Monday Preview - Mystery Monkey Mischief

[Mirage78]

Rue Morgue 2.0?

[Ludvig]

4 hours ago, Scatterbrain said:

I think it looks more like a character for Through The Breach roleplaying game rather than a Malifaux miniature.

What's the difference really? My through the breach kit looks an awful lot like my malifaux minis.  Pretty sure Alison Dade was literally in the TTB game before being made a Malifaux mini.

[Mason]

17 hours ago, daniello_s said:

Sure... ape with bit plating here and there and brass knuckles... Victorian my you know😂

I mean, technically Malifaux has never been Victorian; it's Edwardian.

The Victorian period ended on January 22, 1901, with the death of Queen Victoria. The M1E core 1.5 book started the timeline at 1901, at the dawn of the Edwardian era, and now we're up to 1908.

[JurisprudentiallyYours]

And even more technically, as the Victorian era was marked by a period of relative peace and the freedom to focus on social policies, art, and architecture, I'm not convinced that a Victorian era as we understand it was even possible. I mean, first breach closed around 1790, right? I think the Black Powder Wars and the dependence on magic would have likely altered the timeline just slightly - can we even be sure there was a Queen Victoria in the Malifaux world? There were eight attempts on her life - surely magical fire would have made some difference. Similarly, "Victorian" is the one style of architecture that definitively, 100%, cannot be featured in Malifaux as it developed from that peaceful era on Earth while the breach was closed. 

I love the Malifaux setting and all of the backstory and ongoing story, but this is honestly one of the limitations of historical fiction, right? "Oh, there was magic so everything was different...except for all the stuff that is easier to leave the same." 

[yool1981]

8 minutes ago, JurisprudentiallyYours said:

he Victorian era was marked by a period of relative peace and the freedom to focus on social policies, art, and architecture

From Wikipedia: In the history of the United Kingdom, the Victorian era was the period of Queen Victoria's reign, from 20 June 1837 until her death on 22 January 1901.

This time period was absolutely not marked by peace, even relative. From the top of my mind:

_ War was waged in Europe (for example, France and Germany had a war that ended at the doors of Paris).

_ The USA fought against Mexico and knew a violent civil war that still echoes nowadays. The natives had a very difficult time also.

_ China knew the Opium wars and the Boxer rebellion.

_ Countries were colonized in Africa and Asia.

_ There was famine and rebelion in India.

One may argue that there has never been a peaceful era in the history of mankind but that's another topic.

[daniello_s]

Forget whether it is Victorian or Edwardian setting. With all respect but IMHO this model is plainly stupid...

Did Cojo ask for help and Marcus supplied the ape, Ramos platings and Ironsides brass knuckles???🤣

[Squirrelich]

Not my style, mostly for reasons that @daniello_s has been stating. If others like it I will forgive them for having different opinions from me though. I will note, however, if this model does ever enter my collection it will absolutely have at least the feet brass knuckles removed... probably more.

[JurisprudentiallyYours]

RELATIVE. Relative. Relative peace. Not peaceful. Yes - there was constant conflict and strife throughout history...but to engender such a limited reading would negate terms like "Pax Romana" or "Pax Britannica" simply because some collective violence had occurred. Historians understand the Victorian era to be marked by relative peace.  

If you would like to cherry pick examples though, even the Franco-Prussian War that "ended at the doors of Paris" was one year long - if Europe has also known the Seven Years War, Thirty Years War, Eighty Years War, and HUNDRED YEARS WAR, would ONE YEAR not be relatively short compared to those? 

If you want to use Wikipedia for your research, I invite you to continue reading and following links - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_Kingdom links to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victorian_era as the main article which, lo and behold, includes as the fourth sentence: "The period is characterised[sic] as one of relative peace among the Great Powers (as established by the Congress of Vienna), increased economic activity, "refined sensibilities" and national self-confidence for Great Britain."

Finally, thinking about how things receive their labels is important. For a silly example, @yool1981 could be having a great day. Everything is just awesome - it might even be part of a great overall week! You might call it "yool1981's Awesome week of Awesomeness," get some shirts made, commemorative photos, the whole deal. The number of murders in the wider world, instances of infant mortality, sexual violence, petty theft - they do not negate "yool1981's Awesome week of Awesomeness" because it is focused on you. The Victorian Era wasn't defined by the United States - the American Civil War and associated death from violence and disease did not change the British experience of relative peace. The Victorians were colonizers - the violence suffered by colonized peoples did not factor into their world view and did not change the British experience of relative peace. Rebellion in India and China were absolutely horrific, but they led to increased British control and wealth...the experience of the Sepoys and Boxers did not change the British experience of relative peace. 

 

[yool1981]

Maybe there is a misunderstanding.

I think the Malifaux setting is a worldwide setting. Hence my analysis of the Victorian era being bloody as usual in worldwide terms.

Now if you want to speak about Britain, there was no war on the British soil (as often) but while the British Empire expanded, it shed blood around the world (as did all the imperialist countries of the time).

So, the Wikipedia qualification of "The period is characterised[sic] as one of relative peace among the Great Powers (as established by the Congress of Vienna), increased economic activity, "refined sensibilities" and national self-confidence for Great Britain." is overly simplistic imho.

It is the same as defining the 1950-1970 era as peaceful, even relatively (many historians do and that is what we learn at school in France for example, even though we had a shameful civil war and knew violent decolonization wars). There were terrible wars during this time, just not on the European and North American soils.

It is the same as "Pax Romana", it is a figure of speech and a warped history construct because we often want to see Ancient Rome as an ideal. Border wars & civil wars were extremely common all throughout the history of the Roman Empire.

[JurisprudentiallyYours]

There might be some misunderstanding - my point is that all labels for eras are essentially constructs and the origination of the construct is important to understanding of that construct. The Pax Romana wasn't ideal - it was military might applied to regional dissent to ensure the flow of wealth to the imperial center. This was only good for Romans and, to be fair, only some subset of Romans. But to say "it wasn't the Pax Romana because there wasn't peace and some tribes suffered under Roman rule" is to miss the point entirely. 

Even with a global setting like Malifaux, that context matters. The Victorian Era is not known as the American Civil War and the American Civil War is not known as the Victorian Era. There are different defining events for different regions/states/cultures that may occur in the same time frame. We are running into the issue of using a part, "the Victorian era", as a descriptor for the whole, "events on Earth that occurred during the years 1837-1901." 

Anyway, this has gone pretty far afield from my initial point - which is that there is no guarantee that our understanding of the Victorian Era, simplistic or not, could have occurred in the Malifaux setting because the origin of the construct, a relatively peaceful experience for Great Britain, does not seem that likely in the Malifaux setting's "Magic & World at War" that occurred after the first breach closed. 

[yool1981]

Yes we are far afield.

Maybe there is also a cultural bias. I'm French. For most of the French the Victorian era is just a time period of British dominance in international affairs marked by strong technological progress and industrialization sometimes leading to modern forms of poverty & slavery (let's say it's a combination of Verne & Dickens to be simplistic). The peace is never emphasized and almost nobody uses the term Pax Britannica.

But let's stop it at that to avoid the long off topic pollution of the topic.

I'm not a fan of a goofy Orang-outang by the way :p.

22 minutes ago, JurisprudentiallyYours said:

But to say "it wasn't the Pax Romana because there wasn't peace and some tribes suffered under Roman rule" is to miss the point entirely. 

Not my meaning. Border wars were a thing also. Especially against organized empires such as the Parthans (which were as "civilized" as the Romans, not mere tribes).

Civil Wars were extremely frequent as changes in Emperors were usually justified by military might.

However, you are right that there is a strong illusion of peace behind the Pax Romana that has been conveyed throughout the Western world.

If you wish to continue this interesting discussion, you can PM me.

[Sharp_GT]

No one wants to address that this is an orangutan, which is an ape not monkey? The title mystery monkey mischief is incorrect, it should be arcane ape antics, perplexing pongo pugilism, secret sumatran smackdown or bonkers bornean boxing!

I used to work at a zoo and in education, can you tell?

[JurisprudentiallyYours]

There is certainly some bias that applies to all history - I'm sure Arthur Wellesley would take umbrage with the "Napoleonic Era." 

[yool1981]

Exactly.

[Merchant]

Dont like it.

[TheSpinebuster]

I don't suppose it happens to be a librarian?

[Gnomezilla]

I looked up something else in Into the Bayou and, to my surprise, spied an ape like this one in some background art.

[Da Git]

On 5/23/2018 at 2:49 AM, Sharp_GT said:

No one wants to address that this is an orangutan, which is an ape not monkey? The title mystery monkey mischief is incorrect, it should be arcane ape antics, perplexing pongo pugilism, secret sumatran smackdown or bonkers bornean boxing!

I used to work at a zoo and in education, can you tell?

This is just a post choc-full of awesomeness! 

Don't like the concept at this point. But really, he probably won't be for my factions. 

[KrazyeriK]

Her name is Cobaka, Marcus's ex-beast girlfriend. That Beast that got away, "Noooooo!" HAHA!! And to stop Marcus from mind controlling her, she has the pseudo "Aluminum Foil" Hat contraption to stop him from controlling her mind. She is the Lazarius to Guild, but Beast to Marcus. She ends up being Mei Fengs friend and learns the ways of fist fighting, thus the brass knuckles. Not that Mei Feng's squad needs anymore help with scrap moving and MI advantages. But that is my story and I am sticking with it. 

[Da Git]

8 hours ago, KrazyeriK said:

Her name is Cobaka, Marcus's ex-beast girlfriend. That Beast that got away, "Noooooo!" HAHA!! And to stop Marcus from mind controlling her, she has the pseudo "Aluminum Foil" Hat contraption to stop him from controlling her mind. She is the Lazarius to Guild, but Beast to Marcus. She ends up being Mei Fengs friend and learns the ways of fist fighting, thus the brass knuckles. Not that Mei Feng's squad needs anymore help with scrap moving and MI advantages. But that is my story and I am sticking with it. 

That's awesome!

Otherwise he could be Magnetotan! The amazing mutant Orangutan that controls metal with his mind, on a mission to free all the orangutans from their "normal-ness"!