No Way to Get A constitutional Monarchy

[Oppermenia]

So, this is an issue I have with nationstates, and one that I've personally encountered.
So, there used to be an issue to install the monarchy policy in which you could choose an absolute monarchy, a figurehead monarchy, or no monarchy. I didn't get this version of the issue. I got a monarchy of "Ubalin".
I understand the issue was completely rewritten, as it had a royal family out of your control and made a lot of assumptions. And, after all, stuff like who the Monarch is should be vague, as players may have specific ideas about how their nation is framed.
However, I don't like this.
You see, I had a specific idea for a monarchy in my head, how it'd fit into my nation's government. Even made a factbook on it. Keeping my specific idea in mind, I really wanted to install a figurehead monarchy, a constitutional one.
But, the issue that could've let me do that was completely rewritten. And because of it, you can't just install the monarchy policy without making leader the monarch, or making it an absolute monarchy.
Which, the policy just implies a royal family, not necessarily one with political power. So, I don't like that there's no way to just install a constitutional monarchy, rather than starting out with an absolute one and working your way back to constitutional.
I kind of don't like this. Even though the issue that's now Ubalin assumed a lot of things about the Monarchy, I still would love to get the issue the way it was originally written, so I can install the monarchy policy without making it an inherited dictatorship.
Now, I'm not making this post to whine about this or complain about it. I just wanted to start a discussion, and get all of my thoughts out there. So, let's make this a friendly discussion. I'd love to hear all of your thoughts on the matter. So, please, leave your thoughts and opinions down below.

[Oppermenia]

So, just to try and start the discussion, does anyone agree with me? Do any of you have this problem with nationstates and the issues? Or do you disagree?

[Chez Satan]

You can install a dynasty, by answering the issue about your succession.

And if you want to install a shogunate of sorts, maybe it is up to you to write the issue of which one option will lead there?

[Oppermenia]

You can install a dynasty, by answering the issue about your succession.

And if you want to install a shogunate of sorts, maybe it is up to you to write the issue of which one option will lead there?

You can do that in that issue, but that doesn't install a figurehead monarchy, which is what I would love to have. One that's more separated from government.
I suppose I could write an issue that can give an option for that, though. But I already wrote an issue like that that was rejected.

[Chez Satan]

Maybe we should rewrite it then?

Care to share your proposal, and allow others to help improving it?

[Oppermenia]

Maybe we should rewrite it then?

Care to share your proposal, and allow others to help improving it?

I'll telegram you, and then maybe we can discuss something.

[Oppermenia]

I still do, though, want to hear anybody else's opinions on the matter.

[Chez Satan]

Then maybe the others should weigh in on the proposal:

After a long day of ruling the country, you are presented with a pair of scissors. Apparently there is still some ribbon to be cut. You wonder whether it is time to revise your constitutional position. And it just so happens that everyone watching has an opinion on the subject:

A) "Well, you could ask your lovely family to help with some of the ceremonial duties, Leader", says NAME, one of your ministers. "If your sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, and even nieces and nephews all chip in, you would have some more time for your other duties, like opening parliament and meeting with me every Wednesday so I can tell you what to say in public."
-> Prime minister instituted, enormous expenses to fund the public appearances of an ever-growing royal family.
Political freedom to go up for countries with low ratings, and down for countries with a high rating?, state size to go up, etc...

B) "Don't listen to that power-hungry traitor!", shouts your ardent supporter NAME. "I don't know where that minister gets the idea that he should rule the country instead of you. You should fire him and declare yourself an absolute ruler - the ribbons can be cut by some of the more ceremonial members of your cabinet.
-> ribbons are cut by the Minister for Ceremonial Traditions, while Leader rules absolutely.
political freedom to plummet, state size slightly increased, etc...

C) "Excuse me, but who died and made you king?", asks NAME, an elderly lady watching the ribbon-cutting. "Back in my day we had leadership elections once every four years. And that's what we should have again. And some decent term limits too!"
-> all offices to have term limits, political freedom goes up (on balance) but efficiency goes down (less experience in parliament and government) etc...

D)"Excuse me, but why on earth do we have leadership at all?", asks aging hippy and anarchist NAME. "Wouldn't it be great to abolish the whole central government, and institute a network of local governments working together? Call me a dreamer, but I can't see any way for that to go wrong."
-> Every village has its own army, its own education standards, and its own political disputes with the next town.
Political freedom to go through the roof; efficiency, safety, education, economy et alii to all take a hit.

[The Atlae Isles]

Hi! Unfortunately, I'm not going to go over the text of the proposal at the moment, but I will point you in the direction of the Got Issues? forum, which is the forum about issues and where you draft issues.

[Frisbeeteria]

I will point you in the direction of the Got Issues? forum, which is the forum about issues and where you draft issues.

Correct. Moved.

[Trotterdam]

So, I don't like that there's no way to just install a constitutional monarchy, rather than starting out with an absolute one and working your way back to constitutional.

Well, the thing is, that's how every constitutional monarchy in real life came about. They started out as absolute monarchies, then decided to keep their royal family around as they shifted to become more democratic (or, on occasion, differently-autocratic). These royal families serve as living history museums, reminding you of the nation's origins even if they don't actively do much.

As far as I know, no democratic nation has ever just picked a random family of no prior importance and told them "okay, you're royalty now". And if they did, other monarchies wouldn't take them very seriously.

I can understand why you might want this as the player. NationStates makes certain assumptions about what your nation looks like starting out, assumptions that don't necessarily accord with your roleplay vision, and the only way to change these assumptions is through in-game decisions in the "present day", as your ability to dictate what your nation's history was like is very limited. So even if in your mind your democratic nation has always been a constitutional monarchy, to make the game recognize it you need some sort of issue available to democracies which lets you decide to implement one. However, as there is very little sensible justification for doing such a thing and it flies in the face of historical politics, it's hard to come up with any narrative to warrant it.

Personally, I just see this as a reason to not track constitutional monarchies as a flag at all, and leave it exclusively as factbook/roleplay material. After all, a figurehead monarch has fairly little practical impact on your politics anyway. If it isn't tracked as a flag, then you can simply say you have one, without contradicting your official game state and without needing to make an illogical "present-day" decision to bring about that state.

That said, there is something for you. #61 option 3 allows you to install ceremonial titles of nobility, generally to honor people who have proven their importance to the nation in some way (such as amassing great wealth), without giving them too much power. As a king (or queen) is basically just the apex noble, granting royal status to someone who is already a well-liked celebrity for other reasons could be seen as a logical extreme of that option.

[Oppermenia]

So, I don't like that there's no way to just install a constitutional monarchy, rather than starting out with an absolute one and working your way back to constitutional.

Well, the thing is, that's how every constitutional monarchy in real life came about. They started out as absolute monarchies, then decided to keep their royal family around as they shifted to become more democratic (or, on occasion, differently-autocratic). These royal families serve as living history museums, reminding you of the nation's origins even if they don't actively do much.

As far as I know, no democratic nation has ever just picked a random family of no prior importance and told them "okay, you're royalty now". And if they did, other monarchies wouldn't take them very seriously.

I can understand why you might want this as the player. NationStates makes certain assumptions about what your nation looks like starting out, assumptions that don't necessarily accord with your roleplay vision, and the only way to change these assumptions is through in-game decisions in the "present day", as your ability to dictate what your nation's history was like is very limited. So even if in your mind your democratic nation has always been a constitutional monarchy, to make the game recognize it you need some sort of issue available to democracies which lets you decide to implement one. However, as there is very little sensible justification for doing such a thing and it flies in the face of historical politics, it's hard to come up with any narrative to warrant it.

Personally, I just see this as a reason to not track constitutional monarchies as a flag at all, and leave it exclusively as factbook/roleplay material. After all, a figurehead monarch has fairly little practical impact on your politics anyway. If it isn't tracked as a flag, then you can simply say you have one, without contradicting your official game state and without needing to make an illogical "present-day" decision to bring about that state.

That said, there is something for you. #61 option 3 allows you to install ceremonial titles of nobility, generally to honor people who have proven their importance to the nation in some way (such as amassing great wealth), without giving them too much power. As a king (or queen) is basically just the apex noble, granting royal status to someone who is already a well-liked celebrity for other reasons could be seen as a logical extreme of that option.

Well, I didn't know about #61. Better keep an eye out for that one.
However, you say that it doesn't make sense for a democracy to all of a sudden install a constitutional monarchy, but it also wouldn't make sense for a democracy to all of a sudden become an absolute monarchy, so in that case, I guess it wouldn't make sense either way.

[Trotterdam]

However, you say that it doesn't make sense for a democracy to all of a sudden install a constitutional monarchy, but it also wouldn't make sense for a democracy to all of a sudden become an absolute monarchy,

There are real-life examples of unstable democracies having their power seized by a dictator, including some who then decide to appoint their children as their successors. Most of those dictators didn't actually give themselves the title of "king" (instead tending to maintain the legal fiction that they are democratically-elected presidents, even though the elections are obviously rigged), but it works out as very similar to a monarchy in practice - and some of them might have gone ahead and called themselves kings if they didn't have the disapproving international community glaring at their backs.

Additionally, unlike monarchy, dictatorship is one of the things you can set at nation creation, and thus have as your starting point rather than a later choice. In the nation questionnaire, under "Q7. Without democracy, a country has nothing", answer "Strongly Disagree". Or at least, that's what I would expect. A quick sampling of brand-new nations (I don't want to create my own throwaway nation for a one-off test) suggests that none of them have the Autocracy flags, even the ones whose pretitle and political freedoms suggest that is the player's intent. It is evidently possible for the questionnaire to set the Conscription, Socialism, and Cannabis flags, so I'm not sure why not Autocracy.

It also used to be the case that #0, which allows you to implement autocracy, was the first issue assigned to all nations, so not quite "preexisting history", but close. However, that is no longer the case.

[Oppermenia]

However, you say that it doesn't make sense for a democracy to all of a sudden install a constitutional monarchy, but it also wouldn't make sense for a democracy to all of a sudden become an absolute monarchy,

There are real-life examples of unstable democracies having their power seized by a dictator, including some who then decide to appoint their children as their successors. Most of those dictators didn't actually give themselves the title of "king" (instead tending to maintain the legal fiction that they are democratically-elected presidents, even though the elections are obviously rigged), but it works out as very similar to a monarchy in practice - and some of them might have gone ahead and called themselves kings if they didn't have the disapproving international community glaring at their backs.

Additionally, unlike monarchy, dictatorship is one of the things you can set at nation creation, and thus have as your starting point rather than a later choice. In the nation questionnaire, under "Q7. Without democracy, a country has nothing", answer "Strongly Disagree". Or at least, that's what I would expect. A quick sampling of brand-new nations (I don't want to create my own throwaway nation for a one-off test) suggests that none of them have the Autocracy flags, even the ones whose pretitle and political freedoms suggest that is the player's intent. It is evidently possible for the questionnaire to set the Conscription, Socialism, and Cannabis flags, so I'm not sure why not Autocracy.

It also used to be the case that #0, which allows you to implement autocracy, was the first issue assigned to all nations, so not quite "preexisting history", but close. However, that is no longer the case.

Yes, unstable democracies, but it would hardly make sense for a country that's doing well as a democracy and has had a democracy work for its entire history to just all of a sudden shift to a monarchy. That's an extreme shift. It wouldn't make much sense for that kind of democracy to install any monarchy, but if they did consider it, it would make more sense for them to install a constitutional monarchy - something closer to their current form of government, closer than an absolute monarchy or dictatorship, at least.

[The Free Joy State]

The monarchy policy is currently under backstage review.

In the meantime, just focus on writing high quality issues that aim to tell a good story and let the team figure out the coding.

Issues work out better when you have a story you want to tell first, as opposed to when you start with a desired outcome and work backwards.

[Oppermenia]

The monarchy policy is currently under backstage review.

In the meantime, just focus on writing high quality issues that aim to tell a good story and let the team figure out the coding.

Issues work out better when you have a story you want to tell first, as opposed to when you start with a desired outcome and work backwards.

Okay, thanks.

[Oppermenia]

The monarchy policy is currently under backstage review.

In the meantime, just focus on writing high quality issues that aim to tell a good story and let the team figure out the coding.

Issues work out better when you have a story you want to tell first, as opposed to when you start with a desired outcome and work backwards.

May I ask, have you made progress in that review?
I just wanted to say that as a player, I appreciate what you and the editing team does. I think many people take for granted the work that you do, and I want you to know that I appreciate you guys.
So, thank you. For everything the team has done with Nationstates. Without you, there'd be no game.
And, whatever you decide on the monarchy policy, I won't mind. You guys just keep doing the marvelous work you're doing!

[The Free Joy State]

The monarchy policy is currently under backstage review.

In the meantime, just focus on writing high quality issues that aim to tell a good story and let the team figure out the coding.

Issues work out better when you have a story you want to tell first, as opposed to when you start with a desired outcome and work backwards.

May I ask, have you made progress in that review?
I just wanted to say that as a player, I appreciate what you and the editing team does. I think many people take for granted the work that you do, and I want you to know that I appreciate you guys.
So, thank you. For everything the team has done with Nationstates. Without you, there'd be no game.
And, whatever you decide on the monarchy policy, I won't mind. You guys just keep doing the marvelous work you're doing!

I'll pass on your kind words to the team.

I'm afraid we can't give progress reports on individiaul reviews. All we can say is watch this space.

[Merconitonitopia]

Additionally, unlike monarchy, dictatorship is one of the things you can set at nation creation, and thus have as your starting point rather than a later choice. In the nation questionnaire, under "Q7. Without democracy, a country has nothing", answer "Strongly Disagree". Or at least, that's what I would expect. A quick sampling of brand-new nations (I don't want to create my own throwaway nation for a one-off test) suggests that none of them have the Autocracy flags, even the ones whose pretitle and political freedoms suggest that is the player's intent. It is evidently possible for the questionnaire to set the Conscription, Socialism, and Cannabis flags, so I'm not sure why not Autocracy.

I've always imagined that as being a test to hit you with #0 to see if you will double down on your authoritarian position.
A funny side effect of this is that 0/0/0 nations aren't considered autocracies.

[Oppermenia]

May I ask, have you made progress in that review?
I just wanted to say that as a player, I appreciate what you and the editing team does. I think many people take for granted the work that you do, and I want you to know that I appreciate you guys.
So, thank you. For everything the team has done with Nationstates. Without you, there'd be no game.
And, whatever you decide on the monarchy policy, I won't mind. You guys just keep doing the marvelous work you're doing!

I'll pass on your kind words to the team.

I'm afraid we can't give progress reports on individiaul reviews. All we can say is watch this space.

I'm sorry for asking, but do you know how long the review should take?

[Candlewhisper Archive]

I'm afraid we can't give progress reports on individiaul reviews. All we can say is watch this space.

This is the entire answer to your question. Nothing to gain from continuing to ask.

[Oppermenia]

I'm afraid we can't give progress reports on individiaul reviews. All we can say is watch this space.

This is the entire answer to your question. Nothing to gain from continuing to ask.

I figured. I was just asking to see, thanks

[Oppermenia]

So, it seems the monarchy policy review is complete. It can now distinguish between constitutional and absolute monarchies.
So, this means that an issue writer could write a less restrictive issue, one that could install an absolute or constitutional monarchy, if there is some sort of story that could work with it.
So what kind of story could work with that, that could fit in those options naturally? If it were to introduce those options in an issue that can have democratic nations solving the issue, then maybe it would have to have something to do with the idea of monarchies themselves. Or, it could fit into an issue where governments are in a rut, and want to introduce something new to spice things up.

[Oppermenia]

Does somebody wanna help me write a Monarchy issue?

[Jutsa]

I wouldn't mind helping out, if you've got an interesting issue premise at mind.