Communist revolution in dnd

We need more background.

Late medieval late renisance tech/social.

Yes, but its been a very unpopular opinion in more academic circles over the last few decades. Now its becoming mainstream to actually say in public that the Communist revolutions were morally bad, not simply hijacked by evil men.

Any ideology that requires a "transitional authoritarian state" to achieve isn't even worth considering

Start by posting more information or admit that this is a bait thread.

Every ideology that antecedes a democracy requires a transitional authoritarian state.

I am planning on useingredients the looming communist revolution as a problem for my campaign.

Setting is late medieval or early renisance. Nation is mostly agrarian.

King used to be the center of power but he was deposed by a previous Republican revolution.

The new Republic is trying to keep everything together but without the king nobody really respect their authority.

The Adventurers are from some Adventurers guild and they are right in the middle of all this.

Well one of the qualities that Marx described communism with was there being no government, and the main defining feature of socialism was workers owning the means of production which is largely why the whole "that isn't communism" line keeps being said. I mean they're still basically fantasy that wouldn't really work, but I don't think it's so crazy to point out they were just using a convenient sounding ideology

This is a really stupid diagram. How are authoritarianism and socialism separate and opposed? Socialism literally requires the state to seize private property.

As for the campaign question, the revolutions are violent, counter-reactionary, and always end in despotism. It should probably be a tragedy where the PC’s always lose, or win and become the despots themselves. Because they’ll be fighting other brutal revolutionaries who are more power-hungry or consider themselves more pure of ideology then the PCs.

There is more info now.

Renaissance user, it's latin based. My brain kerfloogled when i read your version. Im aware I'm on a spectrum

I got it from the Kaiserreich mod.

You need a reason why this is popular. Corrupt feudal lords?

Inform the players that all their treasures will be taken away and be redistributed. They will take care of the rest.

Technically you can't try communism, because the conditions for it don't exist and cannot be made to exist, so yeah, communism had never been tried.

>Democratic People's Republic of Korea
At least 2 of those 6 words are lies.
I don't see why we should believe they are communists because they say so.

As an introduction to the starvation rules.

Without at least a little industrialization and the rise classical liberalism it doesn't really make much sense for there to be any sort of significant communist notions, but if you just want some sort of "communist revolution aesthetic" it doesn't really matter one way or another I guess

>Communism
>not Socialism

Leave NKVD bootlicker NOW

>Doesn't make much sense
Why not?

What you are describing is the French revolution read up on that. Be sure to have neighbouring kingdoms freaking out over the "revolting peasants " hire the party to gather intelligence, rescue surviving arristos, commit sabotage. Eventually a military strong man will rise to prominence and impose order again

Because Marx's premise was basically a criticism of classical liberalism's concept that "a rising tide raises all boats" argument by pointing out that there's significant incentive for those with capitol to exploit labor (to get the most out of it). It's just sort of missing pieces if you leave what it's reacting to out

>french revolution
This. Communism requires the set precedent of privately owned property. In a traditional feudal system all property is owned by the monarch and distributed to their vassals.
A violent seizure of that property by 'the people' would be more in line with any classic uprising. If you wanted to give it a communist spin you would need a mouthpiece to espouse a shared state. With their 'party' doing the sharing.
Think 'general murder hippy.'

DAILY REMINDER that Leninism and all of its derivatives differ substantially from orthodox Marxist and ALSO that Lenin abolished the soviet worker's councils because he found dealing with them to be too difficult despite them being the basis for the Russian Revolution and even the name of the fucking country

THERE IS NOTHING SOCIALIST ABOUT LENINISM AND THERE'S ALMOST NOTHING MARXIST ABOUT IT. KGB PROPAGANDA, IRONICALLY HELPED BY THE CIA, HELPED CREATED THIS NOTION THAT SOMEHOW THE USSR WAS SOCIALIST/MARXIST POWER

It's a meme that authoritarianism and socialism are different and opposed

There is Libertarian-Socialism which Noam Chomsky claims to be and he seems like an intelligent man with some decency.

That explains a lot. Just so you know, while Kaiserreich is based of real world ideologies that once existed, like syndicalism was a thing, the modders took a lot of liberties concerning fleshing those ideologies out, to make a more interesting mod.

Like says, the ideology chart doesn't make that much sense for our world. It's handy for navigating Kaiserreich's world though.

And yet the only places where we saw socialism succeed were Russia, China and some parts of Africa. Precisely places that weren't free market capitalist societies but poor, agrarian and often pre-industrial. This was actually a great concern to the left wing useful idiots of the Frankfurter School: why did the revolution not come in the prosperous west, but the impoverished east? Why did the "slaves of the bourgeois" not rise up?

By making Marxism slightly less retarded and in a world where liberalism does not exist, it could work out as an alternative to feudalism.

>Daily reminder that my specific branch of communism has never been tried
Communards are entitled to only one form of state property: the steel of the guillotine.

How many people do you really think have ever read 'das kapital?'
You can't let yourself get triggered by memes comrade.

>Now its becoming mainstream to actually say in public that the Communist revolutions were morally bad
About fucking time. How many "successful socialist experiments" have to turn into nightmarish autocratic hellholes before academia finally admits its a godawful idea?

This is one of the reason why people say those things "aren't really communism" since they skipped major steps and outright contradict the premise in major ways, but I'm not saying that the particular region in question for this hypothetical game has to have these things. I'm saying at least one place in the game world would have to have to have these things for the ideology to pop up and eventually make its way there.

Northern Europe seems to be doing pretty good.

Socialism is fine and is honestly probably going to be required by the end of the century when our natural resources tap out and there is massive global migration from the southern hemisphere to the northern one. It's shitty derivatives of Marxism like Leninism, Maoism, and especially Stalinism that everyone hates because they weird doctrines developed by eccentrics who didn't really understand Marxism beyond a superficial reading. They were autocrats who just wanted to crack people's skulls in most cases more so than rectifying class inequality

Unless it's the dwarves. Hell, considering how protocapitalistic and lawful, it makes pretty much sense to have marx gimli or something.

>How should I handle a communist revolution in my dnd campaign?

What's your party like? Are they causing it or witnessing it? Custom setting? Level cap? Level of agricultural development? Availability of magical items? Availability of high level wizards?

>Ism the graph

What is this even supposed to represent? It's like someone thought they were deep because they drew a graph to include a bunch of shit they got by clicking Related Article in Wikipedia for 8 hours

IMF's pushing of neoclassical liberalism has collapsed most of South America, is collapsing the transitioning states in Southeast Europe and was directly to blame for the last two global economic crises, but the chumps who came up with the doctrine are still raking in Nobel prizes. Academia is impervious to reality.

All the examples you give failed miserably collapsing into various forms of military dictatorship.
You could argue that they fail precisely because they were so unsuited to the comunist model.

Don't have a party yet. I am planing. The revolution will happen as long as they don't do something crazy that stops it so observers / collaborators perhaps.

>This is one of the reason why people say those things "aren't really communism" since they skipped major steps and outright contradict the premise in major ways
So it's actually even worse: useful idiots are now arguing that something that has never actually been tested will totally work.

>Northern Europe seems to be doing pretty good.
Friendo, Northern Europe has some highest ease of doing business scores in the world and relatively low corporate taxes (lower than America for starters). And even disregarding that Scandinavia isn't the utopia many want you to believe it is (brusselsjournal.com/node/510).

>Socialism [...] is going to be required when our natural resources tap out
Of course it is. Because when there's nothing left, it's easier to redistribute that nothing.
>and there's massive global migration
Which is not something socialism solves. It only increases the demand for socialism as uneducated and low IQ third world migrants are loyal left voters (because they'd have to be literally retarded to not vote left: why *wouldn't* they vote for free stuff?).

>[Historical socialists] were just autocrats
Yeah, and the problem is that communist theory makes these autocrats necessary. Marx and Engels considered the dictatorship of the proletariat a necessary step towards the Soviet paradise, but never quite figured out how those with totalitarian power would just give that power away rather than finding new ways to perpetuate their power. That's the root problem with Marxism: it denies the existence of human nature, and replaces it with this idea of a malleable man. This is also why the stage of the dictatorship of the proletariat is paired with gulags, ie. "re-education camps".

Reminds me of Civ V policies funnily enough.

It's for a mod of a WW2 game (hearts of iron), set in alternate history where Germany won.

The entire mod has crazy shit like this, with various different kinds of fascists and communists all with different names. Other crazy shit in the mod include the Papacy in charge of modern day Italy and the USA falling into a 3 way civil war.

It's a fun mod, but the chart and the politics in the game should not have been used as a reference for political ideology.

>What is this even supposed to represent?
Kaiserreich's political divisions, or what would happen if Germany won WW1.

The liberals and socialists speak for themselves, but authoritarianism is supposed to replace fascism. They're arranged in a triangle to correspond with the three factions in the game: the Entente, the Commune Internationale and Germany & Friends (being stand-ins for the Allies, Comintern and Axis respectively).

Rather than being an entirely accurate political chart, the triangle is supposed to be centered around in-game mechanics. HoI 3 and DH allowed for multiple forms of liberal, socialist and authoritarian governments (unlike the dumbed down HoI 4).

What edition?

Give me some data here, man.

>Kaiserreich
It's in vanilla Hearts of Iron as well.

5th edition it's what I have on hand

>with various different kinds of fascists and communists
I think because Germany won, fascism never exists in Kaiserreich. Strasserism and Totalism are instead deemed ultra-authoritarian forms of socialism (totalism being the ideology of Mosley and Mussolini).

Pretty sure starvation and genocides are overdone enough that you shouldn't need help coming up with ideas.

Like in real life. Massive kill off of the local population, divided groups of people being exploited and played against each other. Massive hypocrisy, massive social collapse, exploitation of the natural resources. Selling out to foreign (Jewish or expy thereof) interests at the expense of your local people. Obvious, but denied social strata. Slavery, restriction of personal liberties. Old revolutionaries regretting what they ushered in. Children betraying their parents. Every horrible social aspect of humanity you can imagine. Your adventures will obviously have fun navigating these hazards like any tricky or risky situation. Might not enjoy LIVING in them, however.

I know, but the monarchists and paternal autocrats fulfill the same function as fascists and the syndacalists the same function as communists. They are different ideologies, but functionally in the game they are the same. it's like this guy says, it's about recreating the factions, not necessarily realistic ideologies.

With free rides in magitek helicopters

>Socialism is fine
No, it isn't.

There's nothing more retarded than introducing anachronistic ideologies in medieval settings. You should feel ashamed of yourself, hack.

>I want to introduce Communism in my typical feudal d&d.
>nobody has ever heard of concepts such as industry and working classes.

It's better than late stage capitalism. Maybe capitalism worked better for our fathers and grandfathers but it's not for us. Do you really want to live in a weird technocratic fiefdom where everyone codes enforced by drones?

>libertarian-socialism
Pfft what a meme. When you let people do what ever they want, but also give them massive handouts, you basically subsidize the least productive parts of society and unhealthy behavior.

There's a reason all of the cultural vanguard shit got stamped out of the USSR in the 20's.

It's called the magocracy. Welcome to post-scarcity. No need for farmers, money or anything. Golems do all the work. Mages summon gold and food out of nothing. There's no need for commerce and anything you are too lazy to make yourself, can be teleported from the source.

The only victims of Communism are the Third Reich and Laika the Dog
Get your revisionist bullshit out of here

>t. white bourgeoise westerner

>bootlicker
This insult always feels like it has sexual undertones to it

Because it does. Anyone who worships authority deep down is a filthy sub

Yeah, It would be much better if the government own the drones

Stateless socialism is literally impossible

>All I know about communism is those alarming articles on the internet saying it's bad and dictatorial and morally wrong
Please. At least use the valid criticism that can be made to Marxists theories, such as failing to see the world is made of things other than factory workers, or not imagining for one second that capitalism could try to adapt to its own flaws and last longer.
Marx had a very interesting world view that many people refuse to see because of morality. It's a very materialistic world view and there are reasons it was and somewhat is such a prominent ideology. It doesn't mean communism isn't a shitty system in so many ways, but the criticism you find on the internet are laughable.

Get a real job fagget.

>Implying it wouldn't help people to stop behaving like retards

>mapping four dimensions of politics onto a 2d plane
>not only that, but a 2d triangle
:3

>Because it does. Anyone who worships authority deep down is a filthy sub
Please talk dirty to me some more

Yeah how stupid that user is not wanting power to be in the hands of unaccountable private entities

>5th edition it's what I have on hand
OK.

The revolution's lead by 8 Level 15 Aasimar Favoured Souls of Leira with Actor feat and the Persuasion and Intimidation proficiency.

Below them are 16 Level 10 Warlocks fluffed as drawing their power from the leaders.

The revolution will occur as the result of some LN deity doing [thing] to the weather which results in famine, causing our 8 friends to undergo radical changes (they were all seemingly normal humans before) and seek to FIX the world.

Since the 'model' communist revolution is Russia I suggest having the emperor they overthrow be a high level cleric whose average overstretched the boundaries of what the universe coul've sustained.

And that's where the charismatic chosen people come in.

You'll want them to primarily focus on rich lords at first. Ideally those of ill repute.

Then progress into more and more excessive violence as the already punished land becomes increasingly deracinated and destitute.

Hey, don't generalize. I don't worship authority.

It totally does.

Are you talking about some sort of kabbalah wallah prophecy? Stop reading that flim flam.

>At least use the valid criticism that can be made to Marxists theories
Are you implying the dictatorship of the proletariat isn't part of communist history (or futurism)? The fact that the way to the workers paradise includes a stage of totalitarianism no communist society has ever escaped from should be seen as alarming.

It's disgusting that it's deemed socially acceptable to argue in favor of totalitarianism as long as it's left wing totalitarianism.

What style of society do you have in your d&d campaign? A successful commie revolution usually works as an alliance of urban workers and agrarian workers. So generally there's industrialism, large dispossessed industrial workers with high unemployment and a large landowning class who controls the countrysides.

If it's a renaissance or even middle ages sort of setup where nobility have actual power, there's no industrial production or urbanism to speak of; the most you would have would be peasant revolts in the style of the radical reformation. Think anti-nobility but also fighting against the creation of private ownership and back to communal ownership of villages, that sort of thing. Big thing you can play with is the transformation of peasantry from having a feudal relationship with their lord to becoming essentially sharecroppers on their lords land.

If it's the early modern style society that most d&d has"What with its weak nobles, developed trade system, private property rights, etc." then a radical revolution would be ushering in capitalism. A lot of merchants fighting for equal rights to property ownership, getting rid of tarriffs, etc. You could look at the hanseatic league if you want a real early example of this to the american revolution to even the french revolution. If you have a frontier like most d&d settings do, you could always play up the role of yeoman farmers and settlers in wanting to smash post-feudal land control.
Soviets in d&d land isn't feasible and won't make a whole lot of sense. Luckily, there are a lot of interesting routes you can still take with the idea of class based revolutions.

t~ actual marxist

>Stop reading that flim flam
What?
>Are you talking about some sort of kabbalah wallah prophecy?
It's D&D, prophecies are somewhat common.

I guess what he is saying is that we have never seen a socialist democracy.

Mass combat rules (not the ua, Google it)
Party could try to kill the king, go around helping villages and convincing people to join the cause. Preventing assassination attempts in the leader of the revolt.
Negotiating conflicts between different soviets

Or if they're on the other side, the inverse of everything I said

>late stage capitalism

Holy shit, you know nothing about economics. Read some economic theory by economists who have actually been right about something, then graduate from your worthless degree, stop posting in Reddit echo chambers, and work a real job long enough to understand that anyone advocating socialism understands zero about real world economies or the behavior of humans in those economies.

Make sure you end up killing 60 million people in your world and destroying any semblance of an economy.

I would be terrified of giving the masses that much power. Look at all the lunacy happening right now. Democracy is out of control.

The people have no right to control what they don't understand.

Dictatorship was meant in a different sense. One class fighting and suppressing another. Marx didn't mean autocracy.

I don't see why we should believe they aren't because you say they aren't.

>Reducing population growth through birth control is mass starvation
That's literally what those claims are based on

Why did God invent economists? To make weathermen feel good about themselves.

people want to use violence to achieve some ends, but have no idea what those ends are.

Except Meteorology is an actual science. Economics is not.

and in the rare instances they know what those ends are, they never have any definite plan to implement those ends.

You are literally the dumbest person I've ever seen.