That's it. I'm sick of all this "Masterwork Atlatl" bullshit that's going on in the d20 system right now. Muskets aren't THAT overpowred. They're being way overvalued.
I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine musket from the Spaniards for 12,500 pesos de ocho (that's about a year's supply of tortillas) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can kill an unarmored man, but so can anyone with a working arm and an atlatl.
Spanish gunsmiths spend months working on a single musket and roll it up to a million times to produce a weapon that's no better at killing naked screaming jaguar warriors than a simple fricking bow.
Muskets are thrice as dense as wooden spears and ten times as expensivefor that matter too. Also, anything a spanish metal sword can cut through, a macahuitl can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a macahuitl could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.
Ever wonder why pre-spanish Europe never bothered conquering us? That's right, they were too scared to fight the frenzied aztec warriors and their macahuitl and atlatl. Even when they came here, Conquistadors targeted the men with the biggest macahuitl first because their killing power was feared and respected.
So what am I saying? Muskets are not as great as the current rules suggest, and thus, require more accurate stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for Spanish Firearms:
Pistol: (One-Handed Exotic Weapon) 1d4 Damage 19-20 Crit (gotta be respectful, they hurt if they hit the right places), -2 to hit
Long gun: (Two-Handed Exotic Weapon) 2d4 Damage 19-20 Crit, -2 to hit.
Both count as masterwork for price but don't get masterwork bonuses.
Now that seems a lot more representative of the stopping power of Muskets in real life, don't you think?
tl;dr = Katanas need to be nerfed in d20, see my new stat block.
>I'm pretty sure a macahuitl could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.
Should've said horse, it was going so well 🙁
>I'm pretty sure a macahuitl could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.
Should've said horse, it was going so well 🙁
The Gods of the human Imperium are objectively the only good faction if you're a good Costumbren who loves their mother: >Khorne is literally just Kinich Ahaus who needs more sacrifices on the Golden Skull Alter.in order to empower the Space Jaguar Warriors >Tzeentch is just Kukulkan. >Slaanesh is a VERY enthusiastic Ix Chel.(kino as frick) >Nurgle is just Chalchiuhtotolin with an easier to write name.
Anyone who worships Chaos is sucking Spaniard dick with their so called "Dark King." The Daemon Prince Sanguinius is just a not!Jesus from Spanish Paganism. Go back to history class and read Atlatls, High Priests, and Obsidian. Learn a thing or two about our glorious nation.
That's it. I'm sick of all this "Masterwork Atlatl" bullshit that's going on in the d20 system right now. Muskets aren't THAT overpowred. They're being way overvalued.
I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine musket from the Spaniards for 12,500 pesos de ocho (that's about a year's supply of tortillas) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can kill an unarmored man, but so can anyone with a working arm and an atlatl.
Spanish gunsmiths spend months working on a single musket and roll it up to a million times to produce a weapon that's no better at killing naked screaming jaguar warriors than a simple fricking bow.
Muskets are thrice as dense as wooden spears and ten times as expensivefor that matter too. Also, anything a spanish metal sword can cut through, a macahuitl can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a macahuitl could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.
Ever wonder why pre-spanish Europe never bothered conquering us? That's right, they were too scared to fight the frenzied aztec warriors and their macahuitl and atlatl. Even when they came here, Conquistadors targeted the men with the biggest macahuitl first because their killing power was feared and respected.
So what am I saying? Muskets are not as great as the current rules suggest, and thus, require more accurate stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for Spanish Firearms:
Pistol: (One-Handed Exotic Weapon) 1d4 Damage 19-20 Crit (gotta be respectful, they hurt if they hit the right places), -2 to hit
Long gun: (Two-Handed Exotic Weapon) 2d4 Damage 19-20 Crit, -2 to hit.
Both count as masterwork for price but don't get masterwork bonuses.
Now that seems a lot more representative of the stopping power of Muskets in real life, don't you think?
tl;dr = Katanas need to be nerfed in d20, see my new stat block.
Why the frick is the Butterfly class so much worse than the Eagle and Jaguar classes, teeg?
what was the tlaxcalan religion like?
all I can find is stuff about their conversion to catholicism, nothing pre-contact
I assume they worshiped a similar pantheon of guys to the other nahuas, did they have a specific national god?
They were ethnically Nahua like the Aztecs who they were bitter rivals with, they were a representative democracy interestingly enough, and they specifically worshiped Tezcatlipoca as their patron god which was considered strange and taboo, at least to their extent
This video is honestly pretty good
3 months ago
Anonymous
>they specifically worshiped Tezcatlipoca as their patron god which was considered strange and taboo, at least to their extent
Which was also the rival of Quetzalcóatl whom ironically was who started the whole "spaniards are gods" idea/myth
Reverse Question: Any good alternate histories about what if Mexico hadn't been conquered by the Spanish? Cortez's expedition was such a longshot and the local colonies didn't support it. If it failed, it would have wiped out much of the conquistador population in the Americas which would take some time to build up again with that cautionary story running around (not like Spain would come for revenge. Area's really far away and Europe was pretty busy at the time). Just a decade or two would have been crucial for a native polity surviving, and there's so much that can be done with that.
This guys rises an interesting point: Spaniards wouldnt have come again for at least a decade and thats considering that their problems on Europe are even half resolved
The Gods of the human Imperium are objectively the only good faction if you're a good Costumbren who loves their mother: >Khorne is literally just Kinich Ahaus who needs more sacrifices on the Golden Skull Alter.in order to empower the Space Jaguar Warriors >Tzeentch is just Kukulkan. >Slaanesh is a VERY enthusiastic Ix Chel.(kino as frick) >Nurgle is just Chalchiuhtotolin with an easier to write name.
Anyone who worships Chaos is sucking Spaniard dick with their so called "Dark King." The Daemon Prince Sanguinius is just a not!Jesus from Spanish Paganism. Go back to history class and read Atlatls, High Priests, and Obsidian. Learn a thing or two about our glorious nation.
I saw a pale face at a beach in Cemanahuac yesterday. I told him how cool it was to meet him in person, but I didn’t want to be a douche and bother him and ask him for muskets or anything.
He said, “Arrepiéntete, pagano o serás destruido.”
I was taken aback, and all I could say was “Huh?” but he kept cutting me off and going “huh? huh? huh?” and closing his hand shut in front of my face. I walked away and continued with my hunting, and I heard him chuckle as I walked off. When I came to clean my kill on the beach I saw him trying to get in a canoe with like fifteen golden idols in his hands without praying to the gods.
The priest at the temple was very nice about it and professional, and was like “Sir, you need to sacrifice a child for those first.” At first he kept pretending to be tired and not hear her, but eventually turned back around and brought them to the temple.
When she took one child and started stabbing it multiple times, he stopped her and told her to stab them each individually “to prevent any spiritual infetterence,” and then turned around and winked at me. I don’t even think that’s a word. After she stabbed each child and put their hearts in a bag and started to say the prayers, he kept interrupting her by yawning really loudly.
Should my Meso marines be Space Marines, CSM or World Eaters? World Easters are just missing so much shit that I could only really alter the Zerkers, but its what I like the most emotionally. I could do so much cool shit with CSM Meso marines, since they get havocs and sorcerers and chosen and foot lord options,
Whatever I do my Meso marines are definitely from segmentum obscurus. A Crimson Fist company that got lost in the warp and founded a new chapter. Over time they started confusing giant metal thrones that require blood sacrifices between the emperor and khorne so might be loyalish but are acting Khornate (like blood angels). Someday I want a Quetzalcoatl heldrake.
They should obviously be Thousand Sons who fully embraced the Aztec side of their aesthetic (which is kind of a mixture between Egypt and Mesoamerica).
There was a /tg/ chapter made known as the blood jaguars who were aztec blood angels. I myself wanted to make some but could never find the right ornaments, and these days I'm not really into 40k anymore. Kind of a shame because those heads do look cool.
that's cool
were they melee focused or did they have a blood drinking gimmick like the angels?
did they take prisoners to sacrifice? I can't think of a Warhammer faction besides Deldar that deliberately takes people alive
Not our fault you Hispapoors are feeling inadequate with your inferior urban design. Horse based infrastructure makes it impossible to have livable cities.
We true Yaotl would not standby when the greatest city on earth is mentioned.
This. I acknowledge that Diaz's descriptions of temple doors shaped like dragon jaws or priests dripping with blood 24/7 and using it to style their hair are probably a little exaggerated, but also really damn cool.
the priests being covered with viscera isn't that outlandish
for most of history doctors just let bloodstains accumulate on their surgical gear because they thought it demonstrated professionalism
unkempt/matted hair is still the priestly uniform of some obscure cults like the devadasi
That's why it's okay to engage in a little bit of white genocide
India's population was also growing at double the rate-per-century during the Mughal era.
So they were already growing due to the Mughals modernizing the agriculture.
But that may not be conclusive as it could simply be due to the Mughal reforms reached maximum output and further population growth became untenable.
And it doubled anyways in the second century of British rule due having decent western medicine by that point.
Given there was about 200,000,000 at the start of British Rule and 388,997,955 at the end. Across about 10 generations, 64 million deaths being labled as 'British fault' is not unreasonable depending on how one counts 'British Fault'.
If one considered every famine "British Fault", then yes, the numbers can roughly add up. But one can simply not, and then the numbers drop like a stone. As India is highly vulnerable to famine due their monsoon season. If the monsoons don't come in a given year, famine comes and the population bubble bursts.
It may have been possible for the British to prevent these deaths, but doing such would have been of great challenge. A regime of local tyranny may have been able to prepare and respond better, or they may have not, either is speculation.
In the height of the british colonial exploitation of India between 1860 and 1900 7 great famines took place with the number of deaths estimated somewhere between 33-50 Million deaths.
Between the years 1800 and 1860 only a single famine occurred with less than 1 Million dead.
They are the outcome of the increasing colonial exploitation that occurred in the second half of the 18th century worldwide, accompanied by a lack of administrative efforts to alleviate the situation.
Some simple examples: > In 1865–66, a severe drought struck Odisha and was met by British official inaction. The British Secretary of State for India, Lord Salisbury, did nothing for two months, by which time a million people had died, which he later regretted. >Reacting against calls for relief during the 1877–79 famine, the governing viceroy of India, Lord Lytton replied, "Let the British public foot the bill for its 'cheap sentiment,' if it wished to save life at a cost that would bankrupt India," substantively ordering "there is to be no interference of any kind on the part of Government with the object of reducing the price of food," and instructing district officers to "discourage relief works in every possible way… Mere distress is not a sufficient reason for opening a relief work." >Then in 1876, a large-scale famine broke out in Madras. Lord Lytton's administration believed that 'market forces alone would suffice to feed the starving Indians.The Great Famine of 1876–1878 killed at between 5.6 and 10.3 million people. >The Lt.-Governor of Bengal, Sir Richard Temple, successfully intervened in the Bihar famine of 1874 with little to no mortality; this is the only known example of adequate measures meeting a food crisis by the British. Temple was criticized by many British officials for spending too much on famine relief.
Seven Myths of the Spanish Conquest is a good start, I think. Because most folks have an idea about that and it's a good start to get the Mesoamericans themselves on your mental map as an actual distinct culture in relation to everything else you know.
Reverse Question: Any good alternate histories about what if Mexico hadn't been conquered by the Spanish? Cortez's expedition was such a longshot and the local colonies didn't support it. If it failed, it would have wiped out much of the conquistador population in the Americas which would take some time to build up again with that cautionary story running around (not like Spain would come for revenge. Area's really far away and Europe was pretty busy at the time). Just a decade or two would have been crucial for a native polity surviving, and there's so much that can be done with that.
If they hadn't fatally allied with the Spaniards, they would have suffered the fate of the North Americas - of being reduced to early examples of postapocalyptical Mad Max biker gang cultures.
they would probably remain self governing until a century and a half later that the europeans had jumped ahead so much in war techniques that they were almost unbeatable for around 50-100 years, and then they would get india'd
the Aztec empire would have collapsed eventually as it had volatile succession laws and many members of the priestly class were opposed to their own theology (the tlamatinime), also they had a strict caste system which even had different languages between social classes (similar to England between 1066-1485). with heavy reforms the Aztec empire could have survived, but that would be very difficult with their succession laws basically preventing peaceful transfers of power. plus all their neighbours hated them.
without Spanish conquest other Mexica nations would have eclipsed the Aztecs.
non-Spanish Europeans would have behaved differently too:
Portugal was chiefly interested in the far east and lost quickly interest in the new world once they realised it wasn't a good idea to get to India via the Pacific
England was mostly interested in North America
Scotland had colonial interests in Mexico and South America but lacked the finances: their failed colony in Darien bankrupted the country
the only real interest in the Caribbean region was the Dutch and the French, but both were late because of the 80 years war.
if the Spanish never invaded the Aztecs, they'd have almost a century without significant European contact before either the French, British, or the Dutch turned up, but I expect the Aztec empire would have collapsed before then and have been absorbed into other Mexica states that were more centralised and less bloodthirsty.
>also they had a strict caste system which even had different languages between social classes
They also had universal basic education and universal military service, which was directly tied into people's shot at societal advancement, so that was cushioned somewhat. They apparently suffered from a widening gap between the people who rose into warrior honours through military service and the merchants, who were kinda-sorta part of the state's military apparatus but not really while being hella rich compared to proper warriors.
You can't just wear somebody's skin if you haven't been picked for the rite and wear it all the way until the end.
Also your LGS owner is too base a man to be worthy of that honour. To please the gods and guarantee the next harvest, you at least ought skin a fireman or an ER driver.
Firefighters are too valuable to be sacrificed.
They fight fire.
I'll meet you halfway. Sacrifice state police and townie cops. Let's be real, what can leos do for us that we can't do already?
I was struggling on how to base Mexica for pike and shotte, but then remembered they are also well in the time period for Hail Caesar so 4 per 40mil base and then 3 bases for PnS and 4 for HC is peachy.
>48 posts into an Aztec thread >it still hasn't been derailed by moronic pol users rambling about might makes right and being absurdly emotionally invested in events that happed 500 years ago >its actually just people talking about cool mesoamerican stuff and appreciating their culture and history
Thank you /tg/, if only the actual history board could be as civilized, educated, and open minded as you
I mean, it's not like they were great people either.
Maya were not unified, and were already a decadent population with lots of city-states in war with each other by the time conquistadores arrived.
The Aztecs were even worse, and would've blown up in a not-so-far future due to all the enslaved populations rebelling to their moronic rulership.
They were so bad lots of other tribes preferred siding with the Spanish to overthrow them.
They were just unlucky Europeans had developed better and more advanced societies before them, otherwise they would've done the same to them.
yes but it doesn't really matter if they were good or bad, its been 500 years, they're gone now. All that matters is that they were cool and interesting
>The Aztecs were even worse, and would've blown up in a not-so-far future due to all the enslaved populations rebelling to their moronic rulership.
What people fail to understand was that they were over-achievers. They were doing all that bleeding to demonstrate that they were the most faithful and that they were doing the most for the gods and the universe of everyone within their sphere of influence, so their leadership position clearly was a rightful one.
None of the people around them fundamentally disagreed with the ritual sacrifices, they just disagreed with the Aztecs being the top dogs and that's why they got a civil war as soon as a buncha spaniards came in and seemingly randomly murdered people on their way to the capital.
It is false to assume that each tribe would sacrifice so often.
Aztecs were simply tyrants with harsh claims, on top of being obsessed with sacrifices (flower war being an example of that)
They were also extremely embarrassed of their heritage, and would burn most books and destroy evidences of them not being descendants of Toltecs.
>It is false to assume that each tribe would sacrifice so often.
They wouldn't, but both blood- and human sacrifice were practiced by all mesoamerican cultures in the region and the Aztecs being extreme about it was part of their religious-political strategy.
You gotta consider that bleeding for the gods, being made a human sacrifice and being put on the skull rack wasn't seen as degenerating by these cultures. These were necessary and honourable acts that did guarantee you entry into the good parts of afterlife. The issue folks took probably was that the Aztecs claimed ALL THE SACRIFICES for themselves and their city.
Another umbrage would be giving tribute at all, no one likes paying taxes.
Also Moctezuma didn't have a strong answer to the Spanish, he pussyfooted about, let these strangers walk around freely, didn't punish them when they killed a bunch of chiefs via tricking them into diplomatic talks then ambushing them, so when the chance came to be higher in a new hierarchy they took it.
They weren't expecting 90% of everyone to die, slavery, forced conversion, nor colonial exploitation.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Also Moctezuma didn't have a strong answer to the Spanish, he pussyfooted about, let these strangers walk around freely, didn't punish them when they killed a bunch of chiefs via tricking them into diplomatic talks then ambushing them, so when the chance came to be higher in a new hierarchy they took it.
how much of this do we actually know is true, vs sources after the fact blaming him for the defeat of the triple alliance?
>Maya were not unified, and were already a decadent population with lots of city-states in war with each other by the time conquistadores arrived.
And how did that differ from Italy of the period?
>I mean, it's not like they were great people either.
Neither were a lot of the guys /misc/ worships, but you'll be hard pressed to find someone actually serious about how human sacrifices never happened but they should also happen again. >They were so bad lots of other tribes preferred siding with the Spanish to overthrow them.
You're talking about the Tlaxcala, and then just over exaggerating it. Everyone's been doing this play for the past decades. The Tlaxcala sided with the Spaniards after losing a battle with them and were a strong ally, but there were still numerous tribes and """"tribes""""(kingdoms) that fought against the Aztecs and continued to fight against the Spaniards. They Purepecha for one, the Chichimeca didn't surrendered IIIRC and just signed a treaties with them, and the last Maya city-state to surrender was in the 1690's nearly 200 years after the fall of Tenochtitlan
[...]
This guy gets it. Was them running into your city and saying you're a tribute state now and wanting sacrifices kinda of an butthole move? Yes, but no one was against the sacrifices as an act themselves.
It's not only the Tlaxcala, although they are the most famous one (simply because they were victims of the flower war)
They also didn't side with Spaniards after a sore defeat - in fact, they were described as strong adversaries, and a truce was quickly met.
And that was not the only city-state that sided with them.
This Is not in favour of the idea that Spaniards were actually the good guys, but simply proves that the triple Alliance, or Aztec Empire, fricking sucked diplomacy-wise.
No one said the nearby tribes were against sacrifices, but having a bully that will not annex you because they want to use you to train their soldiers and use your men as a sacrifice on a periodic basis does not feel right.
Maya and the Incan Empire had a different political structure and environment, but the conquer happened so quickly partly because of the civil wars not stopping even past Spaniards' arrival, and tribes siding with them.
>I mean, it's not like they were great people either.
Neither were a lot of the guys /misc/ worships, but you'll be hard pressed to find someone actually serious about how human sacrifices never happened but they should also happen again. >They were so bad lots of other tribes preferred siding with the Spanish to overthrow them.
You're talking about the Tlaxcala, and then just over exaggerating it. Everyone's been doing this play for the past decades. The Tlaxcala sided with the Spaniards after losing a battle with them and were a strong ally, but there were still numerous tribes and """"tribes""""(kingdoms) that fought against the Aztecs and continued to fight against the Spaniards. They Purepecha for one, the Chichimeca didn't surrendered IIIRC and just signed a treaties with them, and the last Maya city-state to surrender was in the 1690's nearly 200 years after the fall of Tenochtitlan
>The Aztecs were even worse, and would've blown up in a not-so-far future due to all the enslaved populations rebelling to their moronic rulership.
What people fail to understand was that they were over-achievers. They were doing all that bleeding to demonstrate that they were the most faithful and that they were doing the most for the gods and the universe of everyone within their sphere of influence, so their leadership position clearly was a rightful one.
None of the people around them fundamentally disagreed with the ritual sacrifices, they just disagreed with the Aztecs being the top dogs and that's why they got a civil war as soon as a buncha spaniards came in and seemingly randomly murdered people on their way to the capital.
This guy gets it. Was them running into your city and saying you're a tribute state now and wanting sacrifices kinda of an butthole move? Yes, but no one was against the sacrifices as an act themselves.
Xiutla monan, palnakayo!
>"Huehca"
>literally just means 'distant' in Nahuatl
Why the frick is the Butterfly class so much worse than the Eagle and Jaguar classes, teeg?
Utterly braindead take, Jags are genuinely the most broken shit once you get your werejag transformation.
That's it. I'm sick of all this "Masterwork Atlatl" bullshit that's going on in the d20 system right now. Muskets aren't THAT overpowred. They're being way overvalued.
I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine musket from the Spaniards for 12,500 pesos de ocho (that's about a year's supply of tortillas) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can kill an unarmored man, but so can anyone with a working arm and an atlatl.
Spanish gunsmiths spend months working on a single musket and roll it up to a million times to produce a weapon that's no better at killing naked screaming jaguar warriors than a simple fricking bow.
Muskets are thrice as dense as wooden spears and ten times as expensivefor that matter too. Also, anything a spanish metal sword can cut through, a macahuitl can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a macahuitl could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.
Ever wonder why pre-spanish Europe never bothered conquering us? That's right, they were too scared to fight the frenzied aztec warriors and their macahuitl and atlatl. Even when they came here, Conquistadors targeted the men with the biggest macahuitl first because their killing power was feared and respected.
So what am I saying? Muskets are not as great as the current rules suggest, and thus, require more accurate stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for Spanish Firearms:
Pistol: (One-Handed Exotic Weapon) 1d4 Damage 19-20 Crit (gotta be respectful, they hurt if they hit the right places), -2 to hit
Long gun: (Two-Handed Exotic Weapon) 2d4 Damage 19-20 Crit, -2 to hit.
Both count as masterwork for price but don't get masterwork bonuses.
Now that seems a lot more representative of the stopping power of Muskets in real life, don't you think?
tl;dr = Katanas need to be nerfed in d20, see my new stat block.
>I'm pretty sure a macahuitl could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.
Should've said horse, it was going so well 🙁
you're right. Anyone saving my shitty edit to this copypasta, please improve it or the tzitzimitl will rain stars upon your hard drive.
yall postin in a tlaxcaltec thread
That explains the smell
what was the tlaxcalan religion like?
all I can find is stuff about their conversion to catholicism, nothing pre-contact
I assume they worshiped a similar pantheon of guys to the other nahuas, did they have a specific national god?
They were ethnically Nahua like the Aztecs who they were bitter rivals with, they were a representative democracy interestingly enough, and they specifically worshiped Tezcatlipoca as their patron god which was considered strange and taboo, at least to their extent
This video is honestly pretty good
>they specifically worshiped Tezcatlipoca as their patron god which was considered strange and taboo, at least to their extent
Which was also the rival of Quetzalcóatl whom ironically was who started the whole "spaniards are gods" idea/myth
This guys rises an interesting point: Spaniards wouldnt have come again for at least a decade and thats considering that their problems on Europe are even half resolved
?si=SfgScORuC2gqJvLS
>seething steellets
Cope, I am behind 7 poxies
The Gods of the human Imperium are objectively the only good faction if you're a good Costumbren who loves their mother:
>Khorne is literally just Kinich Ahaus who needs more sacrifices on the Golden Skull Alter.in order to empower the Space Jaguar Warriors
>Tzeentch is just Kukulkan.
>Slaanesh is a VERY enthusiastic Ix Chel.(kino as frick)
>Nurgle is just Chalchiuhtotolin with an easier to write name.
Anyone who worships Chaos is sucking Spaniard dick with their so called "Dark King." The Daemon Prince Sanguinius is just a not!Jesus from Spanish Paganism. Go back to history class and read Atlatls, High Priests, and Obsidian. Learn a thing or two about our glorious nation.
>Atlatls, High Priests, and Obsidian
Okay I chuckled, that's pretty good anon
I saw a pale face at a beach in Cemanahuac yesterday. I told him how cool it was to meet him in person, but I didn’t want to be a douche and bother him and ask him for muskets or anything.
He said, “Arrepiéntete, pagano o serás destruido.”
I was taken aback, and all I could say was “Huh?” but he kept cutting me off and going “huh? huh? huh?” and closing his hand shut in front of my face. I walked away and continued with my hunting, and I heard him chuckle as I walked off. When I came to clean my kill on the beach I saw him trying to get in a canoe with like fifteen golden idols in his hands without praying to the gods.
The priest at the temple was very nice about it and professional, and was like “Sir, you need to sacrifice a child for those first.” At first he kept pretending to be tired and not hear her, but eventually turned back around and brought them to the temple.
When she took one child and started stabbing it multiple times, he stopped her and told her to stab them each individually “to prevent any spiritual infetterence,” and then turned around and winked at me. I don’t even think that’s a word. After she stabbed each child and put their hearts in a bag and started to say the prayers, he kept interrupting her by yawning really loudly.
Which classic fantasy race maps best to native American aesthetics?
Wood Elves?
Orcs?
Beastmen?
Depends on the nation.
Shitting up the thread with 40k now:
So I bought the STL files. Because I am not a homosexual who doesn't support small creators, and I might want more of this to exist in the future.
https://wulfsheademiniatures.gumroad.com/?tags=40k&query=meso
Should my Meso marines be Space Marines, CSM or World Eaters? World Easters are just missing so much shit that I could only really alter the Zerkers, but its what I like the most emotionally. I could do so much cool shit with CSM Meso marines, since they get havocs and sorcerers and chosen and foot lord options,
Whatever I do my Meso marines are definitely from segmentum obscurus. A Crimson Fist company that got lost in the warp and founded a new chapter. Over time they started confusing giant metal thrones that require blood sacrifices between the emperor and khorne so might be loyalish but are acting Khornate (like blood angels). Someday I want a Quetzalcoatl heldrake.
I'm a fan of rare Raven Guard successors.
They should obviously be Thousand Sons who fully embraced the Aztec side of their aesthetic (which is kind of a mixture between Egypt and Mesoamerica).
There was a /tg/ chapter made known as the blood jaguars who were aztec blood angels. I myself wanted to make some but could never find the right ornaments, and these days I'm not really into 40k anymore. Kind of a shame because those heads do look cool.
that's cool
were they melee focused or did they have a blood drinking gimmick like the angels?
did they take prisoners to sacrifice? I can't think of a Warhammer faction besides Deldar that deliberately takes people alive
it was just a skin to play over blood angels
Is this just one very autistic guy samegayging in this thread?
I refuse to believe so many people know a lot of pre columbian america history
mexicans exist
Spaniard hands wrote this post. Hide your codices
Reminder that spaniards can't do shit if you pre-burn your codices, praise the Hummingbird.
Not our fault you Hispapoors are feeling inadequate with your inferior urban design. Horse based infrastructure makes it impossible to have livable cities.
We true Yaotl would not standby when the greatest city on earth is mentioned.
I love the most evil blood empire ever to exist IRL.
This. I acknowledge that Diaz's descriptions of temple doors shaped like dragon jaws or priests dripping with blood 24/7 and using it to style their hair are probably a little exaggerated, but also really damn cool.
the priests being covered with viscera isn't that outlandish
for most of history doctors just let bloodstains accumulate on their surgical gear because they thought it demonstrated professionalism
unkempt/matted hair is still the priestly uniform of some obscure cults like the devadasi
The English? They killed well over 64 million in India alone in a little under 200 years.
India's population increased over that time. 64 million is so unlikely it can be dismissed
That's why it's okay to engage in a little bit of white genocide
India's population was also growing at double the rate-per-century during the Mughal era.
So they were already growing due to the Mughals modernizing the agriculture.
But that may not be conclusive as it could simply be due to the Mughal reforms reached maximum output and further population growth became untenable.
And it doubled anyways in the second century of British rule due having decent western medicine by that point.
Given there was about 200,000,000 at the start of British Rule and 388,997,955 at the end. Across about 10 generations, 64 million deaths being labled as 'British fault' is not unreasonable depending on how one counts 'British Fault'.
If one considered every famine "British Fault", then yes, the numbers can roughly add up. But one can simply not, and then the numbers drop like a stone. As India is highly vulnerable to famine due their monsoon season. If the monsoons don't come in a given year, famine comes and the population bubble bursts.
It may have been possible for the British to prevent these deaths, but doing such would have been of great challenge. A regime of local tyranny may have been able to prepare and respond better, or they may have not, either is speculation.
>genocide washing to the max
In the height of the british colonial exploitation of India between 1860 and 1900 7 great famines took place with the number of deaths estimated somewhere between 33-50 Million deaths.
Between the years 1800 and 1860 only a single famine occurred with less than 1 Million dead.
They are the outcome of the increasing colonial exploitation that occurred in the second half of the 18th century worldwide, accompanied by a lack of administrative efforts to alleviate the situation.
Some simple examples:
> In 1865–66, a severe drought struck Odisha and was met by British official inaction. The British Secretary of State for India, Lord Salisbury, did nothing for two months, by which time a million people had died, which he later regretted.
>Reacting against calls for relief during the 1877–79 famine, the governing viceroy of India, Lord Lytton replied, "Let the British public foot the bill for its 'cheap sentiment,' if it wished to save life at a cost that would bankrupt India," substantively ordering "there is to be no interference of any kind on the part of Government with the object of reducing the price of food," and instructing district officers to "discourage relief works in every possible way… Mere distress is not a sufficient reason for opening a relief work."
>Then in 1876, a large-scale famine broke out in Madras. Lord Lytton's administration believed that 'market forces alone would suffice to feed the starving Indians.The Great Famine of 1876–1878 killed at between 5.6 and 10.3 million people.
>The Lt.-Governor of Bengal, Sir Richard Temple, successfully intervened in the Bihar famine of 1874 with little to no mortality; this is the only known example of adequate measures meeting a food crisis by the British. Temple was criticized by many British officials for spending too much on famine relief.
Come on anon, you know for a fact that that's just cope so people don't have to think about their destruction at the hands of the Sp*n*sh.
>I refuse to believe so many people know a lot of pre columbian america history
I do, but I feel like this thread is just bumpgay baiting me to reply
>alternate universe tg thread has the same number of unique posters as the board game general
bythestoneballsofthewargod.deerskin
Where to start learning about pre columbian mexico? Any book recommendations?
Seven Myths of the Spanish Conquest is a good start, I think. Because most folks have an idea about that and it's a good start to get the Mesoamericans themselves on your mental map as an actual distinct culture in relation to everything else you know.
Reverse Question: Any good alternate histories about what if Mexico hadn't been conquered by the Spanish? Cortez's expedition was such a longshot and the local colonies didn't support it. If it failed, it would have wiped out much of the conquistador population in the Americas which would take some time to build up again with that cautionary story running around (not like Spain would come for revenge. Area's really far away and Europe was pretty busy at the time). Just a decade or two would have been crucial for a native polity surviving, and there's so much that can be done with that.
If they hadn't fatally allied with the Spaniards, they would have suffered the fate of the North Americas - of being reduced to early examples of postapocalyptical Mad Max biker gang cultures.
they would probably remain self governing until a century and a half later that the europeans had jumped ahead so much in war techniques that they were almost unbeatable for around 50-100 years, and then they would get india'd
the Aztec empire would have collapsed eventually as it had volatile succession laws and many members of the priestly class were opposed to their own theology (the tlamatinime), also they had a strict caste system which even had different languages between social classes (similar to England between 1066-1485). with heavy reforms the Aztec empire could have survived, but that would be very difficult with their succession laws basically preventing peaceful transfers of power. plus all their neighbours hated them.
without Spanish conquest other Mexica nations would have eclipsed the Aztecs.
non-Spanish Europeans would have behaved differently too:
Portugal was chiefly interested in the far east and lost quickly interest in the new world once they realised it wasn't a good idea to get to India via the Pacific
England was mostly interested in North America
Scotland had colonial interests in Mexico and South America but lacked the finances: their failed colony in Darien bankrupted the country
the only real interest in the Caribbean region was the Dutch and the French, but both were late because of the 80 years war.
if the Spanish never invaded the Aztecs, they'd have almost a century without significant European contact before either the French, British, or the Dutch turned up, but I expect the Aztec empire would have collapsed before then and have been absorbed into other Mexica states that were more centralised and less bloodthirsty.
>also they had a strict caste system which even had different languages between social classes
They also had universal basic education and universal military service, which was directly tied into people's shot at societal advancement, so that was cushioned somewhat. They apparently suffered from a widening gap between the people who rose into warrior honours through military service and the merchants, who were kinda-sorta part of the state's military apparatus but not really while being hella rich compared to proper warriors.
I'm going to sacrifice my LGS owner and wear his skin.
You can't just wear somebody's skin if you haven't been picked for the rite and wear it all the way until the end.
Also your LGS owner is too base a man to be worthy of that honour. To please the gods and guarantee the next harvest, you at least ought skin a fireman or an ER driver.
Firefighters are too valuable to be sacrificed.
They fight fire.
I'll meet you halfway. Sacrifice state police and townie cops. Let's be real, what can leos do for us that we can't do already?
I was struggling on how to base Mexica for pike and shotte, but then remembered they are also well in the time period for Hail Caesar so 4 per 40mil base and then 3 bases for PnS and 4 for HC is peachy.
I don't give a shit if they're "evil" personally
I rolled 15!
They did capture some canons but threw them in the lake because they didn't know how to make them work. A shame tbh
>48 posts into an Aztec thread
>it still hasn't been derailed by moronic pol users rambling about might makes right and being absurdly emotionally invested in events that happed 500 years ago
>its actually just people talking about cool mesoamerican stuff and appreciating their culture and history
Thank you /tg/, if only the actual history board could be as civilized, educated, and open minded as you
I mean, it's not like they were great people either.
Maya were not unified, and were already a decadent population with lots of city-states in war with each other by the time conquistadores arrived.
The Aztecs were even worse, and would've blown up in a not-so-far future due to all the enslaved populations rebelling to their moronic rulership.
They were so bad lots of other tribes preferred siding with the Spanish to overthrow them.
They were just unlucky Europeans had developed better and more advanced societies before them, otherwise they would've done the same to them.
yes but it doesn't really matter if they were good or bad, its been 500 years, they're gone now. All that matters is that they were cool and interesting
Is it sacrilege to present a campaign with a Coatl as the primary antagonist, having been blinded and coerced by the Black Tezcatlipoca?
Whoops, meant to tie that to OP, sorry Anon.
>The Aztecs were even worse, and would've blown up in a not-so-far future due to all the enslaved populations rebelling to their moronic rulership.
What people fail to understand was that they were over-achievers. They were doing all that bleeding to demonstrate that they were the most faithful and that they were doing the most for the gods and the universe of everyone within their sphere of influence, so their leadership position clearly was a rightful one.
None of the people around them fundamentally disagreed with the ritual sacrifices, they just disagreed with the Aztecs being the top dogs and that's why they got a civil war as soon as a buncha spaniards came in and seemingly randomly murdered people on their way to the capital.
It is false to assume that each tribe would sacrifice so often.
Aztecs were simply tyrants with harsh claims, on top of being obsessed with sacrifices (flower war being an example of that)
They were also extremely embarrassed of their heritage, and would burn most books and destroy evidences of them not being descendants of Toltecs.
>It is false to assume that each tribe would sacrifice so often.
They wouldn't, but both blood- and human sacrifice were practiced by all mesoamerican cultures in the region and the Aztecs being extreme about it was part of their religious-political strategy.
You gotta consider that bleeding for the gods, being made a human sacrifice and being put on the skull rack wasn't seen as degenerating by these cultures. These were necessary and honourable acts that did guarantee you entry into the good parts of afterlife. The issue folks took probably was that the Aztecs claimed ALL THE SACRIFICES for themselves and their city.
Another umbrage would be giving tribute at all, no one likes paying taxes.
Also Moctezuma didn't have a strong answer to the Spanish, he pussyfooted about, let these strangers walk around freely, didn't punish them when they killed a bunch of chiefs via tricking them into diplomatic talks then ambushing them, so when the chance came to be higher in a new hierarchy they took it.
They weren't expecting 90% of everyone to die, slavery, forced conversion, nor colonial exploitation.
>Also Moctezuma didn't have a strong answer to the Spanish, he pussyfooted about, let these strangers walk around freely, didn't punish them when they killed a bunch of chiefs via tricking them into diplomatic talks then ambushing them, so when the chance came to be higher in a new hierarchy they took it.
how much of this do we actually know is true, vs sources after the fact blaming him for the defeat of the triple alliance?
>Maya were not unified, and were already a decadent population with lots of city-states in war with each other by the time conquistadores arrived.
And how did that differ from Italy of the period?
Italy was not invaded by a more advanced kingdom.
It's not only the Tlaxcala, although they are the most famous one (simply because they were victims of the flower war)
They also didn't side with Spaniards after a sore defeat - in fact, they were described as strong adversaries, and a truce was quickly met.
And that was not the only city-state that sided with them.
This Is not in favour of the idea that Spaniards were actually the good guys, but simply proves that the triple Alliance, or Aztec Empire, fricking sucked diplomacy-wise.
No one said the nearby tribes were against sacrifices, but having a bully that will not annex you because they want to use you to train their soldiers and use your men as a sacrifice on a periodic basis does not feel right.
Maya and the Incan Empire had a different political structure and environment, but the conquer happened so quickly partly because of the civil wars not stopping even past Spaniards' arrival, and tribes siding with them.
>Italy was not invaded by a more advanced kingdom.
Laughs in french
>Italy was not invaded by a more advanced kingdom
I mean I hate frenchies as much as anyone rational but come on, man, give them credit
>I mean, it's not like they were great people either.
Neither were a lot of the guys /misc/ worships, but you'll be hard pressed to find someone actually serious about how human sacrifices never happened but they should also happen again.
>They were so bad lots of other tribes preferred siding with the Spanish to overthrow them.
You're talking about the Tlaxcala, and then just over exaggerating it. Everyone's been doing this play for the past decades. The Tlaxcala sided with the Spaniards after losing a battle with them and were a strong ally, but there were still numerous tribes and """"tribes""""(kingdoms) that fought against the Aztecs and continued to fight against the Spaniards. They Purepecha for one, the Chichimeca didn't surrendered IIIRC and just signed a treaties with them, and the last Maya city-state to surrender was in the 1690's nearly 200 years after the fall of Tenochtitlan
This guy gets it. Was them running into your city and saying you're a tribute state now and wanting sacrifices kinda of an butthole move? Yes, but no one was against the sacrifices as an act themselves.
>but you'll be hard pressed to find someone actually serious about how human sacrifices never happened but they should also happen again.
kek
God I hate /misc/.
>TeNOchtitlan GAMES
Ah. Still, cool thread.
>this chad slaps your girlfriend's ass
What do?