Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JennyHallu
Now, see, I always get so distracted devising believable economies I never get around to writing the story.
|
Good point, Malthus never had a chance to write a good set of fairytales, such as,
The Three Little Pigs: A Malthusian Tragedy in Three Parts.
Speaking of which, Malthus can help (I presume), to explain why the 'dark overlord/lady/it' always fails in the end. It isn't because they're simply over confident, they just do not watch out for a Malthusian Catastrophe...
Quote:
|
... has access to vast armies which require no food, payment or other provisioning and can travel thousands of mile and lay siege to cities without any need for a catering corps. For all this, the Enemy is completely dependant on some insignificant object such as a ring or a piece of rock for his power.
|
Obviously, while the Loser/Hero was not even a thought, or off growing into whatever they are, the 'evil being' has been carefully planning a successful and prosperious society.
Unfortunately, due to the Loser/Hero's kafkaesque ability to call on a challenge to the 'evil being', they have caused the perfect tip for the imbalance of population consumption vs. worker output, and the 'evil being' in a mad dash is forced to let their economic imbalance proceed. In an ill fate invest their slowly crumbling product quantity, they have to resource to insignificant objects and uncomplicative methods of bartering and smoke screens.
It is not that the 'evil being' has expendible workers entirely, it is just that enough of them are in the unemployment line and they have to take care of them somehow, unfortunately in rather undesirable uptakings, all thanks to the Loser/Hero's inscurity and easy ability to be goaded by other's to break a not too shabby economy.
Okay, enough of my rant. It is boring me, and most likely everyone else.
~ Ka