsight, the correct one -- forcing Hannibal to leave Italy, and defend his own city; in fact it was the only way to defeat Hannibal. His brilliant political moves - considered failures by the Roman Senate until they saw the results - led to the defeat of Hannibal, when he treated with the Libyan King, failing to win his help (and thus angering the Senate) but succeeding in forcing Carthage to betray their Ethiopian allies to win Libya over.

However, the Roman Senate never forgave him for ignoring their wishes, and although elected to a second Consulate and three Princeps (Principal of the Senate) out of respect for his victory, he died scorned by the senate and was not buried on Roman soil.

Thus did Rome treat its greatest hero.

[Aqualung71]

To Senators McMeadows, Platypus Rex and ChrisiusMaximus, I understand your concerns. However, there are some wider issues at stake here.

As our esteemed PPP Senator Paddy has reminded you all, the role of the Senate is to advise the Emperor. The Emperor has been chosen to lead Rome, and presumably has been so chosen for his qualities of leadership. Leadership involves crisp and decisive actions for the good of empire, not the extraction of a consensus from a body of men with possibly conflicting self-interest and the subsequent implementation of said consensus. Such a government requires no leader.

Leadership also requires one to make difficult choices based not only on the resources currently at hand, but bearing in mind the longer term good of the empire and the tools one wishes to leave in the hands of future emperors. Would you have your emperors shackled by the constraints put upon them by Senators who, though certainly esteemed in their own right, have yet to taste the challenges of leadership and who are not aware of the dynamics that the current emperor is facing in the field on a day to day basis?

What you are suggesting Senators, is that Rome should become bogged down in the machinations of bureaucracy. I say to you now, that there is no surer way to bring about the downfall of this great and wondrous empire than to impose bureaucratic restrictions on your chosen leader, amounting to a predilection for form over substance!

To all great Senators of Rome, I ask you now. Given our current military resources and the required concentration for the push on Carthage itself.....who among you would advise Rome now to declare war on the Celts? Only those among you who are daring and foolhardy enough to propose an instant re-delcaration of war upon the Celts, has the moral right to damn my decision, and indeed to question the authority under which I made the decision.

To Senator Chrisius Maximus specifically, while I raise my eyebrows at your suggestion of my "inexperience", I appreciate your support for a full apology from the Emperor Modo.

To the Emperor Modo

I shall respond to your increasingly desperate and forlorn ramblings under separare cover.


Long live the Glory of Rome!

[Aqualung71]

Originally posted by Modo44
Paddy, please don't get upset about this. Both me and Aqualung are roleplaying a bit here. No hard feelings, really.

Oh so this is what we are doing, are we Emperor? So you confess to deliberately wasting the Senate's time with idle gossip and shenanigans such as this, when we are at war with Carthage? Such chatter is below an Emperor good sir, and I publicly castigate you for lowering the office of Emperor to such a standard!

Finesse and diplomacy are important virtues, I agree.

Thank you

But halting an ongoing invasion, which could be reinforced without any problems, seems a little too cautious to me. Dangerously cautious.

Rather a contradiction, wouldn't you agree? If the invasion can be "reinforced without any problems", how can halting it be dangerous? In fact, I should go so far as to suggest that "dangerously cautious" is almost a contradiction in terms, but I do not wish to embarrass you further.

Let's stick to the facts here. You deliberately acted against the Senate's decision.

Yes, undoubtedly. Although I would like to correct the obvious misapprehension under which you are labouring: I deliberately acted against the Senate's advice. The Senate does not make leadership decisions, but offers advice in assisting the Emperor govern the empire.

Also, you made it possible for the Celts to keep growing, which endangers our future expansion. While I understand your logic, I must dismiss it as too passive against the barbarians.

You dismiss my logic? And you dismiss logic as being too passive? Perhaps we do not speak the same language Emperor, because in my language, such expressions are contradictory and ludicrous.

The Celts have a total of 6 or 7 cities, rather sparsely improved. They are not a threat, and they will be better dealt with once Rome expands further north (using the Citizens I have already sent in that direction).

Persisting with an attack on the Celts, whose cities are too far north to offer any economic benefit to Rome under our current form of Government, will constitute grossly inefficient management of our resources in these vital early days of Empire. Furthermore, the distance to the Celtic lands means that reinforcements will be slow, and our supply lines will constantly be under threat. The Legionaries in Massillia cannot be used to push north, as Carthage now threatens with Swordsmen from the West.

In short, Emperor Modo, you would have Rome stretch her military resources dangerously thin by continuing with this suicidal military strategy of a 2-front war!

Oh, you mean the long term benefit of making the Senate unimportant in directing the Empire?

This contemptuous and inflammatory statement belittles the important role our great Senate plays in the wheel of government, and accordingly I shall ignore it!

Or do you mean the long term benefit of having to face hordes of Gallic Swordsmen?

Gallic Swordsmen will be few and far between, and ineffectual against our Heavy Cavalry.

I need not defend my decisions. They were made by the Senate...

Then you good sir, while undoubtedly an efficient administrator, are not a leader!

and they were executed both with swiftness and great effect. Senators have noted the good shape in which I left the Empire for future generations.

And you have my compliments on your efficient handling of the administration of Rome. You are indeed, an excellent bureaucrat .

Great job indeed. It should be noted, however, that the empire was already growing in almost every aspect, when you picked it up - after my ruling period.

Without wanting to blow my own trumpet, I think it speaks for itself that I was able to double the shield production of Rome in the 5 turns under my rule. Yes, the empire was growing under your rule. It grew substantially faster under mine. End of story.

I bow to your abilities to continue good strategies that have already been started.

Thank you. I built upon those good strategies, and I amended those "not so good" strategies and implemented more beneficial ones. Again, that demonstrates leadership.

Perhaps he is, perhaps he isn't. The idea, however, was to never have to find out. You broke it.

More procrastination, more fence-sitting. I ask my esteemed colleagues in the Senate, what sort of statement is this from a former leader of our Empire? Either the Celtic Swordsman is stronger than our Legionaries, or he is not. He is not. Period. Furthermore, he is even weaker against our Heavy Cavalry. Period. Never to have to find out? We already know! Ah, you expose your weakness Emperor!

Yes, I was truly hard on the barbarians. I sought to destroy them and had success. I did so in accordance with the Senate's decisions. What a "reckless abandon" of possibilities, what a "glory-seeking" act.

Yes, you attacked and captured the closest Celtic town, a laudable and courageous action indeed . But the success went to your head and you ignored the effect geography has on military strength in the pursuit of further glories.

My opinion, concerning the peace treaty with the Celts, is as follows. The Emperor should have at least addressed the Senate to ask if it would be for the good of the Empire. A simple Yea/Nay vote would make the matter clear enough.

Perhaps you are right. Yet in the field I felt that an instant executive decision needed to be made, and I made it. A Senate vote would not have changed my decision.


My case is clear and compelling.

I now call upon the next great leader of Rome to step forward, and let him also have the courage of his convictions and not be a mere pawn in the hands of the Senate. We each have our role to play, good Senators. Rome needs, Rome demands leaders. Let them lead!. Their reputation shall be made or broken upon their performance, as has mine!

[Beta]

Originally posted by Modo44
Paddy, please don't get upset about this. Both me and Aqualung are roleplaying a bit here. No hard feelings, really.

Well said Modo. Let's all keep this in mind. We have had enough demogame discussions descend into personal attacks. Lets keep this on the up and up.

Ok - back to the debate. To be honest - as a senator I find myself torn. The age old debate ....

Benevolent dictator versus vox populi (the voice of the people).

[Gamecube64]

I say we give them both a sword and 5-10 men, send 'em to the coliseum, and see who is left standing after the dust settles.

[Modo44]

Originally posted by Aqualung71
Oh so this is what we are doing, are we Emperor? So you confess to deliberately wasting the Senate's time with idle gossip and shenanigans such as this, when we are at war with Carthage? Such chatter is below an Emperor good sir, and I publicly castigate you for lowering the office of Emperor to such a standard!

You forgot to put an OOC (out of character) warning here.

Originally posted by Aqualung71
Rather a contradiction, wouldn't you agree? If the invasion can be "reinforced without any problems", how can halting it be dangerous? In fact, I should go so far as to suggest that "dangerously cautious" is almost a contradiction in terms, but I do not wish to embarrass you further.

Dangerous by allowing the barbarians to keep growing, while we had the means to crush them once and for good. Unexpected mercy from a Roman Emperor.

Originally posted by Aqualung71
I deliberately acted against the Senate's advice. The Senate does not make leadership decisions, but offers advice in assisting the Emperor govern the empire.

Except when you ingnore the advice. Because that makes the Senate a completely irrelevant part of the Empire. Certainly that is not what we intended here.

Originally posted by Aqualung71
The Celts have a total of 6 or 7 cities, rather sparsely improved. They are not a threat, and they will be better dealt with once Rome expands further north (using the Citizens I have already sent in that direction).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but won't a war with stronger Celts be distracting our forces from the already planned invasion against Macedonia? Yes, we'll probably handle the barbarians without too many losses, but it will tie some of our forces. Numerous the Legions may be, but they are not without limit.

Originally posted by Aqualung71
In short, Emperor Modo, you would have Rome stretch her military resources dangerously thin by continuing with this suicidal military strategy of a 2-front war!

Well said. So instead of finishing this war fast, you decided to leave the matter for others to handle at some point later on. Because, let's face it, Rome will probably have to fight the Celts and some other tribes at the same time. Great job giving up the responsibility for others to handle.

Originally posted by Aqualung71

Originally posted by Modo44
Oh, you mean the long term benefit of making the Senate unimportant in directing the Empire?

This contemptuous and inflammatory statement belittles the important role our great Senate plays in the wheel of government, and accordingly I shall ignore it!

It should be noted, that you didn't manage to, after all.

Originally posted by Aqualung71
Then you good sir, while undoubtedly an efficient administrator, are not a leader!

My friend. As a wise man once said, divide et impera. Do you really think a true leader need use such methods as direct disobedience to do what he thinks is best? This constitutes not a leader, but a person who doesn't care for the voice of his people. In other words, I never had to act against the Senate. I acted as the Senators suggested, because they were wise enought to accept the directions I proposed.

Originally posted by Aqualung71
And you have my compliments on your efficient handling of the administration of Rome. You are indeed, an excellent bureaucrat .

Well thank you.

Originally posted by Aqualung71
Without wanting to blow my own trumpet, I think it speaks for itself that I was able to double the shield production of Rome in the 5 turns under my rule. Yes, the empire was growing under your rule. It grew substantially faster under mine. End of story.

Yes it was and it didn't need much more to make that growth even better. But let's not brag about this. I agree that you did a great job concerning domestic affairs.

Originally posted by Aqualung71
Thank you. I built upon those good strategies, and I amended those "not so good" strategies and implemented more beneficial ones. Again, that demonstrates leadership.

Well, doing things with far reaching consequences without listening to the Senate is not exacty what I call "leadership". It seems more like the "I know better than all of you, so you better listen to me!" attitude. Truly "worthy" of an Emperor, or dare I say, truly selfish.

Originally posted by Aqualung71
Either the Celtic Swordsman is stronger than our Legionaries, or he is not. He is not. Period. Furthermore, he is even weaker against our Heavy Cavalry. Period. Never to have to find out? We already know! Ah, you expose your weakness Emperor!

Oh please, do you really have to resort to demagogy? Please, don't twist my words. Yes, the Gallic Swordsman is weaker than our units, I know that. But ask yourself this: wouldn't you rather face even weaker units instead? Because, had you continued the invasion, you'd be only fighting Spearmen and Archers. Or are our Legions afraid of Archers now? Ah, you expose your weakness, Emperor.

Originally posted by Aqualung71
Yes, you attacked and captured the closest Celtic town, a laudable and courageous action indeed . But the success went to your head and you ignored the effect geography has on military strength in the pursuit of further glories.

Finally some rational argument.

When I left the Empire, there were Legions ready to reinforce the Celtic invasion. Yes, you might have needed to wait for reinforcements, before the 3 Legions could resume their march. But after that, they could and should have left the city and be headed north.

Originally posted by Aqualung71
Perhaps you are right. Yet in the field I felt that an instant executive decision needed to be made, and I made it. A Senate vote would not have changed my decision.

Spoken like a true dictator. Oh, what has become of the Roman Democracy.

[Paddy]

[Aqualung71]

Some very strange responses from the Emperor Modo here. There doesn't seem to be much worthy of response as I'm sure most good Senators will agree, but my esteemed and vliant colleague has courageously taken the floor yet again against the odds, so he deserves a reply

Originally posted by Modo44

You forgot to put an OOC (out of character) warning here.

As much as I would like to respond to this impassioned plea, I truly have no idea what you're talking about here. Please confine your ramblings to something that makes sens

Dangerous by allowing the barbarians to keep growing, while we had the means to crush them once and for good. Unexpected mercy from a Roman Emperor.

Sigh . They won't. We didn't. And it's called intelligence, not mercy.

Except when you ingnore the advice. Because that makes the Senate a completely irrelevant part of the Empire. Certainly that is not what we intended here.

I've answered this already, but I will again - I continued most Senate-backed strategy, and adjusted other strategy faced with the situation on the ground as it unfolded. I thank the Senate for their guidance, and for the trust they have showed in me to wield executive power when necessary.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but won't a war with stronger Celts be distracting our forces from the already planned invasion against Macedonia? Yes, we'll probably handle the barbarians without too many losses, but it will tie some of our forces. Numerous the Legions may be, but they are not without limit.

Ok....you are wrong. The Celts won't be stronger. If they are, we shll be stronger by a factor of several times. We can pick and choose our eventual re-invasion, and there is nothing to say we need to attack the Celts again before we invade Macedonia.

Well said. So instead of finishing this war fast, you decided to leave the matter for others to handle at some point later on. Because, let's face it, Rome will probably have to fight the Celts and some other tribes at the same time. Great job giving up the responsibility for others to handle.

I take full responsibility for my actions. I stand by my decisions. History shall be the judge, and it shall be a kind judge of my rule. There si not doubt that later Emperors of Rome shall be in a stronger position than they otherwise would should the Emperor Aquavian Lungarius not held the reins of power. Deny this, good sir, at the risk of ridicule.

It should be noted, that you didn't manage to, after all.

Yes, I did. I referred to it. I didn't respond to it. It was therefore ignored. Please don't try to engage me in a battle of semantics over the English language

My friend. As a wise man once said, divide et impera. Do you really think a true leader need use such methods as direct disobedience to do what he thinks is best? This constitutes not a leader, but a person who doesn't care for the voice of his people. In other words, I never had to act against the Senate. I acted as the Senators suggested, because they were wise enought to accept the directions I proposed.

Here I am repeating myself again....one does not owe a duty of obedience to an advisory body, but a duty of placing their advice under consideration. I did so, and I made executive decisions, as you did.

Well thank you.

You are welcome. Credit given, where credit due

Yes it was and it didn't need much more to make that growth even better. But let's not brag about this. I agree that you did a great job concerning domestic affairs.

Thank you

Well, doing things with far reaching consequences without listening to the Senate is not exacty what I call "leadership". It seems more like the "I know better than all of you, so you better listen to me!" attitude. Truly "worthy" of an Emperor, or dare I say, truly selfish.

From what I have read so far, the Senate in general agrees with the "far-reaching consequences" of my actions. I have displayed true leadership. Selfishness? Ha! I spit with scorn on such a ridiculous and insulting charge (yet again!). The Roman people have benefitted from my decisions. My selfishness extends only to my desire for the betterment of the lot of the Roman people. If that is selfishness, then yes I am selfish. So be it!

Oh please, do you really have to resort to demagogy? Please, don't twist my words. Yes, the Gallic Swordsman is weaker than our units, I know that. But ask yourself this: wouldn't you rather face even weaker units instead? Because, had you continued the invasion, you'd be only fighting Spearmen and Archers. Or are our Legions afraid of Archers now? Ah, you expose your weakness, Emperor.

Demagogy? . I did not twist your words at all - I quoted you directly and responded within the context. So if you now admit that the Gallic Swordsman is weaker than our units, why did you previously claim not to know this fact? The rest of your argument is pointless.

Finally some rational argument.

My entire argument has been rational and so far, has not been disproved.

When I left the Empire, there were Legions ready to reinforce the Celtic invasion. Yes, you might have needed to wait for reinforcements, before the 3 Legions could resume their march. But after that, they could and should have left the city and be headed north.

This would have delayed the push south. This would have been unacceptable. The threat from Carthage must be met immediately with irresistable force. You cannot have your cake and eat it too, dear Emperor.

Spoken like a true dictator. Oh, what has become of the Roman Democracy.

Democracy? I know of no such word. Please explain, Emperor. Our Empire is ruled by an Emperor (Empire --> Emperor), who is advised by the Senate. Seems to work well for me

[Modo44]

I admit I have spoken harsh words, but I did so with sincere concern for the Roman Empire and it's people. I am not sorry for what I have said and will not recall it.

However, I now understand that the points I made about the Celtic threat are neither obvious nor certain. It seems that neither one of us can convince the other. Therefore no further discussion (not demagogy ) seems possible. I say let us lay down the arms (20 men, Senator Gamecube? Why not a whole Legion? ) and return to the matters at hand, by which I mean the near future of the Empire. Can we do that?

[ChrisiusMaximus]

Both these senators make some sound and rational arguments!!

However senator Aquavian Lungarius , Rome is neither a democracy nor an empire!!!

Rome is a republic that is run by its senate!!! and you Sir are bound by the Senates decisions via the polls that you should hold prior to your term !!!

Countless times in your protestations here you have again and again said blatantly that you ignored and would again ignore the Senate!!!

By your own words you seek to condemn your self!!!

I stated yesterday that Senator Modo should apologise for his accusation of cowardice, and that is still my position. However Sir I also feel you too owe apology to the senate for your slight against our true importance !!!

You sir were entrusted to carry out the senates wishes, no Senator has the right to deviate grossly from that path!!! I sir spoke of inexperience yesterday to attempt to salvage your reputation from potential ruin. You are not here to implement your own will!! you are here to carry forth the wishes of the Senate!!!

It is only the fact that , and I have stated this already, that on the whole your term produced good results for Rome that I have deffered from calling for your head!!!

If you should continue to belittle the Senate with your misguided assertions that you know best then I will withdraw my support from your corner!!!

It is the responsibility of all Emporers appointed by the Senate to carry forth the Senates choices, no man has the right to ride roughshod over the Senate!!!

Any Senator who finds himself in a similar situation in future should have the wisdom to seek support for his ideas through debate and reasoned argument. Not risk the division of the whole Senate in the way Senator Aquavian Lungarius has.

I stand by my assertion of your inexperience Senator, for you have reinforced this assertion by your continued ramblings here, it is now time to preserve what is left of your good name and accept you have made a mistake here apologise to the senate and hope that the good things achieved during your term will sway enough Senators to call for clemency !!!

As for Senator Modo he stands on shakier ground to my mind unless he retracts his accusation of cowardice!!! we can not allow such blatant abuse of Senatorial powers to be used to pursue petty minded private squabbles and personal mudslinging.

I senator Chrisius Maximus hereby attest that Senator Aquavian Lungarius is of the bravest men of Rome and as such deserves the due and proper respect.

Unless Senator Modo publicly apologises for his slight on Aquavian Lungarius good character then I propose he be severly punished for his abuse of his status.

[Modo44]

Originally posted by ChrisiusMaximus
I stated yesterday that Senator Modo should apologise for his accusation of cowardice, and that is still my position. However Sir I also feel you too owe apology to the senate for your slight against our true importance !!!

I have never used this word when talking about Senator Aquavian Lungarius. Not being brave is still far from being a coward. Very far, to my understanding. It was not my words which bloated a simple statement into a so called "insult", so please, don't judge me so easily.

[ChrisiusMaximus]

Well whatever interpretation you put on it it would be sensible to retract your statement of two days ago and apologise !!!

Then we can all get back to focusing on the running of the REPUBLIC!!! thats REPUBLIC!!!

[Modo44]

I will not be silenced by others calling my statements insults. Which is exactly what an apology would achieve. As long as I am a free citizen, I retain the right to have my own opinion about people. And to state it whenever I want to, which is what I did. It would be "sensible" to understand this point of view and get over it.