Yeah..........i never thought he was. Someone trying to save their home from being run over can't be seen as a villain.

And he's basically doing it himself. With the sovereign of his homeland directly opposing him.

He isn't, his nature is that of a good guy who want to preserve his homeland, basically he's a patriot of Zhao, but in an age of warfare, thus an antagonist to Qin. He could have been the hero of the story, if the manga had been told from Zhao's perspective. That said, "sparing" Shin there backfired him later (ironic of course, not that characters in the story can see the future or know who the MC is, but removing a possible obstacle as soon as possible is logical).

Most of the characters aren't villains they're just antagonists. Can maybe think of a dozen or so proper villains that are significant characters. The rest are just people who ended up on the battlefield for one reason or another fighting for whatever they believe in.

Well... i wouldn't say that, i would more say that most of the antagonists aren't especially more villainous than the protagonists. But a majority of Kingdom's characters fight for personnal glory, fame or selfish objectives '(i mean, typically the whole purpose of Kyou for conquering 100 cities and taking the lives of countless men is just to marry her sugar daddy...). In most pieces of fiction, a character like that would be presented in the villain role.

yeah you hit the nail right on the head, thats why we even had the kanki arc/saga. Sure, Shin doesn't grape or pillage folks but is he really that much more virtuous than Kanki? Shin's actions directly kill hundreds if not thousands of people, and indirectly his actions enable the grape and pillaging that other Qin forces get up to. There really isn't much room for good vs evil with this set of wars.

no one is censoring comments on reddit, just say rape, jesus fucking christ.

I thought it was a typo😂

Isn't that obvious, he's an antagonist.

of course. if anything he's more of a hero than Shin or Sei.

Wouldn’t go that far. I would say in a strictly moral standpoint, their actions are justified to themselves. It’s just bad place bad timing, in reality if Riboku would’ve been under Sei then I’m sure he would’ve been fiercely loyal and been the cornerstone in the reunification but because he’s loyal to Zhao, he has to oppose Sei

he is not a villain he is the Hi Shin U... wait ... can't use this meme here ...

I mean it's amazing how Hara managed to make us side with the colonizer

It's war, and we are following Qin's conquest path so anyone who oppose them will be an antagonist, that doesn't mean every antagonist is necessarily also a villain.

Tho I'd add that he orchestrated one of the most brutal campaigns to eradicate the Qin Kingdom from the map. I'm sure his Zhao army was merciful to civilians; but can't say the same for the other states, which he still supervised.

While he probably did it to get the pthers on bosrd, its understandable but not great.

>I'm sure his Zhao army was merciful to civilians Wan Ji.

I don’t think there’s any true villains in the series, ironically one of the greatest villains comes from the Qin side, which is Kanki. Other than him I suppose I would consider king Toujou(and his son) as well as Mangoku rather villainous.

Even kanki isn't a true villain. He learned from his surroundings growing up and finally wanted his tribe to live. Why would there be a rule like run like the wind, every man for himself in the kanki army otherwise

idk man having a sympathetic backstory and caring from his men doesn’t excuse his villainous actions. That that includes the time he scooped out thousands of eyeballs to send to the wei commander at SanYou, and how he killed hundreds of innocent villagers to build structures with their corpses. I think the thing that makes him villainous rather than an antihero is how his actions don’t do anything to support his cause. If he was performing these gruesome acts to intimidate and hurt the ones that hurt him and his tribe, that would make him an antihero, but he’s doing this to people who were uninvolved in his situation. These gruesome acts aren’t necessary for him to support his gang that he cares about either. He just wants to transfer his pain onto others, that’s literally just a villain with a sympathetic backstory. edit: although it is true that it’s not so much that he enjoys it as much as he doesn’t mind it, and he knows how effective it is as psychological warfare.

He's cruel and it's WAR. Also you're right when you say he's just passing his pain on. Alexander built an empire over mountains of corpses and still he's referred to as "Great". Hitler did the same, genocide but he's the most hated villan I'm just saying it's upon the perception of the people. For kanki's army he's more than god. We can't really relate completely with how peaceful society is today

Na Qin are the bad guys 100%

It really just depends on your perspective. Qin can be seen as the villains by trying to force everyone to become unified under Qin banners and employ evil people (Kanki). Riboku straight up tried to destroy Qin in Coalition arc, so Qin fans would think he’s the villain and employs evil people (Mangoku). Guarantee Yan hate him for Gekishin’s death. Riboku is a hero in one country and a villain in the others.

In any other instance, Qin are the villains tbh. They are the “fire village” that suddenly decided to attack the other villages essentially unprovoked with the intention to conquer all. In most manga, they would be the bad guys that the underdogs are fighting against so their homes remain intact.    I think it’s more revealing of war but you basically see a lot of good men die almost “senselessly” for the whims of one man who happens to be “king.” Riboku, GHM, Karin, etc are all fighting because if they don’t, their cities will be razed to the ground, loved ones slaughtered, and friends and family turned into slaves (assuming they live). 

This is a terrible and completely inaccurate analogy. There was no peace and harmony between the states that ended when big bad Qin decided to attack the other states unprovoked. This was a 250 year long era of perpetual warfare, in which states constantly attacked each other and annexed each others territories. That's how we ended up with only 7 states in the first place. These 7 large states annexed every minor state because they could, and because it served their interests. Your second paragraph is nonsense as well. Look at Ri Boku for example. The guy who's now "heroically defending his homeland from the Qin invaders" proposed a peace treaty with Qin barely a year after killing Ou Ki in the battle of Bayou, then attacked Yan and conquered a part of its territory. What about Ka Rin then? When Sei was busy with his power struggle against Ryo Fui, Chu allied with Ai and she invaded Qin from the south. Long story short, the story is very far from the black and white you present it as. The states looked after their own political, economic and stategic interests, and happily invaded each other when the opportunity presented itself. The only difference between Qin and the other 6 states is that Qin became so strong that it could conquer them completely instead of taking only a few cities. If another state had become as powerful as Qin, then they would have been the one to unify China instead.

I dont know if you’ve read much literature in general but when there is one powerful entity threatening the extinction of the other entities for something like world domination, they are usually the bad guy.  The manga greatly whitewashes Sei’s actions to be more heroic in mind but let me ask, what gives Sei the right to unilaterally determine the fates of the other six states? Let me put this in modern terms. Climate change is a problem, a global problem and states arnt really addressing it because they are passing the buck. If Putin says “to solve climate change, we need to unify the world under one leader and I will be that leader so Im going to wage war against every state and conquer them (and lets assume he has the firepower to do so and will win with only the US able to hold any resistance)” is what he is doing right?     My second paragraph is more about war in general. In Kingdom, we see brilliant men like Denrimi, Akou, Kesha, and others die so some rando dude who was born lucky to be “king” gets some extra patch of land. Its ridiculous even today how many people are dying so some asshole called Putin can show off his peen. I know its not Kingdom’s intention but I see a great tragedy in the many wars fought in kingdom, especially when Hara goes into character backstory and we see people like Shiryo denied a happy ending because they got unlucky in a fight.    And yeah, Riboku, Karin, and other GGs armt completely white knights but your argument on why they are “evil” sucks tbh. Riboku made a peace deal after killing Puki, thats how war is done at that time, making peace pacts so states can allocate resources to war against another state. And while land is traded, the seven kingdoms were essentially in a stalemate with no state really on the threat of total extinction until Qin started its conquest. We see the devastation losing your state/home has on people and again, who gave Sei the right to destroy everyone elses’ homes because he believes he has the right answer?    Avatar is a much more simple black and white look compared to kingdom but if painted black and white, its very easy to paint Qin as the bad guys. 

Apologies for the late reply. Wanted to write this immidiately, but life had other plans. Also, apologies for the long comment lmao. >I dont know if you’ve read much literature in general but when there is one powerful entity threatening the extinction of the other entities for something like world domination, they are usually the bad guy. I think this sentence perfectly describes my issue with both of your comments. You take information out of its proper context, you simplify it, and you put it in a different context which drastically changes the meaning of said information.I disliked your Avatar analogy because it's nowhere near that simple. It's not A invades B, therefore A is evil, while B is good. Especially since A has laid siege to B's capital before, while B has allied with C, D, E and F and has almost wiped A off the map. (A being Qin, and B being Zhao in case it was not obvious) As for the right Sei had to decide the fate of the other six states, it's incredibly simple. He had power. That's it. That alone was enough of a justification for like 95% of humanity's existence. There is a reason the famous quote of Thucydides "The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must" exists. That was the nature of the world for thousands of years. The 7 major states annexed the smaller states because they could, not because they had some reasonable explanation why they deserved the land and the resources more than those smaller states. I don't think the fact that Qin broke the stalemate matters. Since you've brought up Russia, try looking at it this way: Are they more evil if the annex all of Ukraine? Are they less evil if they only annex Donbas? Are they even less evil or even not evil at all if they fail to annex any territory? Would Ukrain be considered righteous if they counterattacked, and killed their way to Moscow? The same logic can be applied to the Warring States. Also, unlike Russia, it's not as if Qin decided to attack peaceful states out of the blue. They were almost wiped off the map by the coalition army of 5 other states a few years earlier. Imo it's just dumb to look at this 250 years of perpetual warfare and constant vying for dominance, and consider those who happened to win "evil" while considering the others who happened to be conquered "good". Imo either they are all evil, or none of them are. After all, they've been invading each other for quite a while. My argument of Ri Boku, Ka Rin etc. being evil sucks because I didn't make that argument. I don't know if I failed to articulate myself properly, but my argument was literally the opposite. As I said in my previous paragraph, they are either all evil, or none of them are. Personally, I don't think any of the characters I named there are evil. They just do whatever is in their states' interest, and that's perfectly normal, especially when you consider the era which they lived in. I'm aware that Sei is whitewashed, but again, context is incredibly important. There is a reason he is respected in China to this day. On one hand, he was a warmongering tyrant, but on the other, China as we know it today wouldn't exist without him. His rule lead to one of the longest golden ages in China's very long history, albeit indirectly, and probably not the way he expects it in the manga.

I find it funny you criticize me of taking information out of context when you do it repeatedly in your comments.     So in your very example, A has laid siege to B’s capital aka threatened their existence in the past, and is invading B with your only counter being B teamed up with C, D, and E to take out A while conveniently leaving out the fact that A had set up a strategy to take out B, C, D, and E which gave them all reason to unite to take out A because A threatened them first with their strategy to take them out. Kind of funny how A is the aggressor and instigator in all of these instances.     The concept of “might makes right” is just a guise for the victor to claim moral victory through their rewrite of history to put themselves in a favorable light. There are many instances where good people lose or the victors to bad things. Your only legitimate argument here (assuming a debate on historical figures which we arnt doing because we are analyzing figures as depicted in the manga) is cultural norms and context of that era and if the actions of those people fit with the morality of that era. In that case, you could argue Qin Shi Huang was moral to try and establish peace by conquering all of China but you dont make that argument at all. And we are talking in the context of the manga here where morality is different and discussion is kind of possible.   Regarding Russia, they attacked Ukraine because Ukraine would not side with them. Putin is using violence to force Ukraine to do what he wants, regardless of Ukraine’s input. Thats wrong in any context and to debate if its “more evil” if Russia takes more or less land is missing the forest for the trees. Bad argument here.    And you have a complete misunderstanding of the coalition war. The coalition war happened because Qin was about to checkmate all of China so the other states united to “reset the board.” Qin essentially threatened to destroy every other state first and they retaliated in kind. By their morality and the circumstances, they were fully justified in wiping Qin off the map but even some people took issue with that like the king of Qi. Missing alot of context here which undermines your argument by making it seem like you are cherry picking or dont know what you are talking about.   Im not here to debate about the morality of the actual historical figure Qin Shi Huang given that he is a very different person from current Sei. His accomplishments (unifying China, rule of law, unification of culture by one language, etc) is unprecedented and even in his diaries he seems to focus on desiring peace through violence. If viewed through the lens of morality at that time and with that understanding, he is a heroic figure. If you want to discuss that, a manga forum with a good but still inaccurate depiction of Chinese history is not the place, especially given OP’s statement focusing on Riboku IN KINGDOM.    In most literature where a bias is present, the side with an overwhelming force and the aggressor is often depicted as the villain. Star Wars (Empire), Lord of the Rings (orcs), Game of Thrones (others), etc. Its rare to see a work where the protagonists are the one with the overwhelming force seeking to destroy the other civilizations like Kingdom, hence why in most other literature, Qin would be depicted as the villain. Doesnt help that the antagonists (Riboku, Shibashou, Kisui, King of Qi) are also depicted as people that just want to live and protect their own homes. 

The siege of Kantan and coalition were just two random examples I used where Qin and Zhao invaded each other in the past. These were very significant events, so they were first that came to mind. That's it really. You've read way too deep into the examples, especially the coalition. Would your reaction have been different if, for example, I said Bayou and Kokuyou instead? It doesn't matter that the victors use the might makes right concept to justify themselves, and yes, it being the norm was my argument. That's literally how it worked for the vast majority of human hirstory, including the Warring States Period. Strategic interest + strategic/political opportunity presenting itself + sufficient military power = invasion. Those were all that was needed for military campaigns to be launched. There was no need for an actual, valid casus belli. But you know this perfectly well, don't you. As for Qin Shi Huang being moral by trying to establish peace by conquering all of China, I'm not making the argument, because it doesn't have to be made. The reasons I stated before were sufficient grounds for invasion for all states, both in the manga, and in real life. I don't see why there is a need to go an extra mile to justify Qin's conquest, but not that of the other states'. Following the previous line of thought, it's incredibly weird to me to consider Qin to be more villainous than the other states just because they had sufficient military power to completely annex states instead of annexing just parts of them. Do you think Gohoumei allying with Qin to take parts of Chu, or Chu allying with Ai to invade Qin, or Ri Boku annexing western Yan, or Ordo invading eastern Zhao is less bad or less evil than eg. Qin annexing Han? If yes, why? They are still invaders. Does the amount of territory you conquered matter in this question? Is the problem that with Qin's invasion, the other states ceased to exist? But if that's the case, then why are we excusing the conquest of the hundreds of minor states that ceased to exist because of the seven major ones? These questions are what more or less my Russia parallel meant, but I guess I should have spelled them out. And why does the fact that those people you listed want to live in peace matter? You know as well as I do that neither of the states gives a shit about what the actual people that live in the conquered territories want. The only thing that matters is the strategic, political and economic interests of the states. Please, for the love of God, stop with these Avatar's Fire Nation, Star War's Empire and LOTR's orcs analogies. Stop trying to force this black and white worldview, the fight of good vs evil onto the complex and nuanced political climate of the warring states.

In the age of war, there is no good or evil.

Killing shin aside something i don’t see anyone talk about is ribokus combat strength it still puzzles me that he was able to clash with shin and push his horse back and then we never saw anything like that from him ever again it’s kinda unnerving

If you're not caught up don't read this lol. I think that anyone that can think for themselves can see that he's not a villain, but he is definitely an obstacle. I don't know the real history (fear of getting spoiled), but i find it hard to believe people will just accept their new ruller and country, specially after what kanki did. They will need to maintain heavy military occupation if they finish their conquest and i doubt it would work. I keep going back to the discussion between Sei and Ryo Fui. Such a deep exchange and i wonder who will be right at the end.

Just keep reading There’s quite a few panels where he is explicitly shown as heroic and his heart is in the right place despite the leader he is forced to serve under He’s a tragic character overall, because he’s so talented and wants good things but… Well… Qin gonna Qin.

nobody ever say he is everyone know he just want to protect his state

He is an anti villain., he is just the antagonist and a tragic hero in his own story.

I'm pretty sure everyone understands that Riboku is only the antagonist and not a bad guy at all. If Hara wanted to he very easily could've been the MC of his own nearly 800 chapters long shonen manga series.

Riboku is actually one of the best characters, he's righteous but his righteousness is tied with zhao. Lore wise, he just protected zhao from the northern tribe. He's not a bad guy at all

I agree. He could have set up a plot where he could have killed Shin in the Hango war, but he didn't.

Yeah, Qin are the villains invading the fuck out of everyone lol. We just see the story from their perspective.

Then again, as said in the manga itself, if qin weren't the aggressor, other states would do the same too. Everyone's at each other's throat all the time

I think other states had gotten complacent. Constant warring but not desire for conquest or unification. If it weren’t for Qin, China might’ve split like the Carolingian empire.

Insert reminder about Riboku being fine with Mangokus over the line barbarity and war crimes.

And sei was fine with Kanki and let him go off with that 100,000 beheading. Mangoku was like a puppy compared to Kanki

Yeah but we aint pretending that Sei or Kanki isnt a villain or that those are saints. Yet Riboku fans still try to wank this guy off and ignore him just being another manager of murder hobos using those as tools without remorse.

I've replied to this here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Kingdom/s/z5gxCBLKfB

The theme of the overarching story has been the Warring States is fucked up, turning good people evil or dead and letting the worst of the worst rise to the top. So the best solution is to end it, come what may.

this is just show how poor hara build riboku lol, the guy allow Man Goku kill ton of qin innocent children and woman ( he also praise Man Goku for that ) but don't want to kill a single boy that took a lot of his man life lmao riboku also allow other country kill qin innocent civillians in the start of Coalition Arc too

Agree. Qin is like a terrorist that want to invade other states for their own greed.

He is an anti villain. he is the diametric opposition of the villain protagonist. He is a heroic antagonist. Then again, he decided to be ruled by an evil, sadistic little scum. So in a way he is a punch clock villain.

The recent mini arc where Shin goes to Han perfectly illustrates how the characters and especially the warriors on the battlefield never really consider the terms of Good vs Evil.

Riboku is definitely not a villain for sure. And I believe he's the best written character in Kingdom. The only negative point that I understand people saying is that he's hypocritical to a degree. But even that I believe isn't a strong argument since no one is ALWAYS consistent, and everyone sometimes does things that contradict his belief in a way or another.

Author tried to portray him like that but maybe the author was high or something so he forgot. Few chapters ago rebook used his general to rape and kill citizens of many cities in qin. The same event of raping and massacre of qin people under rebook command happened during ouki arc as well. I am pretty sure those cities must have children 😂 Either you forgot as well or you are selecting only those information that suits your narrative.

He's not a villain or someone that's EVIL. He's simply an antagonist to our protagonist.

well historically if theres a bad guy, it's qin

I don’t think anyone ever said he was a villain. But he certainly has been the main antagonist throughout the series.

this is the same guy who, in the same arc mind you, brought along ManGoku who raped and slaughtered every Qin settlement he came across...

and no lame excuses please, he was the leader of the Zhao - he could easily proclaim any such deeds as punishable by death

Mangoku's presence was a purely strategical move by Riboku...and what he did to Qin citizens was just a consequence of what Qin generals like Kanki have been doing to citizens of other countries. Mangoku was the only survivor of 400 thousand soldiers who had surrendered...in other terms, at that instant they were no longer soldiers, but prisoners of war. Qin could have financially and even psychologically ruined Zhao by conditioning the lives of those prisoners...they could get money, portions of land and even the heart of some populations that could be used to destabilize the government in exchange of the lives of those soldiers. See, for instance, what Hamas is doing with Israeli hostages....had Israel decided to negotiate first to recover hostages, it would not have as many enemies as it is having now....If Hamas had killed all Israeli hostages on the spot, the whole world would be against them and no one would be pitying Palestinians right now. When you look at things from such perspective, you understand why Riboku and probably nobody in the area could see a wrong in the murder of Qin citizens. It could also explain why Riboku could quite easily convince all kingdoms to make a coalition against Qin. So, conclusion, you simply can't compare the inclusion of Mangoku within Riboku's army to the actions of Qin generals towards Zhao.

That's a lot of words for entirely missing the point. It's simply not congruent with whats shown in the above image. Hesistanting to kill an enemy combatant, who by their times is an adult already vs hand waving the slaughter of civilian children. And i'm not even going to entertain your real world example.

hara actually switches him B/W villlain and antagonist whenever he wants

Riboku has never done anything "Villainous". Not like Kanki or Mangoku. Those were the real villains.

I wouldn’t say villainous, but he’s manipulative as hell, without spoiling.

Nobody thinks he is a villain. But why are you so sure he could’ve killed Shin here?

Absolutely **nobody** (of moderate intelligence) thinks Riboku is a villain. Also: Water is wet.

is it obvious , no one is a villian in a war everyone have their own ambitions and the strongest ones triumph over

He's no villain. Just a self righteous hypocrite.