TG February Chat Thread: Dank Rollman's Halal Hotbox

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > TG February Chat Thread: Dank Rollman's Halal Hotbox

Hyper Crab Tank: Feb 10, 2014; The 16-bit retro-future of crustacean-based transportation

Quarex posted:

I would like to know more about this. The only time I can recall ever deciding that a tabletop game had locked up was the first time I played an Immolation on my opponent's Clergy of the Holy Nimbus when I had no mana to tap, and so the game crashed and the universe had to be rebooted.

That particular one doesn't work under current rules, but as an amusing aside, you can still cause paper M:tG to lock up today, and it's not even that difficult. Perhaps you've seen this video of LSV breaking MTGO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGXG5rNe_tI. What the game ends up doing is actually correct, and if that happened in paper Magic, the game would be considered to be in an infinite loop and would end in a tie.

As to the DBZ RPG, Lynx Winters can no doubt tell the story better, but I remember it had something to do with some shield spell that reflected all damage taken back to the attacker without actually chipping down the shield any. Cue two combatants with one of those, and...

# ? Feb 12, 2015 02:23

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 11, 2024 13:51

Elector_Nerdlingen: Sep 27, 2004

DalaranJ posted:

Dear Rule of Three,

I accidentally raised some Orc children to be Chaotic Good. If I kill them now they will ascend to Asgard where they will surely be murdered by pissed off Elves every day for the rest of eternity. What should I do?

This is the sort of poo poo I'd probably start telling people if they asked the same loving questions for 20 years and then complained that my answers were contradicting the answers I gave more than a decade ago.

Quarex posted:

Yes, and as early as the mid-1970s he was already telling people that if they did not like a rule they should feel free to change it, because the point was to have fun, not to get bogged down in minutiae.

And then a few weeks later saying "well, if you want to do this thing, that is fine, but do not call it Dungeons & Dragons."

These things aren't actually contradictory. If you are not having fun with Dungeons & Dragons, you can (and should) change the rules until you are having fun. Once you change the rules, it's not Dungeons & Dragons any more.

e: That came out pretty badly, I think? What I'm getting at is that (apparently) in the early days, taking your character and stuff between different tables/DMs/campaigns was really common, and if you're using a shitload of extra rule or changes, then you're not going to be able to take a character from your game and put it into a game where people are using the rules-as-written. (And probably more importantly, someone who'd been playing D&D-as-written who brings their guy to your table is going to be unable to play the game you're playing).

Quarex posted:

Sometimes I wonder if he intentionally contradicted himself just to ensure people on any side of a gaming argument could use him as proof of their viewpoint, haha)

It's probably this though.

Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 02:35 on Feb 12, 2015

# ? Feb 12, 2015 02:24

Lynx Winters: May 1, 2003; Borderlawns: The Treehouse of Pandora

Quarex posted:

I would like to know more about this. The only time I can recall ever deciding that a tabletop game had locked up was the first time I played an Immolation on my opponent's Clergy of the Holy Nimbus when I had no mana to tap, and so the game crashed and the universe had to be rebooted.

So okay, it's DBZ, it's about zwee fighting and fireballs. You can spend your energy points to create a force field called a Deflection that acts like armor against energy attacks. The main problem is that Deflections are not ablative, so you either have to overwhelm it by attacking it with more dice of damage than the defender put up, or it stays up forever (or until you go in and punch them). However, if you hit a Deflection with an energy attack and the Deflection has more points in it than the incoming attack, the difference is automatically reflected back at the attacker. No roll to hit, no roll to dodge, they just take it. However, if the attacker still has their Deflection up, it applies against the reflected attack.

Here's the problem, in the form of an example that could easily come up. Noku and Bullgeta are about to fight. Both of them, over the course of some flexing and yelling, have raised 2000 point Deflections. However, since it's the core book, there's no actual way to sense power levels other than a scouter, so Noku doesn't know how strong Bullgeta's Deflection is. He decides to test the waters and throws a 1000 point energy blast. Bullgeta, with his advanced Google Glass, knows that this attack couldn't possibly hurt him and just stands there, thinking he looks cool. The energy blast slams into his force field, fails to do damage, and then the difference between Deflection and attack (1000 points) is reflected back at Noku. Because it's automatic, that reflected attack slams back into Noku's Deflection, which will take all of it and reflect 1000 back at Bullgeta.

Since Deflections aren't ablative and don't get knocked down until a superior attack overcomes it, we enter a state I call Infinite Death Tennis. 1000 dice of damage will bounce back and forth between the two fighters forever. If two characters of roughly equal Deflections are fighting, and one hits the other with an energy attack that won't overcome the other's Deflection, congrats, you've just made a tabletop game freeze until someone house-rules it in a million ways that should have been thought of in playtesting because I refuse to believe this situation never happened when they were designing the game. The game has two sourcebooks and a third was in the works until R. Talsorian lost the license (but it can be found online with the names changed by the main writer) and none of them address this issue at all.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 02:50

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

Tendales posted:

Hilariously, yes. All the time. Check out the 'variants' boards on boardgamegeek some time, and check out how many majorly game-changing house rules are thrown out there by people who admit they haven't played the game yet.

I refuse to believe there are game-changing house rules worse than "no auctioning of properties" and "free parking gives you fees collected from the players"

Guilty Spork posted:

D&D in particular came out of a tradition of wargaming where you were basically expected to have to houserule to make the game really work. Some people apparently missed the memo that we started expecting game designers to sell us functional games, and take houseruling as a default rather than an option.

Avoid pages 361-367 of the Next thread.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 03:08

NachtSieger: Apr 10, 2013

gradenko_2000 posted:

Avoid [...] the Next thread.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 03:22

Tollymain: Jul 9, 2010; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

Really just

gradenko_2000 posted:

Avoid [...] Next

# ? Feb 12, 2015 03:23

ChrisAsmadi: Apr 19, 2007; :D

Tollymain posted:

Really just

Hey, it has good subrace rules!

That's something, right?

# ? Feb 12, 2015 04:39

Kwyndig: Sep 23, 2006; Heeeeeey

Why do need subrace rules anyway?

# ? Feb 12, 2015 04:44

Otherkinsey Scale: Jul 17, 2012; Just a little bit of sunshine!

Hyper Crab Tank posted:

That particular one doesn't work under current rules, but as an amusing aside, you can still cause paper M:tG to lock up today, and it's not even that difficult. Perhaps you've seen this video of LSV breaking MTGO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGXG5rNe_tI. What the game ends up doing is actually correct, and if that happened in paper Magic, the game would be considered to be in an infinite loop and would end in a tie.

Which is why they don't template cards that way any more, mind.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 04:45

Mimir: Nov 26, 2012

Kwyndig posted:

Why do need subrace rules anyway?

Otherwise all of your races have to take place above water.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 05:02

Error 404: Jul 17, 2009; MAGE CURES PLOT

Lynx Winters posted:

So okay, it's DBZ, it's about zwee fighting and fireballs. You can spend your energy points to create a force field called a Deflection that acts like armor against energy attacks. The main problem is that Deflections are not ablative, so you either have to overwhelm it by attacking it with more dice of damage than the defender put up, or it stays up forever (or until you go in and punch them). However, if you hit a Deflection with an energy attack and the Deflection has more points in it than the incoming attack, the difference is automatically reflected back at the attacker. No roll to hit, no roll to dodge, they just take it. However, if the attacker still has their Deflection up, it applies against the reflected attack.

Here's the problem, in the form of an example that could easily come up. Noku and Bullgeta are about to fight. Both of them, over the course of some flexing and yelling, have raised 2000 point Deflections. However, since it's the core book, there's no actual way to sense power levels other than a scouter, so Noku doesn't know how strong Bullgeta's Deflection is. He decides to test the waters and throws a 1000 point energy blast. Bullgeta, with his advanced Google Glass, knows that this attack couldn't possibly hurt him and just stands there, thinking he looks cool. The energy blast slams into his force field, fails to do damage, and then the difference between Deflection and attack (1000 points) is reflected back at Noku. Because it's automatic, that reflected attack slams back into Noku's Deflection, which will take all of it and reflect 1000 back at Bullgeta.

Since Deflections aren't ablative and don't get knocked down until a superior attack overcomes it, we enter a state I call Infinite Death Tennis. 1000 dice of damage will bounce back and forth between the two fighters forever. If two characters of roughly equal Deflections are fighting, and one hits the other with an energy attack that won't overcome the other's Deflection, congrats, you've just made a tabletop game freeze until someone house-rules it in a million ways that should have been thought of in playtesting because I refuse to believe this situation never happened when they were designing the game. The game has two sourcebooks and a third was in the works until R. Talsorian lost the license (but it can be found online with the names changed by the main writer) and none of them address this issue at all.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Holy loving poo poo

# ? Feb 12, 2015 05:21

Harrow: Jun 30, 2012

Lynx Winters posted:

So okay, it's DBZ, it's about zwee fighting and fireballs. You can spend your energy points to create a force field called a Deflection that acts like armor against energy attacks. The main problem is that Deflections are not ablative, so you either have to overwhelm it by attacking it with more dice of damage than the defender put up, or it stays up forever (or until you go in and punch them). However, if you hit a Deflection with an energy attack and the Deflection has more points in it than the incoming attack, the difference is automatically reflected back at the attacker. No roll to hit, no roll to dodge, they just take it. However, if the attacker still has their Deflection up, it applies against the reflected attack.

Here's the problem, in the form of an example that could easily come up. Noku and Bullgeta are about to fight. Both of them, over the course of some flexing and yelling, have raised 2000 point Deflections. However, since it's the core book, there's no actual way to sense power levels other than a scouter, so Noku doesn't know how strong Bullgeta's Deflection is. He decides to test the waters and throws a 1000 point energy blast. Bullgeta, with his advanced Google Glass, knows that this attack couldn't possibly hurt him and just stands there, thinking he looks cool. The energy blast slams into his force field, fails to do damage, and then the difference between Deflection and attack (1000 points) is reflected back at Noku. Because it's automatic, that reflected attack slams back into Noku's Deflection, which will take all of it and reflect 1000 back at Bullgeta.

Since Deflections aren't ablative and don't get knocked down until a superior attack overcomes it, we enter a state I call Infinite Death Tennis. 1000 dice of damage will bounce back and forth between the two fighters forever. If two characters of roughly equal Deflections are fighting, and one hits the other with an energy attack that won't overcome the other's Deflection, congrats, you've just made a tabletop game freeze until someone house-rules it in a million ways that should have been thought of in playtesting because I refuse to believe this situation never happened when they were designing the game. The game has two sourcebooks and a third was in the works until R. Talsorian lost the license (but it can be found online with the names changed by the main writer) and none of them address this issue at all.

Pretty sure this used to happen in the original SNES version of Final Fantasy 2/4 with the Reflect spell and this is even more hilarious.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 05:37

Barudak: May 7, 2007

Harrow posted:

Pretty sure this used to happen in the original SNES version of Final Fantasy 2/4 with the Reflect spell and this is even more hilarious.

Its FFVII where it keeps bouncing (in all other FF games spells which have been reflected once gain the property to bypass reflect) but the game has a hardcoded "whoever's reflect status runs out first/4 bounces" to keep it from bouncing endlessly. Amusingly if you make every target have reflect status and use another spell on all of them to make the reflect status permanent the game does indeed just flat out crash as it doesn't have a solution to that particular problem.

I mean, its a pretty obvious problem with lots of possible neat solutions. Personally, why not just add the reflecting death balls of damage to an ever growing pot of damage and the first ones deflection to fail gets all the damage?

# ? Feb 12, 2015 07:44

My Lovely Horse: Aug 21, 2010

Barudak posted:

(in all other FF games spells which have been reflected once gain the property to bypass reflect)

Which is in fact the way you get past an enemy's reflect, cast it on a party member and attack them with magic. There's even eventually a boss or two who does it to you.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 07:59

Lynx Winters: May 1, 2003; Borderlawns: The Treehouse of Pandora

As far as the whole deflect/reflect thing goes, I always thought it was pretty weird as a mechanic that claims to recreate the cartoon. Sending someone's attack back at them wasn't something that happened a lot in the show, and it was usually in the context of two characters playing reverse tug of war with energy beams, a mechanic not brought up at all in the core rules.

The game's got a shitload of other problems and isn't even close to what I'd call playable, so even if death tennis didn't lock up the game there'd just be a dozen other things to worry about.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 08:07

Nancy_Noxious: Apr 10, 2013; by Smythe

I was (once again trying) to read the tabletop sub-forum of the Intangibility Forums and (once again) I gave up.

Why do people I would (otherwise) think of as progressives have such a regressive taste in RPG mechanics? Some months ago it was all Pathfinder; now it's all Next with some Pathfinder/OSR crap and a dash of Fate Core (it used to be an avant-garde system; now it's just mainstream).

In the RPG.net forums I also noted that (at least a few) transwomen are really into Pathfinder/regressive stuff. I left those forums because new mod Zeea would ban anyone who dared to say anything remotely negative about Next � and she's not the only one to display a preference towards regressive/old school/simulationist stuff.

(Even here � the only place in the web where talk about Next isn't a circle jerk about how reverence to the D&D ~*tradition~* will save gaming from oblivion � we have user Libertad � a seemingly progressive individual whose posts I enjoyed reading here and elsewhere � who seems to be a Pathfinder/Paizo/regressive mechanics enthusiast.)

I know it's silly to expext that people who are progressive about civil rights would be progressive in game design as well, but I find it baffling. Does the Pathfinder love exist because they sometimes depict* LGBT NPCs in their products? Next is a big pile of regressive crap; how does a single parapraph (sorry, "The Paragraph") about character gender make it progressive in any way? (And why aren't those people all over Blue Rose, a game that does the representation thing much better?)

*Although, as Avery Mcdaldno once said, representation is only a scratch in the surface; in order to really queer gaming up there has to be a shift in themes and play dynamics.

Sorry for the rant.

I'm just sad that people I once considered "to be on my side" are against modern design in D&D-like games. I'm also sad that (so far) the only "heirs" to the 4E way of doing D&D are 13th Age (great production values, regressive in many ways) and now Strike! (glorious design with production values I mildly dislike and that will likely prevent my current group from giving it a try). Meanwhile the 3E regressives got not only Pathfinder (great support/production values) and now D&D itself � in the guise of a streamlined and cleaned-up version of 3.5.

(It's not the end of the world though � I still have many wonderful games Powered by the Apocalypse. And my current group likes those. I'll just miss the time when I was able to enjoy D&D � I'll never be able to enjoy 4E combat again, and the fact that almost everyone seems to be glad it's gone only makes me sadder.)

# ? Feb 12, 2015 13:25

Ettin: Oct 2, 2010

Nancy_Noxious posted:

Good lord, I can't tell whether this post is earnest grog or a parody.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 13:28

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

Nancy_Noxious posted:

I was (once again trying) to read the tabletop sub-forum of the Intangibility Forums and (once again) I gave up.

Why do people I would (otherwise) think of as progressives have such a regressive taste in RPG mechanics? Some months ago it was all Pathfinder; now it's all Next with some Pathfinder/OSR crap and a dash of Fate Core (it used to be an avant-garde system; now it's just mainstream).

In the RPG.net forums I also noted that (at least a few) transwomen are really into Pathfinder/regressive stuff. I left those forums because new mod Zeea would ban anyone who dared to say anything remotely negative about Next � and she's not the only one to display a preference towards regressive/old school/simulationist stuff.

(Even here � the only place in the web where talk about Next isn't a circle jerk about how reverence to the D&D ~*tradition~* will save gaming from oblivion � we have user Libertad � a seemingly progressive individual whose posts I enjoyed reading here and elsewhere � who seems to be a Pathfinder/Paizo/regressive mechanics enthusiast.)

I know it's silly to expext that people who are progressive about civil rights would be progressive in game design as well, but I find it baffling. Does the Pathfinder love exist because they sometimes depict* LGBT NPCs in their products? Next is a big pile of regressive crap; how does a single parapraph (sorry, "The Paragraph") about character gender make it progressive in any way? (And why aren't those people all over Blue Rose, a game that does the representation thing much better?)

*Although, as Avery Mcdaldno once said, representation is only a scratch in the surface; in order to really queer gaming up there has to be a shift in themes and play dynamics.

Sorry for the rant. I'm just sad that people I once considered "to be on my side" are against modern design in D&D-like games. I'm also sad that (so far) the only "heirs" to the 4E way of doing D&D are 13th Age (great production values, regressive in many ways) and now Strike! (glorious design with production values I mildly dislike and that will likely prevent my current group from giving it a try). Meanwhile the 3E regressives got not only Pathfinder (great support/production values) and now D&D itself � in the guise of a streamlined and cleaned-up version of 3.5.

(It's not the end of the world though � I still have many wonderful games Powered by the Apocalypse. And my current group likes those. I'll just miss the time when I was able to enjoy D&D � I'll never be able to enjoy 4E combat again, and the fact that almost everyone seems to be glad it's gone only makes me sadder.)

This post is extremely good and not totally ridiculous at all.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 13:28

Chaotic Neutral: Aug 29, 2011

Leaving aside the.. uh, eccentricity of that post, the 4E dream isn't dead. It's just not an easy act to follow up on.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 13:31

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

What new avant garde system may I like now that Fate has sold out?

# ? Feb 12, 2015 13:36

Lightning Lord: Feb 21, 2013; $200 a day, plus expenses

Nancy_Noxious posted:

I was (once again trying) to read the tabletop sub-forum of the Intangibility Forums and (once again) I gave up.

Why do people I would (otherwise) think of as progressives have such a regressive taste in RPG mechanics? Some months ago it was all Pathfinder; now it's all Next with some Pathfinder/OSR crap and a dash of Fate Core (it used to be an avant-garde system; now it's just mainstream).

In the RPG.net forums I also noted that (at least a few) transwomen are really into Pathfinder/regressive stuff. I left those forums because new mod Zeea would ban anyone who dared to say anything remotely negative about Next � and she's not the only one to display a preference towards regressive/old school/simulationist stuff.

(Even here � the only place in the web where talk about Next isn't a circle jerk about how reverence to the D&D ~*tradition~* will save gaming from oblivion � we have user Libertad � a seemingly progressive individual whose posts I enjoyed reading here and elsewhere � who seems to be a Pathfinder/Paizo/regressive mechanics enthusiast.)

I know it's silly to expext that people who are progressive about civil rights would be progressive in game design as well, but I find it baffling. Does the Pathfinder love exist because they sometimes depict* LGBT NPCs in their products? Next is a big pile of regressive crap; how does a single parapraph (sorry, "The Paragraph") about character gender make it progressive in any way? (And why aren't those people all over Blue Rose, a game that does the representation thing much better?)

*Although, as Avery Mcdaldno once said, representation is only a scratch in the surface; in order to really queer gaming up there has to be a shift in themes and play dynamics.

Sorry for the rant. I'm just sad that people I once considered "to be on my side" are against modern design in D&D-like games. I'm also sad that (so far) the only "heirs" to the 4E way of doing D&D are 13th Age (great production values, regressive in many ways) and now Strike! (glorious design with production values I mildly dislike and that will likely prevent my current group from giving it a try). Meanwhile the 3E regressives got not only Pathfinder (great support/production values) and now D&D itself � in the guise of a streamlined and cleaned-up version of 3.5.

(It's not the end of the world though � I still have many wonderful games Powered by the Apocalypse. And my current group likes those. I'll just miss the time when I was able to enjoy D&D � I'll never be able to enjoy 4E combat again, and the fact that almost everyone seems to be glad it's gone only makes me sadder.)

who the gently caress cares

Lightning Lord fucked around with this message at 13:44 on Feb 12, 2015

# ? Feb 12, 2015 13:41

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

Is that for real? Are we supposed to respond to it seriously?

People are still playing 4E, and it's even getting PDF re-releases on DnDClassics, which is a drat sight better than what Next has got. If they would just release PHB 1 we'd be all set.

I'd also challenge that criticism of Libertad: The supplements for Fighters and no-more-alignments are well written and steer Pathfinder away from its 3.5E roots.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 13:41

Lightning Lord: Feb 21, 2013; $200 a day, plus expenses

gradenko_2000 posted:

Is that for real? Are we supposed to respond to it seriously?

People are still playing 4E, and it's even getting PDF re-releases on DnDClassics, which is a drat sight better than what Next has got. If they would just release PHB 1 we'd be all set.

I'd also challenge that criticism of Libertad: The supplements for Fighters and no-more-alignments are well written and steer Pathfinder away from its 3.5E roots.

I really hope it is because it would make my soul swell with joy and exit my body and fly around the room.

I mean Arivia making a not unfair at all assumption that a person who actively got mad about people talking mechanics in the Retro thread is probably a jerk is one thing, and crying about what other people play (it's not cool when it's done "in reverse" either, hth) is a hilarious other. Zeea likes Pathfinder, how regressive. What part of that thought makes sense????

# ? Feb 12, 2015 13:46

Winson_Paine: Oct 27, 2000; Wait, something is wrong.

Nancy_Noxious posted:

I was (once again trying) to read the tabletop sub-forum of the Intangibility Forums and (once again) I gave up.

Why do people I would (otherwise) think of as progressives have such a regressive taste in RPG mechanics? Some months ago it was all Pathfinder; now it's all Next with some Pathfinder/OSR crap and a dash of Fate Core (it used to be an avant-garde system; now it's just mainstream).

In the RPG.net forums I also noted that (at least a few) transwomen are really into Pathfinder/regressive stuff. I left those forums because new mod Zeea would ban anyone who dared to say anything remotely negative about Next � and she's not the only one to display a preference towards regressive/old school/simulationist stuff.

(Even here � the only place in the web where talk about Next isn't a circle jerk about how reverence to the D&D ~*tradition~* will save gaming from oblivion � we have user Libertad � a seemingly progressive individual whose posts I enjoyed reading here and elsewhere � who seems to be a Pathfinder/Paizo/regressive mechanics enthusiast.)

I know it's silly to expext that people who are progressive about civil rights would be progressive in game design as well, but I find it baffling. Does the Pathfinder love exist because they sometimes depict* LGBT NPCs in their products? Next is a big pile of regressive crap; how does a single parapraph (sorry, "The Paragraph") about character gender make it progressive in any way? (And why aren't those people all over Blue Rose, a game that does the representation thing much better?)

*Although, as Avery Mcdaldno once said, representation is only a scratch in the surface; in order to really queer gaming up there has to be a shift in themes and play dynamics.

Sorry for the rant. I'm just sad that people I once considered "to be on my side" are against modern design in D&D-like games. I'm also sad that (so far) the only "heirs" to the 4E way of doing D&D are 13th Age (great production values, regressive in many ways) and now Strike! (glorious design with production values I mildly dislike and that will likely prevent my current group from giving it a try). Meanwhile the 3E regressives got not only Pathfinder (great support/production values) and now D&D itself � in the guise of a streamlined and cleaned-up version of 3.5.

(It's not the end of the world though � I still have many wonderful games Powered by the Apocalypse. And my current group likes those. I'll just miss the time when I was able to enjoy D&D � I'll never be able to enjoy 4E combat again, and the fact that almost everyone seems to be glad it's gone only makes me sadder.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5UPqqCJ8Vw

# ? Feb 12, 2015 13:51

Nancy_Noxious: Apr 10, 2013; by Smythe

Thank you, nice people, I'm truly a bad person that should be killed.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 14:20

Dr. Lunchables: Dec 27, 2012; IRL DEBUFFED KOBOLD

Are we just bolding poo poo for funsies now?

# ? Feb 12, 2015 14:27

Grey Hunter: Oct 17, 2007; Hero of the soviet union.
Accidental destroyer of planets

ProbiLy.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 14:42

ProfessorCirno: Feb 17, 2011; The strongest! The smartest!
The rightest!

Nancy_Noxious posted:

Thank you, nice people, I'm truly a bad person that should be killed.

I don't think you're a bad person that should be killed. I do think you're confusing mechanical taste for a lot of other stuff, though.

What people enjoy mechanically in a game has more or less little to no reflection on most other aspects of their life.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 14:47

moths: Aug 25, 2004; I would also still appreciate some danger.

You do run into a lot of extremely right-wing nonsense in wargaming. I think some folks mostly play to trap someone at a table while they evangelize against gay socialist abortions, illegals, and THE TAKERS.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 15:03

FMguru: Sep 10, 2003; peed on;
sexually

moths posted:

You do run into a lot of extremely right-wing nonsense in wargaming. I think some folks mostly play to trap someone at a table while they evangelize against gay socialist abortions, illegals, and THE TAKERS.

Don't forget the ones who really want to talk to you about the Wehrmacht, or have strong opinions about the real causes of the American Civil War.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 15:04

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

How come we never hear about extreme left-wing nonsense during games of, I dunno, Red Barricades or No Retreat!

# ? Feb 12, 2015 15:11

Mors Rattus: Oct 25, 2007; FATAL & Friends
Walls of Text
#1 Builder
2014-2018

Nancy_Noxious posted:

Thank you, nice people, I'm truly a bad person that should be killed.

Nah, you're just being really melodramatic and it is hilarious.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 15:14

Bob Quixote: Jul 7, 2006; This post has been inspected and certified by the Dino-Sorcerer; Grimey Drawer

gradenko_2000 posted:

How come we never hear about extreme left-wing nonsense during games of, I dunno, Red Barricades or No Retreat!

Wait, you DON'T use your D&D sessions as covert vehicles for spreading Marxist ideology and plotting the downfall of free-market capitalism?

Have I been playing games wrong this whole time?

# ? Feb 12, 2015 15:16

FMguru: Sep 10, 2003; peed on;
sexually

gradenko_2000 posted:

How come we never hear about extreme left-wing nonsense during games of, I dunno, Red Barricades or No Retreat!

There was a game company in the early 1980s (People's War Games) that made WWII games from a distinctly left-wing perspective. Concentrated on obscure corners of the Eastern Front, natch.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 15:18

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

Bob Quixote posted:

Wait, you DON'T use your D&D sessions as covert vehicles for spreading Marxist ideology and plotting the downfall of free-market capitalism?

Have I been playing games wrong this whole time?

None of the players have caught on yet that all of my plots are about toppling the monarchy and introducing ... Syndicalism?

# ? Feb 12, 2015 15:21

Galaga Galaxian: Apr 23, 2009; What a childish tactic!
Don't you think you should put more thought into your battleplan?!

I feel so confused and betrayed that people I thought were on my side in social issues prefer the taste of Coke instead of Coke Zero or Diet Pepsi.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 15:25

Yawgmoth: Sep 10, 2003; This post is cursed!

Lynx Winters posted:

Infinite Death Tennis.

This is gonna be the name of my speed metal band.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 15:26

Bob Quixote: Jul 7, 2006; This post has been inspected and certified by the Dino-Sorcerer; Grimey Drawer

gradenko_2000 posted:

None of the players have caught on yet that all of my plots are about toppling the monarchy and introducing ... Syndicalism?

You might be working too subtly - try embroidering a few hammers and sickles on your DM robe and have the next dungeon boss be one of those nearly spherical robber-barons from a 19th century political cartoon about Trusts.

Perhaps have any hirelings or Retainers the party hires could form a union of some sort?

# ? Feb 12, 2015 15:26

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

Galaga Galaxian posted:

I feel so confused and betrayed that people I thought were on my side in social issues prefer the taste of Coke instead of Coke Zero or Diet Pepsi.

Sierra Mist, motherfucker. :argh:

# ? Feb 12, 2015 15:26

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 11, 2024 13:51

Mors Rattus: Oct 25, 2007; FATAL & Friends
Walls of Text
#1 Builder
2014-2018

Bob Quixote posted:

You might be working too subtly - try embroidering a few hammers and sickles on your DM robe and have the next dungeon boss be one of those nearly spherical robber-barons from a 19th century political cartoon about Trusts.

Perhaps have any hirelings or Retainers the party hires could form a union of some sort?

The robber baron must be a cat.

# ? Feb 12, 2015 15:27

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > TG February Chat Thread: Dank Rollman's Halal Hotbox

«‹›33 »