Tabletop Roleplaying Games (D&D, Pathfinder, CoC, ETC.)

[Corn Flakes]

The irony that the CSA being gone and all awful wacism not existing anymore means you don't get to do redemption stories about former rebel soldiers becoming more tolerant.

 

[Capsaicin Addict]

The irony that the CSA being gone and all awful wacism not existing anymore means you don't get to do redemption stories about former rebel soldiers becoming more tolerant.

It's the same dumb decision that Paizo made with writing slavery out of the Golarion setting. It limits storytelling and opportunities for heroism.

 

[Mr.Miyagi]

It's the same dumb decision that Paizo made with writing slavery out of the Golarion setting. It limits storytelling and opportunities for heroism.

It really feels like a rot that's eating away at storytelling across the board nowadays. If you show some kind of social ill or moral wrong, then people act like you're endorsing it by having it in a product you're selling, even if it's explicitly performed by the villains whom you're supposed to hate. So now conflicts are just, I don't know, arguing with your parents about their expectations for you? Fighting faceless goons who are evil "just because"? It's so dull. Not to mention that settings which feature things like racism or sexism allow a minority player to feel catharsis by confronting those problems through the game-world in ways that they can't in real life. I'd rather have that kind of blatant wish-fulfillment than just turning everything into padded, conflict-averse slop.

 

[Henri Barbusse]

The irony that the CSA being gone and all awful wacism not existing anymore means you don't get to do redemption stories about former rebel soldiers becoming more tolerant.

That's a feature. There's no redemption from being a confederate soldier.

 

[Scream Aim Fire]

So, the Deadlands team took a game that had a fairly interesting story, and completely butchered it in favor of catering to "woke progressives"... despite the changes coming across as regressive more than anything else. Sounds about right for wokies these days, sadly.

It really feels like a rot that's eating away at storytelling across the board nowadays. If you show some kind of social ill or moral wrong, then people act like you're endorsing it by having it in a product you're selling, even if it's explicitly performed by the villains whom you're supposed to hate. So now conflicts are just, I don't know, arguing with your parents about their expectations for you? Fighting faceless goons who are evil "just because"? It's so dull. Not to mention that settings which feature things like racism or sexism allow a minority player to feel catharsis by confronting those problems through the game-world in ways that they can't in real life. I'd rather have that kind of blatant wish-fulfillment than just turning everything into padded, conflict-averse slop.

That's the woke for you. They can't create anything really new or interesting; they have to take what other people have made and twist it to fit their own ends.

That's a feature. There's no redemption from being a confederate soldier.

That's the exact type of logic these freaks love to spew; ironically, it kinda ends up making the Confederates look more sympathetic. The constant demonization of the CSA, even when they're trying to be heroic, ends up making the Union look less tolerant and likable than the Confederacy.

It's a recurring thing with wokies, really; they're so obsessed with "fighting racism" and "equality" and all that, that they end up looking like a bunch of lunatics - they can't stop bringing it up, even when it makes no sense, and said constant focus ends up making them look like bigger racists and fascists by comparison.

That's not getting into some other games that the wokies have made; bit of an oldie, but there's shit like SIGMATA, which propagandizes that violent revolution is always morally justified as long as you're fighting for leftism. Similarly, there's Comrades: A Revolutionary RPG, another left-focusing RPGs that does little more than talk about how violent "revolution" against the "evil right wing Donald Trump followers" is needed and how good it is. They frame themselves as these glorious heroes of "revolution", when in reality... they're not.

 

[Corn Flakes]

That's not getting into some other games that the wokies have made; bit of an oldie, but there's shit like SIGMATA, which propagandizes that violent revolution is always morally justified as long as you're fighting for leftism. Similarly, there's Comrades: A Revolutionary RPG, another left-focusing RPGs that does little more than talk about how violent "revolution" against the "evil right wing Donald Trump followers" is needed and how good it is. They frame themselves as these glorious heroes of "revolution", when in reality... they're not.

You'll notice that none of these games ever attained and kind of success or popularity. That's why they try so hard to infiltrate, subvert and wokify already existing franchises. Of course, whenever they do it, their efforts result in said franchises shedding fans, customers and/or players at a record pace.

Seriously, Deadlands was never all that popular in the first place. I can't imagine it's doing any better these days.

 

[Scream Aim Fire]

You'll notice that none of these games ever attained and kind of success or popularity. That's why they try so hard to infiltrate, subvert and wokify already existing franchises. Of course, whenever they do it, their efforts result in said franchises shedding fans, customers and/or players at a record pace.

To go off-topic, I'm just confused why FATAL and Frinds is indicating that both games are good; seriously, the reviewer for Comrades openly admits that he likes the game, while the SIGMATA reviewer views that game similarly, talking about how he's "privileged" and all that. I mean, I get that different people enjoy different games, but... games that are little more than open propaganda for wokies aren't exactly things most other people would say they enjoy, you follow?

Also...

Seriously, Deadlands was never all that popular in the first place. I can't imagine it's doing any better these days.

You got my condolences, Corn and co.; while I never gave the game a shot myself, I had heard of it beforehand. It seems like it was an interesting game, back in the day; now, it looks like the current version is supposed to be more in-line with Coyote & Crow, sadly.

 

[Hummingbird]

You got my condolences, Corn and co.; while I never gave the game a shot myself, I had heard of it beforehand. It seems like it was an interesting game, back in the day; now, it looks like the current version is supposed to be more in-line with Coyote & Crow, sadly.

There's something cool about calling your DM "sheriff" and your group a "posse", using playing cards to make your character (pre-Reloaded), having mad scientists in the old west, and I like alternative histories.

 

[Ghostse]

The irony that the CSA being gone and all awful wacism not existing anymore means you don't get to do redemption stories about former rebel soldiers becoming more tolerant.

You also miss the chance to turn the "States Rights!" thing into a fun spin; What if there's some CSA states that pass abolition laws? What if the CSA just rationally decides that slavery isn't a productive system?
Also, these guys really clearly didn't look into how the western argicultural tribes treated captives, and that's before you get into the fucked up shit the plans indians got up to. There's a reason a lot of the southern indian tribes sided with the Confederacy.

To go off-topic, I'm just confused why FATAL and Frinds is indicating that both games are good;

They are SA posters and thus giant faggots. Mystery Solved.

 

[Sayer of the N-Word]

You also miss the chance to turn the "States Rights!" thing into a fun spin; What if there's some CSA states that pass abolition laws? What if the CSA just rationally decides that slavery isn't a productive system?
Also, these guys really clearly didn't look into how the western argicultural tribes treated captives, and that's before you get into the fucked up shit the plans indians got up to. There's a reason a lot of the southern indian tribes sided with the Confederacy.

The bona fides that Shane Hensley listed in his Facebook announcement were all consistent with those of a certain species of history nerd who is laser focused on a single subject and retarded in all other ways. It wouldn't be possible for him to work out an end to slavery that didn't involve the total defeat of the Confederacy because he knows of no other way, he has no interest in learning because the Civil War is all he cares about, and any outcome that didn't entail a large number of white people being totally humiliated would be unacceptable to the audience he was pandering to with his decision anyway.

By the way, is there anything more obnoxious than the "you're playing in my world, buddy!" attitude that a lot of game makers evince when they get called out on something? These guys act like they're Tolkien, who had the right to tell people they were wrong and to cut it out when they wanted to mess with the Lord of the Rings because it was a fixed work that was the product of his imagination and his alone. Game worlds have never been like that, and saying something like "it's still mine. And until I die, it will stay that way. I know what it is and where I want it to go" makes you look like a controlling asshole who gets angry when people disagree with the Master's creative vision.

 

[Ghostse]

The left, being authoritarian, can't conceive that a system that compels labor from the unwilling is ultimately self-destructing. A slave only works as hard as they need to avoid the lash.

Also just makes me wonder, what the Ottomans are getting up do now that the CSA isn't competing with them for blacks.

By the way, is there anything more obnoxious than the "you're playing in my world, buddy!" attitude that a lot of game makers evince when they get called out on something? These guys act like they're Tolkien, who had the right to tell people they were wrong and to cut it out when they wanted to mess with the Lord of the Rings because it was a fixed work that was the product of his imagination and his alone. Game worlds have never been like that, and saying something like "it's still mine. And until I die, it will stay that way. I know what it is and where I want it to go" makes you look like a controlling asshole who gets angry when people disagree with the Master's creative vision.

When a game creator develops not one but several new languages & scripts + writes a cosmology as autistically complete as Tolkien, I'll view "My world" as a valid argument.

But I guess I appreciate it when creators do drop the mask. Because it means its time to stop investing in that system and start the look for something else, since all new material/suplements are going to be wokeist drivel, and any new players are going to assume games will also be wokeist drivel. I can hear you boiling frogs already going "muh table", but look man. I can homebrew and bolt-on to "Magical Fairy Princess Adventures" to make an brutal, lethal swords-and-wizardry that's also a coomer fest to rival Cha'alt, but that's not what people looking for games in that system are going to expect.

So now conflicts are just, I don't know, arguing with your parents about their expectations for you? Fighting faceless goons who are evil "just because"?

This is what the faggots and trannies who have colonized the hobby want. See: The gay magical prom shit WotC put out for D&D. Or I should say that's all they are permitted by their own politics to want - no one actually wants this boring shit for longer than 5 minutes, so they will slowly kill everything you love because as soon as they shit up one product, they won't like it anymore and will go over to one that is actually fun ... just problematic, but we can fix that.

There was interview I was reading about a playwriter who sat down with her circle of fags and niggers and asked them what role straight white males should have in plays. After taking their feedback she wrote a straight white male character that conformed to all their expectations that basically boiled down to being a passive ally & cheerleader & abject feminist, and everyone HATED the character because he was a loser. She then presented them with a character who was everything they said they hated about white people/straights/men and they couldn't get enough.

 

[Capsaicin Addict]

This is what the faggots and trannies who have colonized the hobby want. See: The gay magical prom shit WotC put out for D&D. Or I should say that's all they are permitted by their own politics to want - no one actually wants this boring shit for longer than 5 minutes, so they will slowly kill everything you love because as soon as they shit up one product, they won't like it anymore and will go over to one that is actually fun ... just problematic, but we can fix that.

Grey blobs, touching other gray blobs, and nothing actually gets accomplished.

As I've remarked before, it would be sad if they weren't spreading this shit everywhere. Where's their sense of wonder, their desire to be heroic? To be awesome? To borrow the line from Rutger Hauer, I've seen things people wouldn't believe -- if they hadn't seen similar crazy awesome shit in their games too.

There was interview I was reading about a playwriter who sat down with her circle of fags and niggers and asked them what role straight white males should have in plays. After taking their feedback she wrote a straight white male character that conformed to all their expectations that basically boiled down to being a passive ally & cheerleader & abject feminist, and everyone HATED the character because he was a loser. She then presented them with a character who was everything they said they hated about white people/straights/men and they couldn't get enough.

It's fine to have flawed, imperfect heroes. It's not fine to have 'heroes' who are essentially worthless.

 

[Ghostse]

Grey blobs, touching other gray blobs

Touching? That's rape, shitlord. Consent can be withdrawn at any time, even after. Check your privilege, rape apologist.

You've been banned and I'm giving your extreme patriachitical attitude down twinkles. You're a tool of the colonialist oppressors, so sit there and listen to the oppressed voices of black and brown bodies speaking their truth with your mouth closed. You can play again when I see that you've donated $100 to a BLM-affliated racial justice cause and another $100 to a organization that helps temporally oppressed with HRT without informing their parents.

Ok, while our racist thought criminal is venmoing their donations, In my role as Equity Facilitator, I'll see which Individual of Worth is next... Kelly, you're up if you feel safe and validated enough to take your turn, and provided you have enough spoons for the emotional labor. Are you comfortable sharing with everyone what your pronouns are for this turn?

 

[Wormy]

Ah, but that would require them to (a) actually write something beyond REEEEE CSA BAD, and (b) it might lend moral legitimacy to some members of the Confederacy, and they can't have that! They are all doubleplusungood!

Of course! Silly ME, actually thinking someone would write something that made sense in the meta. I forgot what fucking year it is!

You also miss the chance to turn the "States Rights!" thing into a fun spin; What if there's some CSA states that pass abolition laws? What if the CSA just rationally decides that slavery isn't a productive system?

In the meta, slavery was already on life support. At least according to Reloaded, the CSA began a "Join the army, you're a free man" program, which unsurprisingly saw a hell of a lot of slaves sign on. The Texas Rangers recruiting Django Unchained types probably didn't help slavery's status either.

I can hear you boiling frogs already going "muh table", but look man. I can homebrew and bolt-on to "Magical Fairy Princess Adventures" to make an brutal, lethal swords-and-wizardry that's also a coomer fest to rival Cha'alt, but that's not what people looking for games in that system are going to expect.

All the better then to show them a different and more fun way.

 

[Bloitzhole]

they gonna make you rebuy everything because WOTC knows you will.

Will people though? Free PDFs will always be available and I just don't see that many people being retarded enough to actually buy a digital and physical copy of the same book - but maybe I'm giving DMs too much credit.
I agree with your points about why TTRPGs aren't compatible with common video game subscription modules, but if they really try to cram monetization in like a square peg in a round hole, my feel is that the broader playerbase is not so invested in WOTC's platform that if it goes to shit, they won't just adapt or create a digital alternative that works well enough without paying any fees.

I run "Ghosts of Saltmarsh" through Roll20 without a single purchase just fine, the only real hassle is token creation (and the module being a tad mediocre in general if you don't like writing extra storylines to tie everything together somewhat seamlessly. Also throws you a lot of tools but no incentives to really use them in the campaign).

Pathfinder is also pretty popular in my city and has managed to outsell DnD before - I see no reason for it not to do so again if WOTC fucks up too hard when it comes to bland storytelling. Or maybe my outlook is just very optimistic.

 

[Ghostse]

Also throws you a lot of tools but no incentives to really use them in the campaign).

That's WOTC in general. I ran a a slightly reworked Thunderspire, and man they expect you create more than they give you with that one. They have some cool drops from the random encounters that tie into sidequests, but the definition is they explain the doors and passages that they lead, but then the rest is "Go make a fun minidungeon for your players". They don't even suggest monsters or nuthing

 

[Seven Devil Wolf]

A bit off-topic from me gettiing blackpilled on one of my favourite designers (Thanks a lot, Shane. Get fucked), but I noticed some people here have played stuff like Monsterhearts. Can anyone give me the tl;dr of how this stuff works? 'cause I'm trying to read through PbtA for like, the fourth time in my life, and I just don't understand it. I really don't get it. I've tried asking on a Discord I used to be a part of, but of course, if you express any actual confusion or point out how something seems to be, you just don't get it and you're not really asking in good faith.
How do things like combat and scenes actually resolve? Someone said to me 'Well, what does the fiction say?' but I just don't understand how that's applied. In something like Monsterhearts, and I'm surrounded by eeeevil vampire hunters or something, who have me dead to rights (at gunpoint, one false move, pow).

What happens if I want to do something? If I'm rolling I'm gonna wreck it! to kill the main guy, I roll 10+, I get what I want without any issue. What happens then? Does the GM just have the ability to say 'Actually, they shoot you first, take x Harm' or do you just keep rolling per hunter until they're all dead or you roll 6 or less? Do GMs have moves they use in response, because I can't seem them rolling dice for nearly anything?

I've only properly played Blades in the Dark, which is a fairly decent PbtA-adjacent game and that generally handles such things with Elite enemies (When you try to act against them, they just get something which goes off before you even get your chance to resolve - the master fencer disarms you with ease., or the shadowy assassin can throw knives fast enogh to suppress people getting closer and potentially harm you as you get close. Want to spend Stress to Resist?) but I can't see anything like this in ApocWorld, DungeonWorld, Monsterhearts, etc.

 

[Wormy]

Where's their sense of wonder, their desire to be heroic?

Slap some rainbows on me, but I still see this as an existing Achilles heel to the wokescold game mentality. I can sell The Better Way to a new player by emphasizing this. Would you rather sit down and deal with the same shit that's in the real world that I'll safely bet you think sucks, or actually escape and be something far more interesting and heroic, actually overcome flaws and seemingly insurmountable battles, stand defiant in the face of big evils, indulge the things you DON'T get to do in real life?

 

[Capsaicin Addict]

Slap some rainbows on me, but I still see this as an existing Achilles heel to the wokescold game mentality. I can sell The Better Way to a new player by emphasizing this. Would you rather sit down and deal with the same shit that's in the real world that I'll safely bet you think sucks, or actually escape and be something far more interesting and heroic, actually overcome flaws and seemingly insurmountable battles, stand defiant in the face of big evils, indulge the things you DON'T get to do in real life?

Precisely. It's like... they want the exact opposite of escapism. Which, I suppose, makes a kind of grim sense: they don't want anyone thinking they can get away from their cheerless void even for a few hours.

 

[The Ugly One]

Grey blobs, touching other gray blobs, and nothing actually gets accomplished.

As I've remarked before, it would be sad if they weren't spreading this shit everywhere. Where's their sense of wonder, their desire to be heroic? To be awesome? To borrow the line from Rutger Hauer, I've seen things people wouldn't believe -- if they hadn't seen similar crazy awesome shit in their games too.


It's fine to have flawed, imperfect heroes. It's not fine to have 'heroes' who are essentially worthless.

There's no heroism because a hero rises above his peers to do something extraordinary. Heroism and equality are mutually exclusive.

They can't kill it, though, thanks to Ryan Dancey. Mattel could end the D&D line completely, and there'd still be ACKS and other clones.