How would you go about building a hyper nationalistic...

They can't be nazis if they're pragmatic.

>muh let's spend all our resources on dumb dream projects and useless wunderwaffens!

Good, because it was dumb.

I've been working on that first part, it started out that they needed to go to war for water because of a drought. They won . Then after that the empire flourished as a super power because of their absurdly rich sources of ore for weapons of war. That led to a sort of Rome situation where now they're just riding the snowball effect of military victory and expanding like despotic cancer.

Now it's where the players come in and it's basically a WW1 scenario because two of the conquered countries are trying to wage war for Independence and they're backed by a Confederacy of enlightened or otherwise Democratic countries..

It just feels like I fucked up somewhere and it's boring or something. Maybe it needs more reasoning.

As for the emperor thing I guess what I meant was what should his tone be like? I have the trouble of kind of lumping all ruler figures in the same boring 'indifferent to you peasants' kind of thing. How do you make a ruler interesting, engaging and memorable without getting too chummy with the rabble?

>How would you go about building a hyper nationalistic, militaristic and pragmatic empire for your setting without stepping on too many cliches and evil memes?

Come on kid. Get your shit together.

The American government is THE ultimate douchebag country that's sort of good but also evil all at the same time depending on context and viewpoint.

He's a dude who is secure in his strength. He's clearly read up on all the PCs, and he knows their achievements and where best to employ them. He's also generous when it comes to rewards, because they do good work for him.

Also, he's a guy who has a good grasp of the grand scale of things. Like, he knows how shit is going to go down, and he's usually right. When he isn't, he accounts for eventualities.

Not to mention, he's physically vigorous. That's very important. A guy who is fat and slovenly doesn't inspire confidence.

A nazi is a nazi whether or not they are pragmatic. Hyper-nationalistic and militaristic is the definition of nazi

>A guy who is fat and slovenly doesn't inspire confidence.
Churchill was a fat drunk. And he inspired confidence.

Anything is possible if you don't dumpstat CHA.

Middle-American militias are nazis?

Yes.

That is literally false, you pop history child.

It's fantasy we're talking about, man. In fantasy, fat and slovenly = incompetent. It's why all the good people are sexy as hell.

Take a look at the Swedish "empire".

Religion and determinism is the way to go. Emperor being a young lad dressed as his soldiers.

In fantasy an obese man is actually really damn strong and leads his men personally.
Rest in peace Forlong.

Debates over the definition of nazi aside anyone hyper-nationalistic and militaristic is evil and are always going to seem like nazis.

Well, hypernationalism and militarism are the basic pillars of fascism.

Nazism is just fascism with more fairytales bolted onto it to make it more palatable for the dumb retarded masses.

Wrong

What would a government like this do with the people it conquered after winning a war?

It's a pragmatic empire right?

So they'd work like the Romans, or the Americans.

>yeah we conquered you
>now learn english/latin
>and go eat some hamburgers/pizza
>and let's go watch some movies/arena fights~!

Press them into service

Probably start out treating them as second-class citizens, then as they assimilated, give them more rights until they are fully assimilated and fully equal.

Religion was the other thing I was struggling with. I was just going off the pathfinder pantheon but didn't find anything too compelling other than Myketa. I've home brewed so many gods in my day and I have so much other stuff to prepare for the setting that I just can't be bothered atm. But I'll definitely look into that.

Murrica as a nation is far from being pragmatic.
Their corporations are who makes sure people integrate into the culture. Because conformist citizen is happy customer.

I'll give you militaristic, in the sense of jingoism. But don't give me that bollocks of supporting my nation and people first as evil. Why must a man support the needs of the foreigner over his neighbor and kin?

>Nationalism is inherently evil
It's sad that this is what the world is like these days.

Well it sure is a good thing op said nothing of the sort.

>hyper nationalistic
>pragmatic

huh?

All isms are evil.
If religion is the opium of the masses then ism is the cheap crack.

Make your rulers as machiavellian as you can get away with, only on a national level instead of a personal one.

A pragmatic empire is not hyper nationalistic, because excluding your conquered people from being useful to your empire is not pragmatic.

Make the object of devotion the state rather than a specific people or national heritage. Do the roman thing of citizenship through service; a conquered person who is useful to the state is more highly regarded than a native-born who is useless. A strong sense of "private-to-marshal" egalitarianism would also help.

Once this empire had a taste of expanding, they want to expand more and more, because they honestly believe their way of doing things is the correct way and the conquered people would be grateful to them. It works well for a but, but when some of the conquered are not grateful, they don't understand the resistance and become more and more brutal to "keep the peace".

Turians.

>hyper nationalistic
Just make them... well, nationalistic. The empire's citizens are incredibly proud of being citizens and having the privilege of dictating their own lives through the (semi-/faux-)republican system, as opposed to the savages around them who bow to kings and queens.

>militaristic
Conscription is seen as not only a duty, but the privilege of the citizen. To fight and die for the glory of the empire is not only a great honor, it is the greatest honor a free citizen can atain. For bonus points, make conscription a requirement for even the lowliest of political offices.

>pragmatic
Simply do whatever is neccessary. Pragmatic means "will lie, cheat and blackmail to achieve goals", not "will burn babies for fun".

Long story short: Franco-Roman Empire led by Napolius Bonaugustus.

Brazilian integralism was a fascist movement whose slogan was "union of all races and all peoples". Integralists should not discriminate, anyone could be one. That was more of an ideal than a reality. Anyway, the PCs can find a place no matter their race and class. And the integralist nation wouldn't actually comit atrocities just because someone has a funny acent.

Plus, its leader advocated a "revolution of the self". It was meant to lead toweards a greater relation with the integralist family, but sounds kinda enlightening, no? So even an evil PC may be included as long as his actions help the integralism. I believe recently conquered would be considered an "aprentice" underclass, undergoing this revolution of the self. The short cut is military service: if they are ready to fight and die for the nation, they are true citizens.

Unrelated to integralism, such a nation may be a necessary evil. Stalinism was at least as monstruous as nazism, but one needed the first to deal with the latter.

Have the leadership follow the philosophy of "antagonizing and ruling the the citizens with an iron thumb will only spark rebellion, so we'll be nice to our subjects and allies". You can keep them as very agressive and militaristic by basically giving the empire a "with us or without us" attitude, where it will demolish your city-state if you oppose it, but if you do follow their demands, it's very friendly and welcoming.

Just describe him as a "bear of a man", and have him very confident and charismatic. There.

Explain you confusion.

rome

Rome was in no way nationalistic.

Well you're first gonna want to decouple the nationalism from racism, that makes you automatically makes you evil.
You can be any race and worship whoever you want (unless you want a national religion), as long as you do your military service and support the nation.
this guy has the right idea, make citizens proud and the state worthy of adoration. Stand in the Nation's way and we'll kick your dick off.

>the great colonial powers
>Germany

Yes they where, they literally exported their culture to all their subjects.

Rome.
Duh.

Well they were a great power, and they did have colonies.
They just didn't have great colonies.

That is not what nationalism mean. Rome predated the (distinctly modern) phenomenon of nationalism by more than a millennium.

You named Germany as an example of what to do to brown people. What Germany did was beg France and Britain to allow it to have the spare brown people they themselves didn't want. And then lost them within a single lifetime of begging for them.

Seriously, out of all the (potential) superpowers to have ever existed, Germany is the most disappointing one of them all by a league and a mile.

I wasn't that person. I was just pointing out that their statement was semantically correct.

> what is Sparta, the post
> what is Nepal, the post
> what is Rome, the post
> what is WW2 era USA, Britain, Russia, and Japan, the post

>Romans
>pizza

I wouldn't call Britain and especially America militaristic. Remember: the only reason why Germany got as far as it did was because of America's insistence on NOT joining the war. They were perfectly content to watch mass slaughters and genocide happen as long as no Americans got hurt. Even Russia is kind of a stretch.

This really depends on the point in time you're talking about.
Once they had joined the war they were absolutely militaristic, because a nation cannot participate in total war without becoming militaristic.

That's literally not even true, you idiot.

I guess that also makes Finland militaristic for defending their own soil from foreign invasion? Or that Poland was militaristic? Silly definitions lead to silly outcomes. Most people use the term 'militaristic' to refer to nations, individuals or ideologies who specifically pursue warfare. Japan fits the bill because they were actively out to militarily carve themselves an Asian empire, not just defend themselves from a foreign threat.

> They were perfectly content to watch mass slaughters and genocide happen as long as no Americans got hurt
Are you talking about the one in Russia or the one in China, because death camps are a meme.

Good call. A country that gears into total-war mode is completely different from a militaristic country.

In fact, you can have a militaristic country with hardly an army.

Because militarism has nothing to do with the military. It's about the worship of the military of a country and/or the worship of warfare.

/n/ - News was a huge mistake. Containment has completely failed.

> Once they had joined the war they were absolutely militaristic

That's not true either, because right after WW2, the US demobilized everyone and was seeking a return to 1930's level of defense spending.

In 1947, the defense budget was 10% of 1945 levels, and only slightly higher than 1940. Most of that was just upkeep into the stuff that hasn't been mothballed in time.

The turning point was Korea, when the US realized that it would need a large standing army as one of 2 global hegemons. Modern US militarism is born after Desert Storm and shaped by the War on Terror.

>In fact, you can have a militaristic country with hardly an army.
I want to call that retarded, but then I remembered one of the countries involved in WW2 was a kingdom without a king led by an admiral without a navy. That country was landlocked Hungary, by the way.

>How would you go about building a hyper nationalistic, militaristic and pragmatic empire for your setting without stepping on too many cliches and evil memes?
Make them the good guys. They can be militaristic without being expansionist - they just hire mercenaries by the division, do peacekeeping missions, or fight back endless waves of "bad guys" (whether those are orcs, trollocs or something else). Or maybe the world is facing a dire threat which cannot be fought be heroes alone - only a unified humanity could withstand the threat.

That...makes no sense. Total war is the opposite of militarism. It's what happens when the military/warrior classes lose their special privileges and codes. Instead, the whole population gets involved, usually with civilian leadership.

Total war is arguably a social condition that only exists after the masses gain the power of political legitimacy.

>turians
>pragmatic

Sure Desolas,

What about pacifism, utilitarianism or skepticism? I don't think you know how words work.

>skepticism
lol
>pacifism
rofl
>utilitarianism
Pascal's mugging says it's time to genocide the bourgeosie. You're only buttressing his point, user. Maybe try pragmatism, consequentialism, or empiricsm next time. (is there an -ism for virtue ethics?)

You humans are all racist!

That's specieist!

>All isms are evil.
Yeah, we could be colonizing space right now if nobody believed in anything. Except the belief that no ideology or belief is better than another is also an ism!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indifferentism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apatheism
Like many popular one-liners, your cookie cutter morality easily collapses when put under even the slightest of pressure. As do all other forms of relativism, which is an -ism that actually makes your entire argument self-defeating.

>Pascal's mugging
>citing a thought experiment made up on a internet forum based on a complete misunderstanding of Pascal's wager
I'm not even a utilist but please, just stop.

Take standard historical european medieval empire, remove loyalty to the king, insert fanatic loyalty to the country, depending on the time when you want to play remove knights add what ever was standard for the time. You might also want to get rid of the cast system and replace it with something a bit diferent. Bam, done

>Nazism is just fascism with more fairytales bolted onto it to make it more palatable for the dumb retarded masses
No, nazism is just fascism with the race card added

>militarist
>nationalist

Remove feudalism and hype up a national identity.

My post was meant to be merely theoretical, philosophical, but it's nice knowing that it actually happened. Thanks mate.

That's what I said. Fairytales for the dumb retarded masses.

well they did have a lot of actuall fairytale bullshit, ever heard of the die glocke project? If hitelr was alive today he would brouse /x/

Ya think he'd cook up some good skinwalker stories with Will Shatner?

>Nazis
>Not the USA

Hitler had the glock? Shoulda got the deagle.

I thought being National Socialist was the definition of a Nazi.

The problem is that people don't realise that Hitler and his Nazis were SOCIALISTS.

The problem is that Americans don't realise that Hitler had all the socialists within the nazi party murdered in 1934 during the Night of the Long Knives.

After that, the nazis were only socialist in name.

National Socialism had about as much to do with Socialism as North Korea has to do with Democracy or China has to do with Republicanism.

Not today Antifa. Not today.

i think he'd be a very butthurt poster that would get angry if someone sugested he did not know shit

>Hitler
>socialist
I love it how americans dont know shit about political ideas. NatSoc was a mush up of extreme conservatism, marksim-leninism with outdated biological ideas and a bit of capitalism sprinkled on top. State owned dose not mean socialist. Hitlers rule did not abolish the market, neither did he want to do is, in fact entrepreneurs were fairly high in the system.The only reason why natsoc was called natsoc was because workers liked socialism and hitler was in need of their support

And a heavy dose of socialism. Controlled economy plus the government taking complete control over education, enacting directives "for the public good," and making the people dependent on them is socialism if I ever saw it.

The word you're looking for is totalitarianism, not socialism.

GET OUT OF HERE WITH YOUR FACTS AND LOGIC! You're gonna ruin the circlejerk!

>taking complete control over education
That's not socialism, that was standard for most european country at that point, while indeed this was mainly brought about thanks to the socialist, even very libertarian people in europe will tell you that education should be public because the market is not that good at giving people shit that cant be "consumed" by a single user and needs to be in one or other form shared
>enacting directives "for the public good,"
That's just dictator speak for "i want to do it and ill do it", anyone authoritarian from the right to the left dose this shit.
As i said, Hitler took many ideas from the bolsheviks, but most european socialist were on the libertarian side as far as personal freedom gose

Make the players a part of that Empire. Make the empire prosperous, safe, and progressive, but have the emblem of the Empire EVERYWHERE. Throw in references to the Emperor or the Empire in speech. "Emperor damn you!" Take parts of Roman ideology/politics, where military service is seen as a requirement for political office, and can elevate a poor commoner to a higher station. Reference disasters/crises in the past which took a heavy toll on their neighbours, but which careful pragmatism by the Empire allowed them to largely avoid.

Rome and the Imperium (40k) are good to draw from for this, I'd say.

Can't be self defeating when it ends in ism.

>hyper nationalistic, militaristic and pragmatic empire for your setting
Simple, the US-
>without stepping on too many cliches and evil memes?
- nevermind

>hyper nationalistic, militaristic and pragmatic empire
The swiss but as an empire ?

>National Socialism had about as much to do with Socialism as North Korea has to do with Democracy or China has to do with Republicanism.

Whenever I, as someone who grew up in a soviet satellite state, see someone say as stupid shit as this I feel like punching a baby.

It also tells me that the person who wrote this is one or more of the following things:
- From a 1st world country
- affluent middle class
- probably underage or in his edgy 18-year-old-socialism-actually-works-guys-fedora-phase
- socially inept
- probably a virgin

You see, cynically socialism/marxism/communism it is all the same shit but in a different glittery package and as prone to fascism and nationalism as legit national socialism. Obviously its not something you can ever admit to yourself because that would mean that you have something in common with those icky ''far righters'' .
Thank god your gender studies professors however omitted some of the facts about socialism/communism while preaching neo-marxism: The are as fond of totalitarianism and dictatorships as national socialism. You both rely on a FEINDBILD to spread your message across and rile up the masses about some perceived injustice, after all its easy to whip up people once you tell them they have someone else to blame for their misfortune.You both rely on the dehumanization of your FEINDBILD.

In socialism/communism you have the KLASSENKAMPF, the evil bourgeoisie stealing your money and the things you made from you the worker. Everything would be better if the fat-cats and factory-owners would be just robbed of their stuff and given to everyone else.

cont

In national socialism you have the evil outsiders/foreigners/immigrants aka the jews/the niggers/the Mexicans/the asians the FILL IN YOUR EVIL RACE OF THE WEEK HERE-thing that are stealing yer jerbs and living a better life than you do! Everything would be better if the foreigners and immigrants would be just kicked out and robbed of their stuff and given to everyone else.

And make no mistake, socialism/communism/marxism is also as prone to racism as natsoc when it suits their cause and they need someone to whip up the unwashed masses or distract from existing issues. In my country this was in 1968 after it became increasingly obvious that communism didnt work and people were starting realize how miserable things are so the politburo decided that they needed to bring out a new enemy out of the closet so they can give the people someone else to blame, in our case the jews, again.

The only difference between nazis and commies is that neo-marxism adapted. During the cold war and with the collapse of the Sowjet Union more and more crimes of the various communist regimes were coming to light so marxism took a good look at itself, saw that everyone associated it wit stalinism and with millions of people dying just like with natsoc and instead reinvented itself under the guise of INTERSECTIONALITY. KLASSENKAMPF was renamed to SOCIAL JUSTICE. The evil ''privileged white male'' is a thinly-veiled Biff the Understudy Stand-in for ''the bourgeoisie''.

Have them be the claimant successors to a recent (past couple hundred years) fallen empire of which their territory was a small part.

Give them rhetoric about restoring civilization and rekindling the empire.

Literally Rome, but through the eyes of a completely enfranchised Eques. Maybe tone down on the amount of crazy sex going on as well.