Who is the best historical conqueror to base a villain on? I'm not saying it's Napoleon, I just happen to have a pic of him already saved.
>>60202751You mean best historical conqueror to base a hero on?Cause that's what I'm seeing.
>>60202751Alexander the Great.
>>60202769Yeah I would probably go with this, he lived in an era with numerous powerful and stable empires and managed to stomp them all. In addition to mopping up the remnants of the Ilkhanate and fucking up the dying Delhi sultanate (who had managed to survive Mongol invasions) he also defeated both the Ottomans and Mamlukes.
>>60202751William the ConquerorKublai KhanOda NobunagaMehmed the ConquerorScipio AfricanusOtto von BismarckStalinSargon of AkkadZhu Yuanzhang
>>60202751Cao CaoLiu Bei
>>60202787>Alexander the GreatHis dad makes better stock for a villain, I think.
>>60202751Depends entirely on what role you want them to fill. Some sort of world conquering mary sue looking fuccboi is different than a hardened nomadic warlord leading a horde of horsemen who is different than a political and organizational genius with an eye for talent.
>>60202751Dwight D. Eisenhower.
>>60202990If you want another Philip of Macedonia-esque king, there's always the swedish Charles XI. He brutally forced the people of recently-conquered Scania into submission, spawning a collection of pro-Danish guerillas called "Snapphanar", who've been both derided and romanticised historically. He also passed the Great Reduction; a massive, forceful re-purchase of lands previously granted to the nobility, greatly curbing their influence in the country, further cementing royal absolutism. Like Philip he also set out to reform the army, requiring changes to both training and the way society was structured around these professional soldiers; namely the Allotment system. The system existed to support the soldiers in service to the crown, having each county sign a contract with the crown that stated they would supply a set number of soldiers to the king's army. Farms were made to cooperate in the feeding and outfitting of these soldiers; something like 3 - 4 farms per soldier. It was also the responsibility of these farms to provide the soldier with a small cottage (nordic term is Torp), equipment, and a small bit of land to farm. It's important to note that soldiers were volunteers; enticed by the promise of their own house and a small plot to farm. Might've gone on a bit of a tangent there, but I think he's a pretty cool dude. Far cooler than his vaunted son, Carolus Rex, who like Alexander used his father's well-oiled nation and army to set out on an arguably vain conquest spree. Didn't end well for either of them; Carolus Rex's overextension in the Great Nordic War saw Charles XI's army destroyed and was the beginning of the end for the Swedish Empire.
>>60203126*takes you hostage, extorts 3 rooms worth of gold and silver from you, then executes you anyway for throwing the bible on the floor*Nothing personell, incas.
>>60202881>Mehmet IIThat's a strange way of spelling "the Venetians".
>>60203347I think the OP might be Francis II
>>60203126>CortesI think we have a winner.
>>60202751Charles XII of Sweden>Ascended to the throne at 15>Turns a backwater nation into the terror of the continent>Leads with an unorthodox, especially vicious, and seemingly outdated but strangely effective strategy>Fights through being outgunned, outnumbered, and having many enemies>Whips an entire nation into a religious frenzy that turns them on heretic and heathen alike>Megalomaniac terror who thinks that he is some kind of chosen one>Spent most of his life at war>Dies in battle while still young to a bullet through the skull.He rises quickly, and falls quickly, makes a huge impact for a few decades, and fades into obscurity. Perfect for a quick campaign.
>>60203383Whilst Charles XII did get some good victories, and was an effective war leader, he wasn't as great as a lot of people claim.>Turns a backwater nation into the terror of the continentThis was done by his father and grandfather. Charles X took all of Scania from the dane and had likely seized Denmark if the dutch hadn't stopped him. Charles XI incorporated Scania into the realm and turned the nation around, both economically and militarily. Charles XII was a decent driver, but it was still his dad's car.
>>60203418I suppose the "Villan" of the story could by more of a dynasty.Thanks for the info.
>>60203378All his conquest was done by Belisarius who was constantly an outmanned underdog Unless you go with Justin being a demon and kill 1 trillion people
>>60203455It all depends on perspective, really. Charles XI was a big scourge to many of the Scanians, who were oppressed under his reign. Charles X on the other hand had been the man to take Scania from the danes, reducing their landmass by a fourth or something of the sort - he'd also been responsible for the Swedish Deluge, a terrible campaign of looting and burning in Poland-Lithuania, the spoils of which can still be seen in some Stockholm museums. There's always Gustavus Adolphus too, who was arguably the continental leader of protestantism; a big time villain for the pro-Habsburg catholics. But yeah. The rule of the three Charles' is called the Carolean Era and marked a peak in royal absolutism in the country. After Charles XII died and his female heir, Kristina, became a catholic and fucked off to Rome, the "Age of Liberty" started; liberty for no one but the aristocrats. They would later lose a lot of their influence again following the bloodless coup of Gustav III, the very model of an "Enlightened" king (by 18th century standards). I'm going on a tangent again; I just think swedish kings are good fun.
>>60203526And for a tabletop game why wouldn't you? Unless you are going for a historical game.
>>60202751>I'm not saying it's NapoleonGood because he is the hero
>>60202751Honestly, Napoleon wouldn't make for a great villain unless you want to make him the kind of villain even his enemies greatly respect. There's actually a version of "de Bello Gallico" which is prefaced by Napoleon himself, where he constantly expresses admiration for Caesar but also criticizes him for "warcrimes" (like... you know, killing somewhere between 10% and 25% of the Gallic population and burning down entire villages just to send a message?). Caesar would actually be a better villain because of that.The best one to base a villain on would probably be one of the Monghol Khans. You simply cannot top besieging the world's most populated city, killing over a million of its inhabitants and building a pyramid out of their skulls. Name ONE more villainous act in the entirety of human history, ONE.
>>60202965t. Sun Quan
>>60204105>Name ONE more villainous act in the entirety of human history, ONEHolodomor.
>>60204105The Aztec tower of skulls where they regularly put up new skulls to replace the old and rotten.
>>60204105>Name ONE more villainous act in the entirety of human historyI mean, any of the genocides of the 20th century? You name one, Armenian, Cambodian, Rwandan, hell, count all the poor bastards that were starved out or gulag'd by the Soviets. Though that's largely on personal preference, I'll admit.
>>60202751this sly bastard
>>60204308Yeah but they didn't build a pyramid of skulls, did they!
>>60204370Hey, you don't know what those soldiers did in their free time, they could've built a few skull pyramids for fun.
>>60204370>>60204386Oy vey its another pyramid!
>>60202751William the ConquerorTrajanRurik the VikingSuleiman I
>>60203204>for throwing the biblePizarro killed Atahualpa because of indian reports of a large army marching towards Cajamarca, it resulted to be false at the end but the Spanish, manly the newcomers' faction of Almagro, believed that he had to be executed because of treason, thing Pizarro's faction manly opposed, Pizarro himself was reluctant to do so at first, Pizarro believed Atahualpa still had value because of the negotiation power among its's subjects and didn't completely believed the reports, but in order to stop a very real danger of a conflict escalation among the 2 conquistadors' factions, he finally accepted to put into vote Atahualpa's destiny, also another throne candidate came into Pizarro hands. Pizarro sent the de Soto, Atahualpa closest friend, in to an expedition, so he didn't throw a tantrum, Atahualpa's death sentence won by just one more vote, after a while the expedition returned and informed there was no army but it was too late, Atahualpa was already death and de Soto cried like a little bitch, saying to Pizarro who cried a little too because then he was killed for nothing, we should have took him back to Spain with Hernando. Hernando Pizarro, Francisco's older brother, and also a close friend of Atahualpa, like de Soto, later knowing Atahualpa's death saddened him, lamenting how he couldn't defended him because he returned back to Spain (Atahualpa didn't wanted him to go back or incase wanted him to take him along) in order to give its treasure share to the king, later both de Soto and Hernando commented on how it would have been so much better to send Atahualpa back to Spain like he wished instead of committing a magnicide, thing both, the king and other conquistadors recognized and believed it shouldn't have ended that way since they both kept Atahualpa on very high regard, the most intelligent indian he had ever meet as one of them saidconflict between the 2 spanish factions escalated into a full civil war like 1-2 years after
I wonder if you can have Augustus as a villain, because he kinda won everything.
>>60204618also, another reason was because Almagro's faction only received little crumbs of the gold treasure (since Pizarro's faction was the one who captured the Emperor) and wanted to leave Cajamarca already in order to sack Cuzco, in one occasion Almagro pointed his sword threatening Pizarro, and if it wasn't because of an intermediary it would have been escalated into full conflict, but as I said, later it escalated into a full conflict on wich both Pizarro and Almagro were assassinated
>>60204347Good taste.I recommend reading about him to get a good sense for a villan that is not doing evil for the sake of evil but for real human reasons. A more sensible villan if you like.
>>60204717>I wonder if you can have Augustus as a villainOf course you can. The heroes lost the Roman Civil War, authority ended in the hands of a tyrant and the republic died unceremoniously.
>>60204717Why not? He has a martial right hand man, close associates he controled the very lives of and plays everybody like a fiddle while appearing as humble and unambitious. A villain like him would be great
>>60204468>married a greedy dumb cuck>burned some even dumber tribals>whored herself to christianity>did nothing else noteworthy
>>60202925>Otto von BismarkThougt this was about conquerors not politicians
>>60205038He'd fit anyway.
>>60204798The republic was already dead.
>>60203126Team Pizarro here
>>60204105Well, there's the whole issue with Haiti but nobody cares about slaves in a island.
>>60204754The worst part is that while I detest what he and his country are doing in the region, I have to admit that he's actually doing a really good job of it (from his point of view)
>>60205067>Free slaves>They chimp out>"Oh shit, better get them back in line">The rest of Europe counteracts>"Fuck this shit, I have bigger fish to fry">All whites on the island are exterminatedClearly the Haitians were the good guys. You know that the fact that they killed all whiteys on the island contributed in part to why the Americans were so hesitant to abolish slavery, right? They saw a white genocide on their doorsteps as a result of abolitionism.
Umar, responsible for expanding the Caliphate to Iran, Mesopotamia, and Egypt. A theologian as influencial as St.Paul, a statesman and a patron of phylosophy like Lorenzo de Medici, a social reformer like Karl Marx and a military thinker equal to Napoleon,
>>60203126Honestly, yeah. Ruthless, super ambitious dude with a comparatively small force of well equipped mercenaries showing up and wreaking havoc against a powerful empire is an awesome antagonist. You could get a nicely morally ambiguous adventure going if the pcs are by default sympathetic to whatever the Aztec analog is. After all, the alliance against the Aztecs that was spearheaded by Cortes and co didn't spring up out of nowhere...
Sulemein the Magnificient.
>>60205289>Are you sure he's the BBEG?>Absolutely!>What makes you think that?>He has the biggest hat!
>>60202751If you like scheming french strategists, Richelieu is a far better choice than Napoleon, because although he was fully dedicated to the state, he was absolutely ruthless, crushing nobles, protestants and all factions that opposed the King and his vision of France.Napoleon saw the awful state of France and Europe and decided to become the enlightened ruler of all the continent, Richelieu saw a nation rotten to the core and surrounded by enemies, and decided that he would see them dead at his feet, with cold machine-like efficiency.Besides, he provides interesting internal struggles, as he had to fight against the holy see and the queen, despite theorically being a servant to both.And he's so badass that even when he's the protagonist it's difficult not to portray him as a good guy (like in the three musketeers and twenty years after)
>>60205349>ProtestantsIt still fucks me up that he effectively exterminated them in France while bankrolling Swedish Protestants to fight against Catholic Austria while himself being a cardinal. That's some 6D Mahjong right there.Being a cardinal he was technically a contender to become pope, wasn't he? Does anyone happen to know if he ever tried to take St. Peter's throne? I imagine controlling both France and the Papal State would do a lot to make him more powerful. Or did he just put all of his eggs in the French basket to the point where becoming pope would be detrimental?
Ivan the Terrible.
>>60205365Richelieu took a place in the clergy to ensure his family's bishopric. I imagine it was more out of duty than anything else. Had he become pope, he wouldn't have been able to have the same involvement in the French government. Had he tried it's likely that he would have met some very serious opposition from both within the Vatican and outside of it, potentially doing more harm than good to himself and to France.
>>60205365He never really had a chance. There was only one Papal election during his Cardinalate and he had only been one for a year at that point so didn't really have a chance of being elected.
>>60205365I don't think Richelieu was motivated by personal gain. His ascension would have been far easier if he had just licked the boots of a couple powerfuls patrons.I believe he was just a pure statist patriot in an era that didn't really supported them. And a complete workaholic.French protestants being supported by England, and contesting the authority of the King, they had to submit or die. They didn't submit.And he only became cardinal because his family was entitled to it. Though he was a pious man, I think he would have joined the military if given free choice.In fact, a lot of french priests of noble birth were first grade schemers. Richelieu, Mazarin, Tremblay,... Might be because they knew they had little official powers compared to dukes and such, and were way more cautious and less prideful as a result.This pic always cracks me up. It establishes the character in 2 seconds.
>>60205349Even if he's not the main antagonist (just the boss of her) he was still pretty evil in the three musketeersAnd isn't he dead in 20 Years after?
>>60204105Easy, the holocaust. I know you /pol/ shitters don't want to hear about it, but it's true. They killed 11 million innocent civilians in extermination camps with a ruthless efficiency never seen before. Industrialized murder and pure evil.No other atrocity in history comes even close.
>>60205569We're talking about things that actually happened here.
>>60205580The holocaust is more well documented than any other event in this thread.
(((>>60205569)))oy vey remember the 6 gorillion
>>60205569cough Stalin cough
>>60205365By the time Bohemia lost the Thirty Years War was all but the Habsburg centralizing the HREEven Ottomans was on Protestant side from the start
>>60204105Vlad Tepes' literal forest of impaled bodies
>>60205641Stalin is a jobber when it comes to genocide. He hadn't really intended for any of his fuckups to cause as Hitler's a jobber too, to be honest.Muslims, Jews and Christians are true masters of this game. Especially two latter.
>>60205731T*rks had it coming for a looong time.
>>60203126thisI don't think anyone can top cortes vs the aztecs, it is such a surreal story
>>60205867why did they give the manlet the melee stuff
>>60205365I love Richelieu. Some 6D Mahjong is fuckin right. >>60205525I love Mazarin too, if only because of the pastry that carries his name.
>>60202751Genghis KhanCaesarChristopher ColumbusWilliam the Conquerorfucking Hitlar
>>60205097Wew lad that's a lot of misinformation in one post. >Free Slaves, they chimp out The Haitian revolution wasn't that simple, predominately due to the rapidly changing politics of France at the time and how long it took orders to get from the National Assembly to Haiti. By the time any set of orders arrived, the assembly would change and new orders would be shipped out giving rise to the joke that Haiti was always a month behind. To add to this, the colony was split up into several warring factions comprised of a mixture of slaves, free coloreds, and local whites with factions dividing up between those loyal to the crown and those loyal to the republic. Then add in the British and the Spanish both attempting to invade the colony and reinstituting slavery as they went. >Oh shit better get them back in line The LeClerc expedition had nothing to do with "getting them back in line" as there was nothing to get back in line. Haiti was consolidated under the power of President Toussaint Louverture and reestablishing labor laws and trade. The LeClerc expedition was mainly caused by Josephine (who was a white Haitian land owner) amongst other colonial land owners convincing Napoleon that Haiti would be way more profitable if it was turned back into a slave colony. >Rest of Europe counteracts Except that didn't happen and this is a really dumb point. The rest of Europe did nothing about this. The LeClerc expedition failed on its own. Cont.
>>60203176Charles XII was the first to learn that invading Russia is a terrible idea.
>>60205988>All Whites in the island are killed This also is inaccurate. Firstly, not all whites on the island were killed. The purges conducted by Jean-Jacques Dessalines specifically targeted white French. Americans, British, and Polish whites on the island were left alone. Dessalines wanted the French exterminated and this was widely condemned even by Haitians which is how Dessalines found himself assassinated a year later. This was the actual chimp out of the Haitian revolution. >American abolition American views on the Haitian revolution were already sour before the massacres took place. President Adams didnt officially recognize Haiti's independence but allowed American traders and merchants to discreetly deal with Haiti to make a decent profit at the expense of the French. Even that however was reversed by Jefferson who took an openly hostile position against Haiti. The Haitian massacres were pointed at during abolition as a scare tactic to say blacks would seek retribution against their masters but it was far from being the only factor and it generally was incorrect anyway.
>>60203126I raise you Yermak
>>60205641if you go by liberalist propaganda, yeahif you go by actual documents from that time he was a monster but pretty tame one, in comparison, and most of his atrocities were to get shit done, no matter the cost or collateral damage, not for the evulz
>>60205731oh please, Ivan the Terrible laughs at thatalso killing enemy soldiers never counts
>>60205547Snap, you're right, it's Mazarin. They compare him to Richelieu so many times in the book that I assumed the old guy was still alive.To add on Richelieu, the guy was pretty hardcore even without the 6D mahjong.>La Rochelle is revolting against the rightful autority of Louis, King of France>lay siege to the city>England decides to resupply them by sea, and you can hardly run an effective blocus>guess I'll just close the bay with a giant wall>"but you're eminence, that's impossible, we've just entered TL4">oh yeah? you think I got IQ 16 and single-minded for show? watch me>and we'll destroy the english at sea, while we're at it
>>60206132>guess I'll just close the bay with a giant wallI love it when strategists overcome the odds by pulling the most retarded shit.>Cardinal, the British are supplying la Rochelle by sea!>Close the bay with a wall>Caesar, the Gauls are bringing reinforcements!>Build a fortress around their fortress!>Alexander, the enemey has retreated out of Old Tyre into the island of New Tyre>Build a bridge out of the rubble of Old TyreIt's that kind of shit most people wouldn't even think of, let alone attempt.
>>60202751All conquerors are villains, it's just that most of them had excellent PR flacks.But my personal favorite is Cortes because the dude was legitimately a piece of shit.
>>60205761>Abrahamic religions considered as unified entitiesYou should say Communism and Nationalism instead of Stalin and Hitler, then.>also no pol pot or mao.
>>60206186>Lucius Flavius Silva, the zealots have fled to Massada, one of the most accidented and unhospitable regions of the Empire!>Build a 3km long encirclement wall, 8 camps, and a giant sand slope that will still be there 2000 years from now
>>60206044Are you saying the Holocaust was done in the name of Evil, and not because the Nazis were trying to achieve something they believed in?
>>60206255Responding to Stalin/Hitler post. Neither person had even a fraction of bloodthirstiness of your average Muslim conqueror (or Jewish, in those rare occasions when Jews conquered something they proved to be utter genocidal scumbags).
>>60206406Do you believe the chessboard killer was okay because he believed what he did was right?
>>60206418What he believed in wasn't right.
>>60206407The average muslim conqueror was pretty vanilla bro, the copts for expample actually preferred them over the Byzantines.
>>60206434Most people think the nazis werent right either.
>>60206406when your GOAL is killing someone, then yes, it is for evulz all roundwhen your goal is to bring order to a region, while settling another region, and to hell with how many people die in the attempt, that's a clear and decent goal, just rather evil methods
>>60206407>Hitler>bloodthirstinessoh, moustacho hefreitor went waaaaay beyond bloodthirstiness. muslims wish they were so bonkers
>>60206448Allies weren't any better. Everyone likes kicking a dead lion.
Threads like this are why I hate /pol/. Can't even talk basic history without some retard claiming it's all left wing false flag propaganda.
This maniac right here.
>>60206486I'd say that the nazi's goal was to gain lebensraum. The fact that there were other people inhabiting those areas was unrelated to their basic plan, even if they did provide cheap slave labor.>>60206522I believe that it's called escalation. Nazi germany acted like lunatics and expected the rest of the world to play by the rules, and then acted all indignant when others responded in kind. Talk shit, get hit, don't come crying afterwards.>LionMore like a rabid dog. They lashed out at everyone that didn't give them head, and lost by the rules they choose.
>>60206522Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind
>>60206567Was it escalation when Soviet Union starved its own population and shot innocents while missing those it claimed to target? Was it escalation when Britain went and slaughtered millions in its insatiable greed, in its desperate attempt to hold something they had no right to in their grasp?Besides, there's trying and failing to contain religious and political opposition, there's deranged conquest, there's desperate attempt to stave the enemy by any means and there's destroying the whole cities with all their population for no real tactical, strategic or ideological reason, just for kicks.You seem to be harbouring an illusion that I'm fond of Hitler. I am not.
>>60202751For a villain?Easy answer: early ww2 Hitler.Better answer: Attila the Hun
>>60206698Both are totally irrelevant for WW2. Try again and stop trying to find excuses for mr. Evilmustacheman
>>60206747>early ww2 Hitleras opposed to late ww2 Hitler?
>>60206768A mad and sickly opponent is a lot less intimidating
>>60206566He really stole the show.>>60206698Yes it was, at a national scale. They were fighting for survival, as there is no doubt at what german occupation ultimately held for them. In the end, the old prussian warmongering started ww2, when most of the other nations would have been content with peace.
>>60203383>turns a backwater nation into the terror of the continentThe backwater nation that had spent the last two centuries winning wars and taking incredibly valuable land?The Empire of Sweden which under Gustavus Adolphus overtook Denmark as dominant Scandinavian power?yeah, backwater as fuck.
>>60202751Genghis khan Attila the HunDarius IIIAlexander the greatHitler
>>60204105>kill the great Khan's peaceful envoys seeking to establish trade and good relations>twice>"abloo abloo, why are those meanie tartars burning down muh cities?"Persians
>>60204105>you know, killing somewhere between 10% and 25% of the Gallic populationthat seems like a low estimate. I normally hear 20-35
>>60206782Good show. Is there subtitled rip of it somewhere?To be somewhat fair to German nation Versailles left no other option but to war. Was their own fault not quitting while they were ahead and starting eastern front meatgrinder, but then again, few people are smart enough to do that.
>>60206837The comic is available, the movie is in italian in french, but I dunno about the english version's quality.>Versailles left no other option but to war.That's german revisionism, anon. Foch said from the start that versailles was too lenient to be a peace treaty, and was only a cease-fire for 20 years. If anything, the 1871 Versailles treaty between France and Prussia was way harshier. And what about Belgium that had been completely destroyed during the war of the trenches? They didn't start any war.More about it (beats reading an entire library on the subject).https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3hiukg/is_this_bad_history_of_the_treaty_of_versailles/?st=jgri41cl&sh=5a72b826
>>60202769this is good for for a villainFor a hero, I unironically think Napoleon is a good base, just lower his ego a bit
>>60206566>german buddho-orthodox reincarnation of Genghis Fucking Khan with a penchant for torturing both enemies and allies alikeSeriously, how did this guy even happen? This is some of the most surreal shit I've ever read.
>>60206931Use young Napoleon (before he becomes consul). Leads charges and doesn't afraid of anything
>>60206938>This is some of the most surreal shit I've ever read.heh, I suggest you read Pelevin's "Chapayev and Void" - itself a surreal kinda-buddhist psychological mind screw novelIt features Ungern and its awesome
>>60206938he was a real-life PC
Leaders govern through apparatuses that have their own interests, and in a world of unintended consequences, where even if their directions are followed to the letter, the outcome can be unexpected. They cannot impose their will on society by force but must align with or create coalitions that allow them to rule. The leader is shaped by the vast undercurrent of minute processes and decisions, and resistance to this process can break them.Take Hitler and Stalin as examples. Amid the economic misery and social chaos that followed Germany’s defeat in World War I, Hitler managed to tap into a deep anger. He did not create the circumstances that bought him to power; he aligned himself with them. He became what the public demanded. His control was limited by a notoriously chaotic and fractured bureaucracy. True, if Hitler intervened he would have been obeyed, but for the most part he could neither know nor control what the bureaucracy did, and the power structure rested on the general society it commanded.
>>60207000Stalin emerged because he understood the Marxist-Leninist notion of the dictatorship of the proletariat. He took control of the Communist Party and the country, understanding that the country, shattered by World War I and a century of inefficiency, had to break out. He also knew that the bureaucracy – over which the czar had lost control – was the problem. He instituted a terror campaign, murdering, almost randomly, members of the apparatus who were responsible for carrying out his orders, thereby increasing the probability that future orders might be carried out. But the orders he gave were dictated by the reality on the ground. The Soviet Union needed to industrialize or it would collapse. For this, the Soviet Union needed foreign equipment, which it could pay for only with agricultural products. Taking those products from the peasants who grew them would lead to their starvation. But not taking those products from them would lead to the Soviet Union’s downfall. Stalin did create terror and starvation, but he was reacting to the reality presented to him. Others might not have reacted this way, but it is not clear that the Soviet Union would have survived by any other means. Stalin was a prisoner of his reality, and it was a reality that demanded ruthlessness.
>>60205569Tbf it’s more a case of just not caring.
>>602069251871 Versailles was quite fair. Especially compared to 1919 Versailles, both in reparations (5 billion francs vs 132 billion gold marks), territorial changes (in addition to losing all gains form 1871 Prussia was severed in two for Polish greed, A-H ceased to exist) and restrictions, of which V1871 had none noteworthy.
History, like the economy, is the vast unfolding of millions of decisions and events. The idea that one person or group of people is in control of this process is misguided. It is impossible for any political leader to be aware of, let alone control, the myriad events that shape a nation from within and without. Even very powerful leaders could only govern through a political structure that underpins their own authority. They give orders to their subordinates, who then give orders to their subordinates, who then work within the broader society to try to implement the orders.
>>60207014you are confusing two parts of his reignyou got collectivization right, but the terror was part of clearing old revolutionaries from government, army and all important facilities - many of them were fanatics, social-revolutionaries (those would make Hitler blush), or ascendant bandit warlords. They and their supporters had to be cleared out. It was partly done to stabilize the country, partly to enforce Stalin's rule, but people who don't know Russian Revolution's history don't realize that Stalin was so much better and nicer than Trotski or social-revolutionaries.Stalin wanted one powerful country held in an iron fist.Social-revolutionaries wanted to literally bathe the world in blood, sacrificing Russian in the name of the "worldwide revolution". Those people were bad. And many of their leaders ended up in higher echelons of Red Army and governmental apparatus.
>>60207014He might not have been entirely reasonable, as illustrated by his death in isolated paranoia.>>60207061>polish greedThat's the first time I see this substantive applied to the punching ball of Europe.
>>60202925>William the ConquerorHe made the Anglos sufficiently French enough to allow them to be relevant down the line. Can´t really see that as anything other than a hero.
>>60207097>sufficiently French enough to allow them to be relevant down the lineAHAHAHAsince when being French is anything but a downgrade?unless we're talking about wine and 19th-century art, that is
>>60207150The french were a prime continental power for many centuries, anon.
>>60202751Isn't he the reason people make fun of manlets?
>>60207094Of all European states Poland tends to behave in the most arrogant, greedy and contentious way for its relative size and station. Yes, it is a punching ball, but not unwarranted one. Poland was called the greedy hyena of Europe for a reason.
>>60207150>say the anglo who became relevant after being frenched
Friedrich II is a pretty good pick.A homo who is - among other things - angling for suicide by military action.Napoleon III too. Dude made three seperate coup attempts before he managed to buy an election.
>>60207150>since when being French is anything but a downgrade?Since 1945.
>>60202965>>60204110Liu Bei would be fantastic as a villain, if you steer right into the skid and play up the divide between what he and his generals actually do and what his citizens hear of it all.
>>602071941940 then, considering they surrendered to Nazis so fast it would take longer had they actually invited the germans in
what if Zhuge Lang decided "fuck it, I'll make my own China with blackjack and geishas" and decided to conquer shit?
>>60203156MacArtur would be better to base a villain on. Vain, arrogant and connivingly political.
>>60207194As if post-1945 Britain is so impressive.>>60207227Why do people always perpetuate this meme? Why do americans always shit on the french?
>>60207278I'm Russian, FYIfrench are shitthey have birthed some outstanding individuals, sure, but in general they are useless cowardly shits
>>60207292Most nations in the world are full of useless cowardly shits.
>>60207278>Why do people always perpetuate this meme?because british people fought in the WWIIrussian people fought in the WWIIamerican... okay, that was cynical profiteering, nevermindpeople from occuppied or hitler-aligned countries like norway fought against nazisfrench welcomed hitler with open armsfuck french, along with ukrainians, hungarians, lithuanians and others who supported nazis out of their own free will
>>60207292Napoleon and Willie weren't French.
>>60206566This. I was about to post him. Tho I wouldn't call him conqueror, I think he would be great base for a crazy warlord type villain. >>60206938Also>russian patriot>extreme monarchist>declared the reincarnation of god of war by Dalai Lama>almost suicidal lack of fear and desire to prove himself >he let his soldiers take as much cocaine and hashish as they want>wanted to go down in history as a great heroI recommend this recap if someone is interestedhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNUq7IUU300https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nje3kuwO6gA
>>60207326I was thinking de Gaulle and ImpressionistsCharlemagne was German, wasn't he?
>>60202751Not strictly a conqueror, but Mad King Zhou is some crazy shit.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Zhou_of_Shang
>>60207292> Cowardly shits> When they could'nt stop waging war against the rest of the world in their entire existence> When they managed to make the English fed up with trying to rule themI'd call French many things, but cowards shit is not amongst them
>>60207343Charlemagne lived and died over 1200 years ago. There was no such thing as german or french back then. He was one of the Franks; a group of germanics (germanics =/= german).
>>60207366they make fine mooks when they have a good leader (usually someone foreign, like Napoleon or Charlemagne, or completely bonkers, like Jeanne), but other than that... eh. fuck the french.
>HitlerpostersYou have to win to be a conqueror.
>>60207320>managed to singlehandedly make an entire political wing verboten
>>60207434he was winning until he decided that waking a sleeping bear by hitting it with a stick WAS A GOOD IDEA
>>60203126conquering naked savages savages is too easy tho
>>60207326>>60207402That's stupidity on the level of "he's not american, he's texan".And in a thread with Richelieu and Mazarin, no less.On a sidenote, Jeanne is far too cool to be called completely bonkers, read any of the transcripts about her, she's totally awesome and lays down mad bantz at her opponents for a demure maiden from the common folk.>You say that you are my judge; I do not know if you are, but take good heed not to judge me ill, because you would put yourself in great peril.And she loved guns and introduced rocket artillery in the french army, too. Pretty /k/.
>>60207672on one thing, you're righton another thing I can't allow a 4chan post change my opinion, that would be incredibly lame
>>60207694hand. meant hand. not thing.fucking trilingual thinking.
This thread is like a mini /pol/ and yet the discussion is actually pretty relevant to the topic. Hell, it's pretty fun to read through and there's very little shitflingingWell done for making a civil thread on these subjects, /tg/
>>60206931Frenchman here. Napoleon was a bandit that managed to put his hand on the world biggest gun. He destroyed the republic and bullied its way through Europe thanks to his tactic of unlimited manpower through conscription (a reliquat of the republic).Not saying he's a villain, but he's not a hero. He was just a very, very lucky chicken thief.
>>60207724/pol/ is a very civil board
>>60207745I think the issue might be that those interested in civil discussion stay on /pol/. Those who spread /pol/ shit to other boards for no good reason tend to be the ones who are more interested in shitposting. It's the same with any board, really.
>>60207724Well, we are all gentlemen here, are we not?
>>60202751Napoleon is great because he was sympathetic in many ways and yet still a natural and genuine antagonist in many people's stories. He was a man who fought for his country's genuine interests, making one daring gamble after another to let it stay on top - and kept on doing so after his lucky streak finally ran out.Julius Caesar would be another interesting sympathetic antagonist; a charismatic and in many ways very reasonable man, but one willing to go to great and dangerous ends to defend his interests.
>>60207766>man who fought for his country's genuine interestshis wars cost France the lives of almost all its malesI guess Napoleon was a modern feministoh, and let's be frank (pun intended) - he didn't fight. he just gave orders. he sacrificed nothing and even in both exiles he still lived in luxury
>>60207482>he was winning until he lost>when the Soviet Union smelled the trap and started gearing toward arms production as soon as the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact was signed, in 1939.So, I guess you could say he's a great conqueror of Spain, Austria and Czechoslovakia, and that's due more to the trahison of the West than the might of the Wehrmacht.Speaking of Spain, Franco would make a pretty good villain. Well-meaning and nuanced, but doesn't shy away from atrocities to complete his objectives.>>60207743>what are the bank of france, franc, code civil, concordat, courts of appeal and trade, constitutional judges, constitution of year VIII, lycee and university, legion of honor, prefects, senate, and modern policeC'mon, the guy basically created all the institutions of modern France.
>>60207766>He was a man who fought for his country's genuine interestsThis is the absolute opposite of what happend. Napoleon fought against France when he was eyeing a position as a corsican politician, before switching sides when he understood in which direction the wind was blowing. Then he opened fire on multiple occasions on parisians strikers which started his national career.He was liked by the upper class because he stole wealth from other countries and because of what we call here "rachat" which allows rich people to pay their way out of conscription.He had some good sides, especially compared to pre republican royal system (good soldiers were promoted, sometimes very high), but Napoleon acted in his own interest his whole life.
>>60207793>he's a great conqueror of Spain, Austria and Czechoslovakiaalso France, Norway (I think? or was it some other scandinavian country?) and that one town in UK that had more german bombs than british people in it (by weight). Coventry, I think
>>60207793>C'mon, the guy basically created all the institutions of modern France.I am not saying he's completely bad. He did some good things, at a horrible cost, and filled his pockets very deep in the process.If you want a TRUE villain/hero, that acted genuinly for his country, google Robespierre. That man did horrible things, but with a genuine, and totally disinterested love for french people.
>>60207810>good soldiers were promoted, sometimes very highJean Bernadotte went from being the youngest son of a lawyer in, to being a regular soldier, to Marshal of France and Prince of Pontecorvo, and then all the way to King of Sweden Norway. Not bad for yet another dirty pyreneean.
>>60207785>he didn't fightHe got 18 horses he mounted killed or injured in battle. Hardly indicative of a safe spot.And check his early battles like the siege of Toulon. He definitely fought.Less so at the end of his carrier, but having your commander-in-chief take part in bayonet charges instead of making plans is kind of a waste.
>>60207838Ah, Robespierre. My favourite lawyer!
>>60207854Yeah lol, I was thinking about him specifically. But common soldiers could be named officers very easily. That trend ended totally at the restauration and is one of the themes of "le rouge et le noir" by Stendhal
>>60205047>>60204798The republic died when Marius and Sulla started fighting. Everything after was just pretending things could go back to normal. The whole Roman system of government was breaking down when the Gracchi tried to introduce reforms and were assassinated for their trouble.
>>60207855>but having your commander-in-chief take part in bayonet charges instead of making plans is kind of a wasteu wat?
>>60207862Love him or hate him, you can't question what he did was totally disinterested. He slain a fuckton of noblemen, and his council cleared the councils of the partesans of the king. He also reprimed unrest in blood. But he never became rich in the process, never married, created a legacy and at the height of his power (the most powerful man in europe of his time) he rented his room to a carpenter. Dude was one of the few politicians to ever believe his own jig.
>>60207766>Napoleon is great because he was sympathetic in many ways and yet still a natural and genuine antagonist in many people's stories. He was a man who fought for his country's genuine interests, making one daring gamble after another to let it stay on top - and kept on doing so after his lucky streak finally ran out.This applies to Hitler as well m8.
>>60207838Saint-Just was the villain. Robespierre is pure. Pure!
>>60207941lolRobespierre did abolished slavery tho. I dunno about your american guy
>>60207964indeed, death frees us allain't a slave if ye're dead
>>60208015Robespierre killed noblemen and member of the council, none of them were slaves.
>>60202751Robert E. Lee. He's got the interesting and understandable motivation for the things he's doing and he's not necessarily perceived as evil. He'd make for a good potential villain and/or NPC renegade general if he's done right.
>>60202751making villains out of historical bad guys is unimaginativetake historical good guys and twist their image so they become villainsthat would be funtake Bolevar or Lincoln for instance
>>60207899>let's preserve France from the monarchies attacking it and liberate the nations of Europe in the process, and start my own dynasty while I'm at it.vs.>[oppressed russia...german minority detected] + let's cleanse the world of all non-aryans (and potential ideological opponents, and the aryans I don't like anyways)I'm not sure I can follow you there. Hitler's ego was slightly less overblown, but that might be because they lived in different eras with very different stances about what a head of state should be.
>>60202751Napoleon was a hero of the ages who reformed Europe for the better, setting the stage for a future continent of peace, you uncultured anglophone swine.
>>60207434He was winning until he wasn't.
>>60207785>his warsOnly 2 of the wars he fought were declared by him, the other 7 were declared by his enemies.
>>60208044>let's cleanse the world of all non-aryansHitler nor the nazis never held such views senpai. Stop accepting Hollywood propaganda as the truth.The only races Hitler sought to remove from Europe were the jews and gypsies. The former because he saw them as a threat to his people, and the later because they are parasites.
>>60208158Jews, gypsies and Slavs, technically. He also wasn't big on gays, cripples and retards. Or black people for that matter, I think.
>>60208044Don't forget Code Napoleon, one of the most influential bodies of legal work in the history of mankind.The worst thing Napoleon did was that he removed some privileges that women had gained during the revolution. Sure, he was at war a lot, but war was every ones business in Europe during that time.
>>60208158Realistically, how far would the Nazi expansion go assuming they didn't lose? Like, no matter the scenario, I don't see them ever trying to invade the Americas. Too much of a logistical problem
>>60208214He also reinstated slavery but ohwell
>>60208205I think the Nazis only cared about blacks unless they tried to live in Germany. If I recall, they sterilized the Rhineland bastards. But they also took Africans into their volunteer forces in the Africa theater.
>>60208019They were slaves to the system, and therefore objective accomplices.More seriously, France's history is fascinating. You can't accuse them of being racist or anything when their internal purges where even more brutal.>kills royalists>kills vendeans for supporting unsanctionned priests>kills bretons for not supporting conscription>kills toulonese for allying with the english>kills lyonese just to be sure>kills moderate republicans>kills extremists republicans>fells betters, goes to war against the rest of Europe>rinse and repeat every time there's trouble in french historyAfter all the original motto was "unity and indivisibility of the Republic, or death"And they did it constantly, too. It has been what? Ten regime changes since the revolution of 1789?>algerian war>police machineguns down supporters of independence>police machineguns down supporters of colonizationGood thing the right to go on strike is written in their constitution now, otherwise they would continue to shoot each other constantly.
>>60208231Yeah, you might be right. He definitely didn't want Slavs, though, since he wanted to conquer Russia and dish the country out to the German race a la Manifest Destiny.
>>60208224Shit, I forgot about the mismanagement of the colonies
>>60208235>algerian warAlgerian war has nothing to do with Robespierre. It was a set up for a far right military coup that devolved into terrorism (OAS) and eventually gave us the Front National. Litteral traitors, and I'm all for gunning traitors down in times of war.Most of the officers were spared by De Gaulle, and it was a huge mistake whose ramification extend to the current day. He should have put a bullet in their heads.>>60208235>kills royalists etcNobody says Robespierre was an angel. My point is, he didn't do that for the money or for the fame. He lived in poverty and turned down an offer from his partesan from freeing him from his death sentence cell. He was a true patriot. People point at the bloodshed because they have nothing else against him.Yeah, he was powerful and didn't take shit from anyone. People in officer were executed when they tried to smuggle national goods (Danton for instance). Other were executed because they acted against the republic or tried to get Prussia to invade. It would be like, today, executing generals for colluding with the enemy, or ministers for spending millions to buy a chair or something. It was a different time, national responsabilities meant something back then
>>60208205black people they just thought were trash, but they were fine in Africa (or so they said, it's not like they shied away from colonization which would lead to intermingling in the way they opposed)Mainly they claimed to think that every race should just stay home, but the way they treated slavs makes that dubious at best.
>>60208355Well, Hitler wanted to colonize countries like Poland and Russia and to set up German-controlled settlements and towns in that area, most likely to establish some breadbaskets for the German Empire.
>>60208158Lebensborn programs coupled with the complete stripping of ressources in occupied countries towards germany implies otherwise. As do the art. 4 & 8 of the 25 punkte programm, that clearly state that no german blood = no citizenship = no right to stay. And the november 18, 1940 decree about abortion of non aryan women.Further integration of occupied countries into the Reich would have, in the end, resulted in the total elimination of non-aryan citizen.Can't fully colonize landand territories if there's already people there, after all.
>>60207724>/tg/ discussing warcrimes"interesting points from the SJW brigade, anyone wants to add something before we begin the mesopotamian slavery seminar? Yes, the stormfaggot on the right? Go on" "Well, firstly I would like to thank my predecessor for hir intervention...">/tg/ discussing fantasy waifusREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE HOW DARE YOU I'LL GUT YOU AND YOUR ENTIRE FAMILY
Roman von Ungern-SternbergBatshit crazy and obscure.
>>60203383>turns them on heretic and heathen alikeThey were the protestant heretics.>dies in battleHe was most likely fragged.
>>60208958Watch THIS*destroys your thread*
>>60207325>Ukrainians, LithuaniansThese people lived under the red terror. I think they were perfectly justified in siding with any power that sought to destroy the Soviets, no matter how crazy
>>60208235>Ten regime changes since the revolution of 1789?Like 15.Algeria is rightful French clay. ;_;
>>60204105>Caesar would actually be a better villain because of that.Casesar started wars to secure his re-election, which is as American as Apple Pie.
>>60209908So, not at all?
>>60202751The key trait of a villainous conqueror I think is that they can never just stop, they must always keep slaughtering new rebels and foreigners, building new monuments, and planning new campaigns even if it brings down all that they have wrought..Alexander in India, Napoleon in Russia and in the Hundred Days, Timur on route to try and take Ming China.Thus I think the best villain conqueror would be one whose blinding military genius is in circumstances where the pay off never happens, the campaigns and dominance never get a chance to translate into efficiency or art or anything, Where the ruler is never not on campaign but whose legacy slips past their fingers even as they exert almost superhuman powers to grasp it.That's right now's the time for Pyhrrus, King of the Epiriotes, master of Makedon, Sicily, and Italy, killed in Argive street fighting by the thrown roof tile of an old woman.
>>60205761>Hitler's a jobber too, to be honest.Hitler is a huge fucking jobber.>We just want them gone, so we make their life hell and revoke their citizenship>but our economy is in the dumps and I can´t fix that, so they have to leave WITHOUT A PENNY AFTER THEY PAID US A HEFTY FEE. Because them taking even a fraction of their personal cash or turning their businesses into money and then leaving would absolutely tank what´s left of our monetary reserves after all the crisisesMonths pass>WHY ARE THE MONEY-GRUBBING JEWS NOT LEAVING?????
>>60207785>his wars cost France the lives of almost all its malesThat's the thing. His wars were warranted from his point of view. Most of them were indeed pushed on him. The rest were preemptive wars against plausible threats, necessary to defend France's borders against revisionist powers. If he could win them all, it would be all be worth it and France would be left in a far superior position since, truly secure against any threats to its homeland at last. But he overplayed his hand, then did it over and over again, and eventually the cost became so prohibitive that many of the French lost faith in him. (But many others didn't.)That's what makes him an interesting antagonist... especially if you're on his side to begin with, but start to see that he just can't accept defeat and will keep fighting so long as there is any hope of victory, no matter how remote and no matter the cost.
>>60208235>Ten regime changes since the revolution of 1789?To be fair, that makes it sound like the country went full retard. It only ended up that high as it did for two reasons:1. 1815 never changed the French desire for liberalism. This is why, when Charles X revoked the 1814 Charter (that guaranteed the gains of the revolution, but as a "gif" from the king), he was dethroned and replaced by "citizen-king" Louis-Philippe. Who went full retard as well and was replaced by Louis-Napoléon, later Napoleon III. This was acceptable to the French and, like his uncle before him, he was dethroned by an outside force (and admittedly a group of republicans who were upset with him, Napoleon III was very unpopular in Paris but popular everywhere else, and just a bit before 1871 his popularity was higher than ever before. Probably because he was ACTUALLY liberal, unlike the faux-liberal Louis-Philippe who preceded him). cont.
>>60209913Napoleon didn't exactly attack Russia just for larks. He needed to ensure compliance and Alexander I was being a shit.
>>602099892. WW2. The Third, Fourth and Fifth Republics aren't so much regime changes as constitutional changes. It would have been entirely possible to just continue the Third Republic after WW2, but this didn't happen for... some reason. The Fourth Republic was a parliamentary republic constantly in deadlock because the conservatives (pro-colonization) and socialists (pro-decolonization) couldn't agree on ANYTHING. President Vincent Auriol described that period as hell, with minister after minister constantly handing in his resignation. The Fifth Republic only happened because Charles de Gaulle saw the Fourth Constitution had a shit constitution and rewrote it for his Fifth Republic. On the plus side, it gave the president a lot o fpower and De Gaulle personally oversaw decolonization (including such things as retreating out of Algeria despite being militarily ahead because fuck having 40 million Muslims on French soil his successors are trying to undo that hurr hurr). The downside is that this republic was made for De Gaulle so France now suffers from Great Man Syndrome: its institutions now demand a talented and ambitious man of the caliber of De Gaulle, something France hasn't been able to provide ever since (maybe Macron will turn that around?). So, in short:1. You can't stop the liberalism train2. A lot of these different "regimes" weren't really different regimes
>>60207320>Ruined EuropeI figure you faggots would hate him more. He ruined "Muh white imperialism"
>>60210015I keep trying to tell /pol/ this, yet they insist he "saved" the white race from a threat that only arose after his death.
>>60207325>>60209815This (well, rather, everyone in the Soviet Union and nearby was trapped between two Great Evils and could hardly be blamed for picking either side over the other in hopes that it'd be a bit less bad for him or for his own - morally, both choices were about equivalent, especially before the Germans made their policies towards civilians on the Eastern Front completely clear).Incidentally this goes at least as strongly for all the Russians who picked Hitler. It's not like Soviet rule was any easier on the bulk of them. On the other hand, bear in mind that many Ukrainians and some Lithuanians picked Stalin, and that was just as justified.
>>60203347>He doesn't want to okay a chosen men campaign
>>60206837>To be somewhat fair to German nation Versailles left no other option but to war.To be fair, the Weimarian Republic worked hard to find an alternative that would ease the burden enough to allow economic re-developement and it worked, but then US chimped out and left them stuck with both the French and the British insisting on their next pound of flesh.
>>60209118Honestly a bit too crazy and unaccomplished. He's just some two-bit mad warlord, though the Buddhist Darwinist angle is fun.
>>60210083Except the Versailles Treaty appointed a committee that would dictate how much the Germans could afford to pay each year. Sometimes that sum was zero.
>>60207014>He also knew that the bureaucracy – over which the czar had lost control – was the problem.>Stalin knewThe first wave of people whom he had killed in kangaroo courts or assassinated would disagree. Stalin stiffled democracy in favour of the rule of the bureaucratic apparatus.
>>60210024A threat, ironically, that he caused. History saw how his "kick everyone out and kill those who don't leave" mindset burnt down Europe and as a result Europe had a "Yeah, let's not be that guy" moment as a result. Without Hitler, even if Colonialism did end, it would of done so in an organic way that would of left everyone, even the ex-colonies better off.
>>60210206>and as a result Europe had a "Yeah, let's not be that guy" moment as a resultYou're going to call me /pol/, but what we also need to point out is that a lot of socialist academics in the West WERE/ARE Jews. Not saying there's some grand conspiracy, just pointing out a fact that cannot be overlooked. These Jews ended up fleeing to America, and the mantle of the Holocaust made them invulnerable to all criticism and made anyone to the right of them automatically a Nazi. That to a certain extent also explains why Europe went down the rabbit hole so fast: all resistance to socialism that existed in earlier decades was absolut verboten, and all sense of identification with your own race and people doubly so.>Without Hitler, even if Colonialism did end, it would of done so in an organic way that would of left everyone, even the ex-colonies better off.True dat.
>>60210206Who the hell did Hitler "kick out"? If anything, he preceded Merkel by dragging all those gastarbeiters in. A lot of people left Germany, but they were running away, not being chased out. He did have a plan for moving the Jews to Africa at some point, but that never got off the ground and he decided it was better to just kill them instead.
>>60207014>He also knew that the bureaucracy – over which the czar had lost control – was the problem.u wotThe bureaucracy that Nicholas II "lost control of" was completely different from the bureaucracy Stalin expanded. He was necessarily ruthless, yes, from the point of view of staying alive while surrounded by evil commies, and also from the point of view of remaining an evil commie himself and thus being opposed to anything that may undermine Soviet rule in the long run. He was wiser than his comrades in realising that any bit of democracy or private enterprise would be poison to the CPSU, so stomped it all out.
>>60210268>The mantle of the HolocaustExactly what I mean by causing the threat. Just letting them try and preach socialism would have resulted in all the usual socialist vs pure capitalist vs Communist debates and let every country decide based on their own cultures. But instead one faction became virtually invincibleThat said, limited socialism is definitely a good thing. In a capitalist society there needs to be safety nets or a disenfranchised lower class will burn everything from the bottoms up.
>>60205618Go fuck yourself, Kalen.
>>60210312The reason it was the "Final Solution" was because he couldn't get his "undesirables" to leave fast enough. "Running away from" and "Chased out" by a government is typically the same thing, especially if you're being targeted. For example: say Trump claims he was going to arm riot police to sweep the streets of Spanish. Are those leaving just running, or being chased out.
>>60210410Trump's assassination in 2019 can't come fast enough.
>>60204480>he was on the game's side the whole time
>>60209118>>60206566You should check thread before posting, anon.
>>60210312>Who the hell did Hitler "kick out"? If anything, he preceded Merkel by dragging all those gastarbeiters in.Anon, the people Hitler had brought in on account of needing every German male he could find to die in Russia were basically slaves by another name. At best they got paid shit and fed crumbs so they wouldn´t perish as fast as their compatriots at home.Comparing the nazi slavery program with the cold war guest worker program is just disgusting.
>when you fail your exams so hard 30 million people die in the resulting war
>>60207241>MacArturMacArthur couldn't conquer his way out of a wet paper bag without nukes and probably should have been shot for deserting his post
Holy fuck this thread is making me feel retarded How do you guys know so much about history
>>60207941David Weber is that you?
>>60210075It just sounds like a shitty situation overall.
>>60202751he does feel like a PC more than a main villain >>60202925>Scipio AfricanusDon't you mean Aemilianusneither did any wrong, delenda est.Sulla, Gaius Marius, Pompy, Quintus Caecilius Metellus, Gaius Julius Cesear and sheet would be better >>60207157>The french were a prime continental power for many centuries, anon.only proves the continent was fucked
>>60210353"Regimes may fall and fail, but I do not." Even revolutionary governments are forced to incorporate the old bureaucratic elite. Governments and bureaucracies need experts. Often, even after a revolution, the only experts are from the old regime and have to be incorporated.
Tamerlane, descendant of Genghis plus a gammy leg for extra villain kudos.
>>60212080Stalin was right for his time. Every system has a time and place.
>>60202751OzimandiusBut I feel like Julius Caesar needs a shout out. Who else would build a bridge using brand new engineering tech just to kick your ass, walk away, & then destroy it?
>>60206837As pre-war germany spent more on rearmament than on reparations, no. They were of bad faith since the beginning, and wanted revenge at all costs.
>>60214022>sulla did not conquer the east>and then return to liberate rome from the tyrany of the Populares
>>60210648He is a hero!
>>60207649>I don't know anything about the Aztecs other than Guns, Germs, and Steel memeryYou have to be 18+ to post here.
>>60210004>(including such things as retreating out of Algeria despite being militarily ahead because fuck having 40 million Muslims on French soilTo be fair to France, the US was not (And largely still is not) supportive of what it perceives to be European colonialism (for two possible reasons, depending on the particular American - because they truly believe in self-determination is good and that colonialism is bad, or because European colonialism gets in the way of US interests). As such, both the UK and France received a lot of pressure to give up their colonial holdings post-WWII, most prominently with the US telling both of them "stop fucking around with the Suez canal and just give it to the goddamn Egyptians so they don't go Red" during the Suez crisis. The US made decolonization in Africa and Asia a major condition of support of the Allies (for a wide variety of reasons), and also twisted Churchills arm when he tried to back out of decolonizing Africa. Couple this with post WWII money problems and a Cold War, and suddenly colonialism isn't a good decision anymore.
>>60203383Charles XII got a strong country handed to him by his predecessor. I think Charles XII-Peter I was a great rivalry narratively>prodigious king of a major European country>leader of a large but backwater and inefficiently-administrated shithole>honest and loved by the people>stubbornly and violently try to change his country>insensitive to pain and love war, waging one against multiple countries at a time>love building ships and cities, build his own capital and major port on a swamp>Sweden become irrelevant after he died>Russia become a major power in Sweden's place throughout his reign
>>60217824for got reason
>>60202769first post best post.
>>60202751Qin Shi Huang might be a good one, mostly due to his later fear of death and the distance he went to try and become immortal which included eating mercury pills and shit.
>>60202769This is a lame choice.
>>60202751Oda Nobunaga or Toyotomi Hideyoshi would be pretty interesting. Shou (or some other pseudo-Japanese for non-Faerun settings) warlord having united civil warring states using tactics that earned him the name "demon king" from his rivals, or a mad king who inherited his lands from said demon king and had delusions of grandeur. In either case, turning his sights upon the rest of the word, spreading military might across the land. Could even have him be a blade warlock, his patron being some demon to really bang home the whole "demon king" moniker. Nobunaga is honestly just such a fascinating figure that I'd even recommend portraying him not as a conquering villain but a progressive leader, lowering taxes on those who brought trade to his capital, opening Japan's borders to trade from foreign countries and allowing Jesuits to immigrate and spread their faith, as well as quashing the over mighty Buddhist temples, endorsing open debate between sects, and centralizing government in his office rather than that of Shogun or Emperor. And a huge goddamn Westaboo, to boot, though he did love him some traditional Japanese theatre. There's no real wrong way to portray him honestly- hero, villain, antihero, saint, demon- other than as a generic samurai warlord obsessed with honor, which he definitely was NOT.
>>60205525>I don't think Richelieu was motivated by personal gain. His ascension would have been far easier if he had just licked the boots of a couple powerfuls patrons.wasn't he BFF with Louis XIII after mediating between him and his mother's rebellion?
>>60203378>can't even deal with some hooligans without killing 30 000 people
>>60220347what if it was 30000 hooligans?
>>60218124One of the coolest things about Qin is that if you lived at the same time as him, he seemed like the biggest fucking villain conqueror monster ever. But if you live in the unified, peaceful empire that resulted from his savagery, he seems like a great guy.That's pretty much the entire point of the Jet Li movie, Hero.
>>60219927Yes, but though he was a young genius (archbishop at 22), he started by improving his parish as much as he could, until the Queen noticed that one part of France was runnning really smoothly and brought him to the court.He was a 6d mahjong player, but everything I've read points to him using people in order to make France great again, not become the top dog. Being at the top only made reaching his goal easier.It's possible that he was just getting his rocks off playing puppetmaster with Europe, but that don't really fit what I know of his personality.>>60217726>be France>have strategic base on Djibouti, with almost zero native population>get lots of migrants there due to ww2>suddently UN decides that decolonization of Djibouti is the absolute priority>make referendum: 60% remain>doesn't count for some reason>ethiopian terrorists begin fucking shit up>second referendum ten years later: 99,75% leave>Djibouti becomes independent>US install military base on it 2 seconds laterSeriously, I would have joined the warsaw pact. With friends like this you don't need enemies.
>>60221640Let's not forget that French Guyana was also supposed to be decolonized. In fact, all the overseas territories France has today are only French because they voted to remain. It's like the opposite of Brexit but with the same principle: let's keep organizing referenda until we get the result we want (Soros is trying to finance a second referendum).
>>60221640huh, sound like he was more of an idealist than I though he was, his shitty portrayals in any and all Musketeers media certainly doesn't help
>>60204105I thought about pushing a button to melt down hundreds of thousands in a single moment and poisoning their land for decades would be more villainous at first, but then I looked up the numbers and it seems that the death toll doesn’t really compare. Figures.
>>60221708He said during his deadbed confession "I had no enemies but those of the State"I would recommend reading his political testament. It's a good, relatively easy read, and is full of sun tzu-like maxims.
>>60202751If you get conquered you're not the good guys.
>>60210721Very many people, each of who only knows about that little pet topic. It’s entirely reasonable not to know about all of them.
>>60206973>>60206984This. All of this.
>>60202769But he was a good guy
>>60204735This is why Cortes is the superior conquistador. His tlaxcalteca warriors fought with him against both Cuitlahuac and Panfilo de Narvaez to secure the conquest of Mexico.In the end the conquista was less Spain coming to do what they wanted with the indians and more two armies of underdogs expected to die fighting each other unifying to tell the largest empires in two continents to fuck off for a little while.
>>60202751Not a conqueror, but I would love to see Phemistocles as antagonist. He is my favourite politician of antique times, and it would be so cool to fight someone as cunning
>>60205614If it were well documented we'd know the majority of victims were eurasian gypsies as Himmler was unable to accept they were the real aryans and not his nordic fanfiction gary stus.
>>60205908Shorter combatants are better, taller sharpshooters are better.
>>60207150Why did you copy their weapons, tactics and fashion to gain independence if they were so foul?
>>60221697>(Soros is trying to finance a second referendum).Thiel will just have to switch to sucking adult Latino instead of Aryan baby blood for a couple of days to pay for the counter-referendum then, no? That´s how the libertarian market of ideas works.
>>60208158>Hitler nor the nazis never held such views senpai.Himmler did. Hard.
>>60203378Did it, and it works. His main achievement is an outright uncalled aggression.
>>60222642To be fair Himmler had a rough life.If you read his writings he basically viewed hitler and his ideals like they were the word of God.i mean to him, Hitler is this WW1 veteran who rose up from being a nothing artist to politician then fuhrer. He turned the failing german state into a world superpower and preached community, family, and strength.Its not hard to see why he was so loved, and who so many would do anything to expedite their vision.
>>60203383>>Turns a backwater nation into the terror of the continentMore like turns the terror of (this part of) the continent into a backwater nation. Charles was the well established power trying to keep his influence, his rival Peter was the new emerging power.
>>60203436He was hated even by spaniards, so yeah. Though he didn't really conquer much.
>>60219417Have your well deserved (you).
>>60222687not him, but the point is Himmler held such views, and made sure they came into fruition by the SS and the Gestapo, so even if the ones doing it didn't believe in it, they still did it
>>60207238Romance of the Three Kingdoms magic genius inventor wizard general Zhuge Liang would have either won everything, or been mysteriously thwarted by things that were TOTALLY NOT HIS FAULT like he was those five times in the book.Actual "Pretty clever bureaucrat/politician" Zhuge Liang? Probably executed by Liu Bei without a second thought.
>>60203526Belisarius was often outmanned but not always an underdog. Eastern roman military was clearly superior to that of the germanic kingdoms (and arguably better than that of the persians, at least in some areas). Your villain doesn't need a massive horde of shitty mooks, a fearsome elite force also works.
>>60203527Also the swedish do work very well as villains, since they got a fame of very ruthless cold killers. Even in the 30 years war, a conflict where everyone was pretty ruthless.
>>60206828The khwarezmian sultan was a central asian turk just like half of Genghis' army. Persian history after islam is basically about steppe nomads using your land as a battleground and ruining it with their constant wars among themselves.
>>60210118Yeah Democracy wasn't ever on the menu in Russia. The best you can hope for is "competent authoritarianism".
>>60222794Hell the 30 years war makes the spaniards almost look like the good guys.
>>60205159All four Rashidun Caliphs work great both as villains and heros.
>>60205365He also sent the danes against the HRE. Sweden was his B plan.
>>60218124I've read a translation of "The Records of the Grand Historian" dealing with the Qin. In that account the First Emperor seemed like he had his head more or less screwed on right. (To the extent that someone who says "I'm going to conquer China", and does so, can). At least in Sima Qian's account was the courtiers and the Second Emperor who shit the bed.
>>60222880That's just because Germans are pants on head retarded.
>>60222794Swedish army under Gustav and Charles X was mostly protestant German mercs sacking catholic German areas and Poland emptyCaroleans were bersekers though
>>60206566I love this dude but I dunno how the fuck he managed to lead... anything. They told me crazy fucks couldn't lead.
>>60222794Yeah, that's true. If you go further back in history you get even more feisty civil war stuff, with things that seem lifted straight out of Game of Thrones, such as the "Nyköping Banquet": King Birger's brothers, the dukes Valdemar and Eric, staged a coup against him in 1306. The danes and the norwegians interfered in the conflict and the result was a Sweden divided evenly between the three brothers. Only Birger wasn't taking that shit, so he waited for several years and eventually invited his brothers to the castle at Nyköping for a feast. Of course, this feast was only an excuse to get the two brothers seperated from their retinues and preferably in the same place. What happened was that the dukes were surrounded by the king and his crossbowmen, who revealed that he was out for revenge after their earlier betrayal. The king promptly imprisoned both of his brothers in the keep and allegedly threw the only key into the nearby stream. Not sure if they were then murdered or simply starved to death; but die they did.
>>60206822>Darius IIIWhat the fuck why. I can get Darius I, who was an usurper, a liar and an aggresor even if he was also a great leader. But why poor Darius III who manages to almost be an underdog figure despite outnumbering his enemy Alexander?
>>60202751He is part of the history now.
>>60207167>Poland was called the greedy hyenaBy who? And who the fuck uses a hyena as a metaphor and calls himself european?
>>60223095Who the fuck wears leopard skins and calls himself European?Oh wait.
>>60223095I guess butthurt Germans and LithuaniansThe first because of post-World War treaties, the second because of the Commonwealth's internal conflict
>>60223019If you say something with enough force and enough confidence you can get people to believe you. If you happen to have the kind of interpersonal skills to develop a rapport and tel people what they want to hear, that helps too. The right kind of crazy can actually help you be more convincing because you don't bother with "I thinks" and "I believes"... no, you are speaking the truth handed down from whatever personal and unique divinity has manifested from your brain sickness, and you are speaking it with a fervor and a certainty that will get people in the right context to take you seriously.
>>60223095Churchill >And now, when all of these benefits and all this aid has been lost and discarded, England, leading the France offers to guarantee the integrity of Poland — the same in Poland, which just six months ago with greed hyena appetite took part in the robbery and destruction of the Czechoslovak state.
>>60207793>betrays literally everyone to get into powerFranco would be a great villain indeed. Protagonists don't even need to be reds, just make them carlists or actual falangists.
>>60208158It's kind of interesting. If Hitler had confined himself to the gypsies, his memory would probably be on his way to rehabilitation in Europe by now. "Okay... yes, it was bad, but soviet union... and besides, he killed gypsies". (Seriously, ask a European about gypsies. Generally they either hate them like poison or, if they don't hate them, are themselves gypsies)
The basis for the greedy hyena quotes were mostly about Poland trying to restore Commonwealth border during and after Versailles. They actually won western Belarus and Ukraine against Soviet just before WW2
>>60208042Half the characters on this thread are not automatically thought as bad guys.
>>60208205Nobody liked blacks before the last decades of the XX century.
>>60202751>>60204347>>60218124>>60210648The chinese have always the craziest conquerers.My favorite: Zhang Xianzhong>The events surrounding Zhang Xianzhong's rule and afterwards devastated Sichuan, where he was said to have "engaged in one of the most hair-raising genocides in imperial history".Lurid stories of his killings and flayings were given in various accounts. According to Shu Bi (蜀碧), an 18th-century account of the massacre, after every slaughter, the heads were collected and placed in several big piles, while the hands were placed in other big piles, and the ears and noses in more piles, so that Zhang Xianzhong could keep count of his killings. In one incident, he is said to have organized an imperial examination ostensibly to recruit scholars for his administration, only to have all the candidates, which numbered many thousands, killed.In another, to give thanks for his recovery after an illness, he was said to have cut off the feet of many women. The severed feet were heaped in two piles with those of his favorite concubine, whose feet were unusually small, placed on top. These two piles of feet were then doused in oil and set alight to become what he called "heavenly candles".>He was reported to have ordered further massacres before he abandoned Chengdu in advance of the invading Manchus. The massacres, a subsequent famine and epidemic, attacks by tigers, as well as people fleeing from the turmoil and the invasion of the Manchus, resulted in a large-scale depopulation of Sichuan. The worst affected areas are believed to be Chengdu and its surrounding counties, and places on the path of Zhang's retreat from Chengdu to Shaanxi.
>>60202751The British AnCapsImperialist Drug Lords
>>60217824He was also an amateur dentist and loved remove teeth. He chased people to remove their teeth.
The Assyrians>I built a pillar over against his city gate, and I flayed all the chief men who had revolted, and I covered the pillar with their skins; some I walled up within the pillar, some I impaled upon the pillar on stakes, and others I bound to stakes round the about the pillar; many within the border of my own land I flayed, and I spread their skins upon the walls; and I cut off the limbs of the officers, of the royal officers who had rebelled. >Their men young and old I took prisoners. Of some I cut off their feet and hands; of others I cut off the ears noses and lips; of the young men's ears I made a heap; of the old men's heads I made a minaret. I exposed their heads as a trophy in front of their city. The male children and the female children I burned in flames; the city I destroyed, and consumed with fire.
>>60207793Stalin basically refused to see Barbarossa coming, even though he was warned.Soviet arms manufacturing at the start of the ivnasion was horribly underdeveloped, and were it not for the massive amount of lend-lease provided by the Americans they would have straight up lost, regardless of all the talk about "LOL NO INVADE RUSSIA ST00PID". That's straight from fucking Zhukov, and if you believe you have a better understanding of the military situation in Russia at the time, you may be delusional.>>60207836Norway AND Denmark. Denmark surrendered and was treated so well comparatively that it was known as the "Whipped cream front".>>60207838Napoleon started 1 war in his entire career, looted Italy, and commanded his soldiers during war. That compares favorably with literally every head of state in the coalitions.There are genuinely fucked up things you can pin on Napoleon, but the idea taht he was some kind of bellicose frothing psychopath is just fucking weird.The Brits burned down the capital of a neutral country for no fucking reason (THE ARCH MONARCHISTS MIGHT DECIDE TO SUPPORT A REPUBLICAN, THIS IS WHY THEY'VE PUT ALL THEIR SOLDIERS ON THE BORDER TO DEFEND AGAINST FRANCE, INSTEAD OF GETTING THEM READY TO REPEL US), started like 7 wars in the same period, looted entire continents, and the people in charge were even more rampantly narcissitic than Napoleon.Francis ran a foreign policy based on butthurt.Alexander I oversaw a systematic and delierate brain drain, was completely nuts and yelled conspiracy at his house plants while comitting a bit of ethnic cleansing and, together with his predecessor, had a deliberate policy of getting involved in as many wars as possible.Gustav IV's overthrow in the national day of Sweden for a reason.Ferdinand VII was the worst kind Spain has had, and in case anyone forgets they had a literal retard as a ruler.
>>60223360Heaven brings forth innumerable things to nurture man.Man has nothing good with which to recompense Heaven.Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill.
>>60219775An important thing about Toyotomi is that he was a fucking nobody before rising to power, unlike Nobunaga or Tokugawa.
>>60202751Ben Yusuf - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rCG5-7E7Ao
>>60219775>>60223427Yeah, Nobunaga was a guy who spent his entire life using Japan's Feudal System to shit on Japan's Feudal System, because he realized it had gotten to be awful at everything it tried to do. A shame he went toe-to-toe with Buddhism's PR department and lost, so it took Japan another three hundred years to get its head out of its ass and realize it couldn't play 'No Girls Allowed' and function.
>>60223415Also the fence-sitting king of Prussia who lost to Napoleon in 1 month when he finally decided to pick a side, then almost whore his wife out to Nappy
>>60223419What does that even mean? It sounds edgy as fuck, but what does it MEAN?
>>60222880Except the spaniards are very easy to make thea good guys everywhere but in the Americas. At least if you pick 16/17th century memes, not 20/21th century ones. Honorable, faithful, proud and brave as opposite to lazy party lovers who at best can be comical sidekicks.
>>60223002All armies in the 30 years war were mainly mercenary germans killing other germans.
>>60223110Well now that you mentioned it the leopard thing always looked too exotic to me. But well slavs gonna slav.The hyena thing just surprized me when other animals like vultures are available.
>>60223526The actual third stanza is probably "The spirits and gods are knowing, so reflect on this and examine yourselves", rather than Kill seven times.Basically live your life as if you're in debt to ineffable gods for the entirety of your existence, and try to repay the debt with things the gods approve of. Y'know, like an American with student loans.
>When the Danish nobility opposed his rule and refused to ratify his choice of Bogislaw IX, Duke of Pomerania as the next King of Denmark, King Eric left Denmark in response and took up permanent residence at Visborg Castle (built by him) in Gotland, apparently as a kind of a “royal strike”, which led to his deposition by the National Councils of Denmark and Sweden in 1439.>For ten years, King Eric lived on Gotland and made his living by piracy against the merchant trade in the Baltic.Being king sucks, let's be pirates.
>>60223379But I thought tea was also big on the Middle East and India? Was that caused by Brits?
>>60223379>>60223415I don't fucking know how the fuck the brits can be ever presented as the good guys or even sympathetic. In a world ruled by a nation that was born because brits were cunts.
>>60223655Vaguely makes sense. Though how in the 'changed' version, how does the kill x 7 relate to anything that came before it?
>>60223656He looks like he's from fucking Peru
>>60223808I assume it's close to the symbol/sound for "kill" seven times.They've a poem that's "shi" like two dozens times and it actually makes sense.
>>60223767Alfred the Great
>>60223954Literal who if it wasn't for anglophone domination of current globalism.
>>60203126Like him or not, Cortes was the underdog and he managed to overcome incredible odds both against natives and the expeditionary force sent to stop him. Underdogs tend to be more hero-like in my view.
>>60205365I love Richelieu. He's the perfect sort of questgiver NPC>Hands the party stuff that advances his and their goals alike>Motivation conflict and RP opportunity but still on the same side>Great connections and personal influence>Never takes center stage>Party can't afford to kill him
>>60224646This. Any spanish expedition in the New World is better approached as an adventure rather than an evil invasion, at least if you want a fun product. You need to ignore modern ethics, but people love viking adventurers so they should have no problem.
>>60225653>>60203126>>60224646That's basically every Rogue Trader game, if you make an conquistador adventure, I would recommend that the heroes meet a Gonzalo Guerrero-type of character, In 1511 a Spanish ship sunk off the coast of the Yucatan. Those who didn't die in the shipwreck or from thirst before reaching the coast were enslaved by the natives, sacrificed or worked to death, except for a friar, Gerónimo de Aguilar, and a soldier, Gonzalo Guerrero. Guerrero won his freedom after saving his owner from a crocodile, embraced Mayan culture and religion, and rose rapidly in rank until he married The Chief's Daughter. When Cortés passed through the place on his way to Mexico and offered the two men to join his army, Aguilar readily took the offer but Guerrero chose to stay with his wife and three children. By the beginning of Montejo's conquest of the Yucatan in 1528, Guerrero was the Nacom (General) of the army of Chetumal. Montejo tried to win Guerrero to his side but once again he refused, and instead led the Mayas to several victories using both Mayan surprise guerrilla tactics and Spanish anti-cavalry phallanx tactics that he had learned while serving in Italy decades before. He was killed in battle in Honduras in 1536, of an arquebus shot to the chest, but Montejo had to concede defeat and it was his son who finally managed to control Yucatan a decade later. >You need to ignore modern ethicsThat's required for any murderhobo, and makes every setting fun otherwise I wouldn't have that much fun in our modern Congo game.
>>60224646Conquistador campaings are always fun.
An entire thread of French schemers and no one mentioned Talleyrand?Shame on you.In a coflict with 3 sides he was on 7 of them, and betrayed every single one of them at least twice.