Is anime the worst thing that happen to roleplaying?

Is anime the worst thing that happen to roleplaying?

Every group has atleast one "that guy". The guy that just got done watching bleach and now argues why he should be able to wall run wile duel wielding. It seens like watching too much anime disconnects people from what is realistic. Even modern d&d seems to be catering more and more to these people.

DnD was never realistic, you colossal nerd.

No, Monty Python and the Holy Grail was.

Rolled 17 (1d20)

>It seens like watching too much anime disconnects people from what is realistic
I roll to cut in a milion pieces this dragon using my Kakuretsu, ultimate art of the ice burning dark blade.

Objectively? Probably MMORPGs and video games in general

This.

To answer your question, Anime is the best thing to ever happen to roleplaying games.

The rest of your post is unsubstantiated opinion based on personal anecdotal evidence at best.

>The guy that just got done watching bleach and now argues why he should be able to wall run wile duel wielding. It seens like watching too much anime disconnects people from what is realistic.
I think you have causation backwards there.
A lot of anime is very good at catering to basic power (and sex) fantasies, but it didn't create those desires in the first place. If "that guy" never watched any anime, they'd just lift their cringey bullshit from some other source.

>Every group has atleast one "that guy". The guy that just got done watching bleach and now argues why he should be able to wall run wile duel wielding
I have never seen this.

I do however have grievances with some anime:
-Perpetuation of the "all weapons are either 200lb metal slabs or useless toys" meme.
-Pushing the idea of "adventuring" or "heroism" as a day job. This cheapens the whole concept and has done roleplaying a great disservice.
-Drowning character designs in belt-buckles instead of doing research into what sensible equipment actually looks like


On the other hand, I love the idea of showing mercy to enemies and making them into friends, and the way that some animes (rouroni kenshin and jojo come to mind) seem to promote that.

>-Perpetuation of the "all weapons are either 200lb metal slabs or useless toys" meme.

You really don't understand this.

>-Pushing the idea of "adventuring" or "heroism" as a day job. This cheapens the whole concept and has done roleplaying a great disservice.

You REALLY don't understand this and when it's used.

>Drowning character designs in belt-buckles instead of doing research into what sensible equipment actually looks like

This is actually more of a problem with western comics, thanks to artists like Liefeld. You can see this also with artists like Wayne Reynolds. In anime, characters are actually kept pretty streamlined out of necessity, and even the Japanese laugh at overdesigned characters.

I've seen more people ruin games because of "muh realism" than people who have ruined games because of anime influences.

Hell, I don't even like anime or manga all that much but I'm not going to blow a gasket just because someone drew parallels between bull's strength and kaioken or some shit.

>you don't understand oversized weapons or adventurer-guilds
So what am I missing?

I know Guts meant to be unique and superhumanly powerful, while the hero organizations in OPM and goblin slayer are meant as satire of MMOs. So what am I not getting?

whoops, pic for ants

Here's your (You)

And in the past they would have been Gor fans. Win some, lose som

So, basically, you're trying to publicly hate on things you think the group hates, in order to feel like you belong?

Look at him. Look at him and laugh.

You seem to lack the basic understanding of very simple ideas that would lead to those ideas being reasonable and practical.

Things like "If people are ridiculously strong, large weapons DO make sense" and "Organized guilds are an inevitability of any group that becomes sufficiently large."

If you don't understand basic things like this yet, it seems like you've got some sort of mental block built largely from your personal tastes, and even worse you associate things like the latter with anime when there's been things like "Hero's Guilds" all the way back to the time of King Arthur.

Nah, that distinction goes to intersectionalist feminism. But then again, due to its intersectional nature it's the worst thing to have ever happened to anything, from comics to science.

>Every group has atleast one "that guy". The guy that just got done watching bleach and now argues why he should be able to wall run wile duel wielding.
It would help balance casters and non-casters, at least.

>it's the worst thing to have ever happened to anything, from comics to science.
You're the reason MRA's aren't taken seriously.

Au contraire: if MRA were taken seriously, I wouldn't have the opinions I have right now. This is why I actively disassociate myself from them: not because I think they're the womanhating shitlords feminists think they are, but because they're well intending fools who think women are willing to cooperate with men to improve their condition.

Winner winner, chicken dinner.

t. That guy

Nice argument.

Wow, what an excellent rebuttal.

/s

I literally don't know what the fuck you're saying.

>I hate all heterocultural elments with a passion

No, user, YOU are the worst thing that happened to roleplay. Guys that only read, watch and play standard fantasy, resulting in continuious circlejerks and dumbed down settings.
Go take some scandinavian history classes, or read The death of King Tsongor/Death of an Ancient King, and try to play something based on it, that will leave you a better player.

Weaboos retards are annoying too, but I haven't seen one since I left highschool, so...

>OPM hero organization.
>Satire of MMOs.

Isn't what he's saying showing a clear understanding though?
It seems like he's trying to say he hates that people try to translate those topics into everything, as opposed to appropriate settings, whereas your argument as to why he doesn't understand it is "It makes sense when used with the appropriate setting."

He seems to only understand enough to get upset, and the idea that guilds only belong in MMO satire is so far removed from the truth that it really only shows contempt for the idea rather than any appreciation of it. Hell, OPM is more of a satire of the Justice League than any MMO, and Goblin King has roots in games like Dragon Quest and Wizardry which precede MMO's by decades.

And "Guts is strong" doesn't really say anything worth noting about oversized weapons. It ignores basic things like a correlation between size and durability, size and effectiveness against larger monsters, and any of the hundreds of other simple justifications for large weapons. Requiring obscene strength is just the base that enables it, without really appreciating what makes them so prevalent.

Most of isikai-shit has roots in dragon quest but it's since been mangled and divorced from it's source, One punch-man works because it doesn't take itself seriously

Really, it's more of a satire of government positions (with the fact that, with the exception of S-ranks, one's position in the organization is really more of a matter of internal politics and having a good-looking workload than anything actually important).

>but it's since been mangled and divorced from it's source

You mean D&D?

Dragon Quest (and Final Fantasy) both have roots from Wizardry, which was unabashedly a love letter to D&D and one of the first attempts to turn the tabletop game into a computer game.

To get upset about adventuring guilds for having "done roleplaying a great disservice", and trying to blame anime for them, is failing to appreciate that adventuring guilds started with roleplaying games to begin with.

What some people find upsetting is that it's divorced from legends and stories where there's only a single chosen band of heroes, but that's just a different style of story. "Hero guilds" are equally prevalent in both western and eastern media, and are just the result of worlds where hero-type characters are more numerous.

Adventuring being a "day job" started back when D&D slowly shifted from a medieval fantasy game with skirmish-size armies, complete with hired mercenaries. When the game reduced the scale down to bands of a handful of people, the mercenary aspect for some characters remained. Don't like it and prefer more Destiny-driven heroic characters not simply out to get a paycheck? That's great. But, blaming anime for that is silly, especially when there's settings like Eberron that likewise take the approach of "what if the conventions of D&D were extrapolated to their ultimate conclusions"?

Does the world have a lot of adventurers? Expect some form of an adventurer's guild.

>Does the world have a lot of adventurers? Expect some form of an adventurer's guild.

Implying that any setting which is sufficiently organized to have "adventurer's guilds" wouldn't just absorb them into the regular state apparatus and not let superpowered people wander around with only the most tenuous control over them.

Kys weeb faggot

>big weapons make sense in the hands of stronk characters
Yeah sure, and so does slashing like a mad retard and turning the fucking fight into basically a fucking easy dodge for the opponent

Anime, like any other medium, ruins things if crappy people pick it up.

Clearly, crappy people are the problem, rather than anime.

>Is anime the worst thing that happen to roleplaying?
I think alignments were probably the worst. Followed by class based systems.

> regular state apparatus

You've made several assumptions, including that guilds are not part of the regular state apparatus. Most large guilds are in some form or function run or endorsed by the state. Even ones like the Justice League or teams like the Avengers have government backing, and most video-game ones are ultimately controlled by some king.

Are you that idiot who kept making those Adventure Guild threads just for people to explain to you that you really didn't understand them? I hope not, because that guy never learned his lesson despite dozens of people repeatedly explaining simple things like what I just explained to you.

The fucking isekai autist is back.
Bait thread succesful i guess.

You just made another heap of assumptions. Are you trying to figure out how wrong you can be in as few words as possible? You're doing a great job if that's the case.

I don't like heavy anime games but you sound way worse to play with than the fags you're describing

see

Because wallrunning and dual wielding are absent from all media beside anime, right?

Loonies will be loonies no matter what media they consume. How about you just leave or kick them out if you don't like playing with them?

I don't think anime really had all that much impact on roleplaying games. RPGs definitely had an influence on some anime, but the best thing to ever happen to roleplaying games remains Adventure Serials.

>TFW the That Guy in your first game hated anime but tried to play "Totally not Drizzit" in every single fucking game, regardless of setting.

I dunno what people you play with but I've literally never had that problem. The problem I have is people who want to use hit locations and martial techniques because they're a bunch of fuckin' HEMAfags who want to show off their complete and in-depth knowledge about fighting when they've never even picked up a sword in my high-fantasy adventure where each fight is set-up like a puzzle with multiple answers.

You are aware that guilds existed in real life and were generally state-backed, right?

Nah, video games have done far more damage than anime has.
>GMs running totally on-rails campaigns because that's how video games do it
>players who just follow the rails because there's nothing off them in video games
>players who don't have personalities or backstories for their characters because these don't matter in video games
>players who think their characters should be able to carry five sets of full plate without issue
>players who aren't prepared to do anything outside of combat because most video games don't have anything outside of combat
>players who think MMO rules apply to tabletop RPGs, thinking they need a dedicated healer who doesn't do anything else and a "tank" who enemies are somehow obligated to attack despite having less armored and more dangerous options
And these are just the things that come immediately to mind.

Oh, and another thing:
>players who can't even go a full session without video games, and are playing on their phones/another monitor when it isn't their turns

No, playing D&D disconects people of what's realistic

Actually god bless Anime, thanks to it there's a movement of people who don't drink the "caster supremacy" koolaid and instead are into mythical warriors doing supernatural shit.

>Anime invented helenic heroes, norse heroes, celt heros, Indian heroes and a long, etc
Yep, antiweebs are worse than weebs

No. Theworst things that have happened to roleplaying are video games and SJWs.

Dude, that's an MRA. You're an MRA. Rejoice, you've found a group. What you thought were MRAs are merely feminists or egalitarians.

I think the worst thing to happen to roleplay is nerd culture and nerdy people in general. But you could argue that this is also what saved it from becoming extinct.

TTRPGs should be played by normie kids/teens to have flights of fantasy while socializing. As the manual says, it's playing pretend.

But now they have been appropriated by a specific subset of people who are probably the least fit to play. My worst experiences with D&D are not due to people belonging to a specific fandom as much as their being obnoxious, annoying autists.

Oc.
Otherwise, who would have killed the monsters ?
I know also that super hero comics and isekai are truly the best litterature, since its historical. And its not at all for complete retards with shitty taste. Nope.Hey, major in history here, i can tell you everything about Louis XVI adventurer guild and how they fought the orcs during the french revolution.

You're a blast at parties aren't ya?

>Being this retarded
The Glazier's guild. The Butcher's Guild. The Guild of Stonemasons (which eventually became the Freemasons). The Woodcutter's Guild. Actual fucking mercenary guilds, such as Landsknecht companies (aka "Bravarian Blackwater"). Did you think the word "guild" was invented by the guys who made Neverwinter Nights?

I'm definitely not an expert on the system, but can't a shadowrun adept do exactly that (even though dual wielding is kinda useless in SR)?

Yep, you are right.
People are always eager to learn about tales of bravery and loot.
Did you know that the crusades ended because there was a lich in Jerusalem catacombs and they couldnt find its philactery ? Many party wipe, i tell you.
Fortunatly, the local arab branch of the adventurer guild took care of the problem, but archives are incomplete and nobody knows.

>Most large guilds are in some form or function run or endorsed by the state.
Which is a long way away from being directly controlled by some government apparatus. Every stock trade in the USA is at least theoretically overseen by the SEC. The U.S. government does not control all stock trading.

No government that has the level of control you're talking about would give operational freedom to "adventurers" to go out and kick butt the way that they do in an RPG with only the most vague of oversight.

Oc not. These didnt exist. There was only one real guild, the glorious adventurer guild, with offices in every town in case monsters respawned ( they tend to do that).
A clever system of rank allowed them to attribute quests per difficulty. Quite witty of them.

Arabs back then had the highest amount of sages used their algebraic formulae to solve for death.

God, you found the lost tome !
I was sure of my theory and nobody believed me. I told them its was surely a mathematical logic loop but they said its was retarded.
I am so happy.
Thank you user. The adventurer history department owe you one.

>people defending adventurer's guilds again
Hey, you know what would've made Lord of the Rings better? If instead of a purposeful and exciting journey, it were about people hanging around a town doing menial tasks for money!

Isn't your entire argument a paradox?

Either guild is too strong for the government to do anything except nominally back it and support it, or the government is strong enough to control it. It's pretty straightforward, and it seems like the idea that governments lack the resources to do much more than police deliberate lawbreakers is a pretty common assumption. These are not volunteer soldiers or drafted rank-and-file, so its ridiculous to assume that anyone would be able to enforce something like military standards of discipline.

What's with your whole "The government will obviously be antagonistic towards a guild of any sort"? You act like our cities aren't firmly in the hands of unions, and they don't even have any super powers.

For every reason against guilds, there's a reason for them. It really all just comes down to circumstances of history and necessity.

I have never had that guy. Maybe you should just stop playing games with that guy.

Well, yes. The middle earth adventurer guild would have gathered their rank S and A druids to summon the eagles, ride them straight to mount doom and drop the stuff into the volcano.
Its quite obvious. But the film would last 15 minutes instead of a trilogy.
More money at the cost of historical accuracy.

God, you're a bitter cunt, aren't you?

It's almost like different settings have different tones or something fucking crazy right!

I have a hard time believing that there are two types of people here and the majority of the more obnoxious weebs aren't the same people who get uptight about realism.

I don't think there are that many players over the age of 17 who can't see why over the top anime logic doesn't work in fantasy game settings. Hell, they go and setup "anime" themed games where a game is made around the concept of anime logic, so if someone wants to punch a meteor back into space they can.

Op's "that guy" is probably not that bad, and likely watches attack on titan not bleach. He's probably annoying, but not every group has someone like him. The "realism" fags are everywhere though.

> doing menial tasks for money!
Are you saying this can't lead to character development or potential excitement?

OP, I could spend time dismantling your warped and horribly wrong views that have little basis in reality or logical thought, but instead I'll just say that you're a fucking idiot and move onto a better thread.

No, it's not, because you have to examine the entire phenomenon that leads to "adventurers" in the first place. If we define adventurers as

>Career mercenaries who tend to fight in small bands numbering in the single digits and specializing in threats that are "abnormal", such as monsters or other paranormal individuals.

then what would produce a society where you can have people who do this sort of thing for a living? Presumably, such threats are present and persistent enough to keep a regular demand for their services, and are intense enough that the adventurers themselves don't make enough of a headway that they eliminate their own demand by removing all of the monsters and other supernal threats.

But if you have a setting in which such dangers like dragons are omnipresent, do you really think you can have a recognizeable "separate" government anyway? One built on westphalian notions of monopoly of organized violence? I can't imagine too many states staying stable when ogre rampages and illihtid attacks and whatever else are regular enough occurrences that not only do you need constant bands of mercenaries, but you actually have business organizations for them.

Put simply, if there's enough of an organizational capacity to form the guild in the first place, why hasn't there been a government that was ready and able to stamp out the problem such that you don't need adventurers to deal with it? And once there is one, why all the adventurers? I mean, yes, maybe you could have a setting where the government of whatever area started off as a band of "adventurers" and their followers and accreted a state around them, but when you look at other Filibuster style states, they don't stay as (quasi) military organizations for long.


1/2

Somewhat unrelated, but LotR would make an absolute dogshit RPG game. It's a railroady as fuck adventure full of GM fiat-level plot advancements with a main character who never wants to be part of it. The DMPC carries the party through half the story, and ruins any weight his death would have by coming back stronger. There is an autistic level of worldbuilding, but virtually none of it is relevant to the story at hand.

Nah. Never. Adventurer guild is serious business for intelligent people. I have the sacred duty to defend this clever idea and oppose those who dare to defile it with logic of facts.
Very serious business indeed.
Trust me, i am on duty and nothing will escape my vigilance.

>What's with your whole "The government will obviously be antagonistic towards a guild of any sort"?
I might not have stated this clearly. Governments will obviously by antagonistic to anything that threatens their monopoly on organized violence. And not only are we talking about a guild of mercenaries, we're talking about one where depending on setting, you might have individuals within said guild that by themsleves can pose an existential threat to civilization, nevermind the guild itself turning against them. States ARE historically hostile to the notion of private armies, and almost always do whatever they can to weaken or eliminate them. Making something that is exponentially more dangerous than any real life private army alongside a conventional state is horrifically unstable.

>realistic

Do cockroaches suffer from cancer? I was under the impression that they had some kind biology magic that made them practically immune to it, like sharks.

such is the power of stale memes

The popes (or papal candidates) themselves and every noble you could think of (giants like Cesare Borgia) used condottieri, which were mercenaries. The usage of these companies spans a period of almost half a millennium.

Actually, in Paris, there was a race of roaches or other vermin, who ate cigs. And once smoking was prohibited, they starved and disappear. A genocide my man, for the puny excuse of public health.
I wish druids existed to punish that horrible crime.

>not just letting people play whatever style of campaign they want and politely letting the weeb know that it's not the game for him

do you even fucking talk to people?

>And not only are we talking about a guild of mercenaries

But very similar to them. And, depending on the setting, that might really be all they are.

>you might have individuals within said guild that by themsleves can pose an existential threat to civilization

And what kind of retarded government would think antagonizing or trying to rigidly police these kind of people would be a smart idea?

Very likely, the guild will come into being to serve as a liason between the government and the adventurers, to maintain peace between two factions that could very easily destroy civilization if they came into conflict. Adventurers can very well end up the kind of people that can only be policed by other adventurers, making a good relation with adventurers a vital necessity.

Unstable? If most adventurers agree working with the government is more agreeable than opposing it, than that's rather stable. And, if the government wants to try and restrict their freedoms beyond basic law enforcement, than it quickly becomes unagreeable.

You should read DM of the Ring

Yeah. Mercenaries. A meme. A conveniant excuse to purge adventurers outside of history books. Everyone was jealous of their influence, their offices with merchants and teleporters, to dell loot and move with strategic efficiency, and prefered the tale of like minded soldiers that selled their swords for money.
Like it could happen.
No, the truth is that high level fighters, druids and monks, and many other classes, built a insane network. And everybody hated them for that. They preferred the payroll of the guild to their gods, their people, their ideals. And were punished for it.
What a sad story. Even their leader, an unamed japanese student with a rare skill could not prevent the destruction.

>But very similar to them. And, depending on the setting, that might really be all they are.
And such guilds were often extraordinarily straitly controlled, and wouldn't have individual members taking their own individual missions when they felt like it, offered by whomever. They also had a tendency to be obliterated or expropriated at a moment's notice, a la the Knights Templar.

>And what kind of retarded government would think antagonizing or trying to rigidly police these kind of people would be a smart idea?
user, if you have a setting like this where you do have those kinds of superpowered people, the idea of having any organized government beyond small fiefs of god-kings ruled by the local superbeing becomes largely untenable.

>Adventurers can very well end up the kind of people that can only be policed by other adventurers, making a good relation with adventurers a vital necessity.
And if that's the case, YOU WON'T HAVE A GOVERNMENT. Why should there be one? It after all, can't police either the adventurers or the sorts of threats that need adventurers to solve. Why would Joe the farmer pay his taxes to King Whathisface, who after all, can't do shit to help him when a dragon sweeps through, instead of the local adventurer, who might?

>Unstable? If most adventurers agree working with the government is more agreeable than opposing it, than that's rather stable. And, if the government wants to try and restrict their freedoms beyond basic law enforcement, than it quickly becomes unagreeable.
Then the adventurers ARE the government. There is no external one; since after all, they can topple the government but apparently not the reverse.

The fuck are you rambling about? Are you on drugs?

The tragedy of the condottieri, these mercenaries you call a meme but were widespread from roughly the 13th to the 17 century, was this: they won battle after battle for their employers much like tabletop bands, only to find themselves banished, imprisoned or executed. It wasn't that they were ungrateful. The problem was that there were plenty of others just as willing and able as they were. They were expendable. The older veterans gained power themselves and asked for more money for their services. Better to do away with them, and hire a younger, cheaper mercenary.

Ok, just for you, i get out of irony trip.
Mercenaries are awesome. Tragic. Powerful. Horrible. And real.
I love them and they make great PC.
They are the soldier of fortune, the real men.
They are awesome. I tell you. Sometimes disgusting, sometimes heroic.
I just make fun of retards with bad mmo/ manga deliriums who are a desease to rpg.

>Why would Joe the farmer pay his taxes to King Whathisface, who after all, can't do shit to help him when a dragon sweeps through, instead of the local adventurer, who might?

Because the King handles things like maintaining roads and maintaining daily order and peace? The king might also be the biggest adventurer, and he definitely has some in his pay.

>Then the adventurers ARE the government.

Killing rats in basements does not make you the ideal choice for deciding things like water usage rights, negotiating with foreign powers, organizing and officiating colleges, or mustering and running armies. Governments do a lot more than just take care of monsters and bandits.

Well, also that you didn't want a mercenary group *too* successful on your hands. They might pull something akin to what Francesco Sforza pulled off in Milan, and whomever's in charge at the moment wants to avoid something like that at all costs.

Uh alright dude, good luck with that

>Adventurer guilds are bad.

>Because the King handles things like maintaining roads and maintaining daily order and peace?
How, when he can't institute a monopoly of violence? We have a name for political institutions like that. They're called "failed states", and they usually don't actually handle things like maintaining daily order or infrastructure very well.

>The king might also be the biggest adventurer, and he definitely has some in his pay.
So, in other words, it comes down to rule by the individual with the most personal power. That is not a stable system for any sort of government, and you're likely to see a world akin to a Mad Max movie.

>Killing rats in basements
Adventurers of this caliber are not "the kind of people that can only be policed by other adventurers", user. Stop moving your goalposts.

> does not make you the ideal choice for deciding things like water usage rights, negotiating with foreign powers, organizing and officiating colleges, or mustering and running armies.
Real life governments are rarely staffed by people with the ideal choice for administration or diplomacy. They are, however, staffed by people who are best at seizing and holding power, which comes down to ability to organize troops and lethal power within their own borders. When you have a world, unlike our own, where numbers and organization can take a backseat to being able to stop time or shoot lightning out of your eyes, you've created a dramatic shift in how taking and holding power works.

> Governments do a lot more than just take care of monsters and bandits.
Yes, they monopolize force within a given locale. That's implicit in the very definition of what makes an organization a government in the first place. If the "government" cannot defeat the adventurers guild, it's not really a government at all.

So, one thing I don't totally understand in the argument over adventurer guilds is why either side assumes high-level government-toppling entities existing in the first place. It seems to me that if the world is in such a state to have 1- numerous enough deadly monsters that there's a high demand for monster skaters, and 2- numerous enough people to be those monster skaters, then a high death rate in that profession would be enough to keep most "adventurers" at or below level 5. Why would high level people be a problem when the majority of people in the profession die?

>How, when he can't institute a monopoly of violence?

Because the Adventurer's Guild also likes roads? What?

I feel like you're trying to argue just to argue at this point, and your efforts to reduce government down to a simple equation that solely supports your line of reasoning is ridiculous, especially with your largely insane maxims that governments are solely staffed by generals.

I'm done arguing with you, because I feel like your stance is devolving, and I'm not interested to see just how low you are willing to go.

>why he should be able to wall run wile duel wielding.

This was a thing in d&d before anime got really hugely popular. You're trying to blame anime for shit that was already a thing.

What was your point again?

>So, one thing I don't totally understand in the argument over adventurer guilds is why either side assumes high-level government-toppling entities existing in the first place
Because if they don't, then clearly this adventurer's guild isn't existentially powerful, not much more so than real life mercenary companies. Why aren't they subject to the same sort of absorption, distrust, and annihilation that happened to so many real life soldier organizations?

> It seems to me that if the world is in such a state to have 1- numerous enough deadly monsters that there's a high demand for monster skaters,
If there's that much of a deadly monster problem such that you have a "high demand for monster skaters", it's unlikely you have a coherent government in the first place, but in any case.

>then a high death rate in that profession would be enough to keep most "adventurers" at or below level 5. Why would high level people be a problem when the majority of people in the profession die?
At least if you're working with a D&D style framework, even if 80% or more of them die before level 5, the ones who don't are fully capable of knocking over a city. It doesn't matter how many or how few of them there are. What matters is the ability of them to project power in a certain area; and even a dozen high level characters are fully capable of conquering a nation, perhaps even a world, if they're not opposed by similar superbeings.

>Because the Adventurer's Guild also likes roads? What?
Please respond to the actual post instead of your bizarre strawman.


>I feel like you're trying to argue just to argue at this point, and your efforts to reduce government down to a simple equation that solely supports your line of reasoning is ridiculous, especially with your largely insane maxims that governments are solely staffed by generals.
Where did I claim this? But you will notice that for much of history, states have been extremely suspicious of standing armies, and they do pose a problem in states that don't have very strong mechanisms for civilian rule. Monarchies, or more primitive governments a la what you see in most standard fantasy, ARE run by their militiares; since you know, that feudal aristocracy was the military.