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

You know, all this shit about WOTC and DND reminds me of a question I asked on the WoD tread awhile back:

Bit of a dumb little joke question/challenge for you guys; for DND 5th, which races and classes do you guys think would fit best for an anti-woke character? Like, if you guys wanted to make a character that was basically a gigantic middle finger to WOTC and their woke crowd, what would you run?

Not entirely sure on the race side of things, but on the class side of things; I know that Barbarian and Druid have had some issues with woketards disliking them for some reason. Bard could work; these fucks completely lose their minds the moment they hear "mean words", so Vicious Mockery sounds fitting. Paladin and Cleric fit, since both can be about faith and holiness and such. Monks fit, since the woke seem to hate anyone being healthy and such.

What do you guys think? What would you choose?
Make a jock dudebro Monk. Instead of spiritual balance, he's all about physical perfection and lifting heavy things. Total Chad/chud. Buff, loves red meat and raw eggs, loves flexing for pretty ladies, punches things so hard they explode.

Although, mechanically, a strength based Monk would be hard in 5E. But maybe that's part of the joke.
 
You know, all this shit about WOTC and DND reminds me of a question I asked on the WoD tread awhile back:

Bit of a dumb little joke question/challenge for you guys; for DND 5th, which races and classes do you guys think would fit best for an anti-woke character? Like, if you guys wanted to make a character that was basically a gigantic middle finger to WOTC and their woke crowd, what would you run?

Not entirely sure on the race side of things, but on the class side of things; I know that Barbarian and Druid have had some issues with woketards disliking them for some reason. Bard could work; these fucks completely lose their minds the moment they hear "mean words", so Vicious Mockery sounds fitting. Paladin and Cleric fit, since both can be about faith and holiness and such. Monks fit, since the woke seem to hate anyone being healthy and such.

What do you guys think? What would you choose?
I've already got one I main: A female hospitalor paladin, beefy and stronk, but with the personality of a trad wife and voice of a moe girl. Her faith is aligned with the combined teachings of Goddess of the Sun and God of the Moon, and values true love, loyalty, and kindness. Those that abuse said values for "fun" or other reasons that cannot be reconciled are quickly smitten by her holy blade.
The only caveat is that she's a Nagaji.
 
Anybody else ever write (and sometimes even stat) characters you know you'll never get to play? I've never played Starfinder, don't know anybody who does, yet somehow here I am writing a brief backstory/personality/etc for a character I know will never get used.

What did my brain mean by this?
I used to do something about as autistic for games I GM'ed. I wrote character generators in BASIC for the game and then spat out dozens of sets of stats for them, and then put them on index cards similarly with a brief description like goals/motives/personality/notable weapons/magic items, then organized them in little index card boxes with tabs specifying type of character/where they are/etc. so if people were in city X and ran into a rogue, I could just pull out a character with some features other than "rogue from city X."

I probably used at most 10% of these.
 
Here's the fucking thing that irks me about the World of fucking Darkness, and I know this may blow some minds, but it's supposed to be, and wait for it: a world of darkness. The whole idea of the setting was that there's an encyclopedia of weird and scary shit going on basically everywhere. The various playable groups like vampires, werewolves, mages, etc, don't represent the totality or even the majority of the supernatural insanity happening in the setting. The current crop of writers seem unable to even remotely grasp this fact, instead opting to navel-gaze about how your pansexual transgender vampire is just like Antifa because the elder vampires are the fash. No. No, you complete fucking idiot. Walking down a dark alley in the World of Darkness is liable to get your spinal cord sucked out by something that has no name, walks despite having no bones, and has eyes that see only the sins you've committed. It's supposed to be SCARY. The original 90s WoD groups formed clans/tribes/traditions and stuck together because sticking together was necessary for survival, even for supernatural monsters. The social systems in the setting could be abusive and oppressive, but giving them the finger and running off alone was a quick ticket to getting dead, which is why they stuck around. The weaker, younger members had to cling to the older and more powerful for protection.

And, credit where it's due, nWoD did try that to some degree with the God-machine, adding in a worldwide entity that was conceivably an immediate danger to anyone on the planet, regardless of what flavor of thing they are. It couldn't give a fuck about your noble struggle against the system, it was just doing its own thing and ruthlessly consuming anything and anyone to progress its plans. But the older books had made it pretty clear that there was a lot of unknown horror going on behind closed doors and around corners that would make the average vampire look cute and cuddly in comparison, where the God-machine would just be a drop in the bucket. This latest generation of the books seems instead to make the various supernatural factions into Redditor superheroes, with the luxury of plenty of time and safety to give a fuck about random popular causes and not be looking over their shoulders for every waking minute of the day.
 
You know, all this shit about WOTC and DND reminds me of a question I asked on the WoD tread awhile back:

Bit of a dumb little joke question/challenge for you guys; for DND 5th, which races and classes do you guys think would fit best for an anti-woke character? Like, if you guys wanted to make a character that was basically a gigantic middle finger to WOTC and their woke crowd, what would you run?

Not entirely sure on the race side of things, but on the class side of things; I know that Barbarian and Druid have had some issues with woketards disliking them for some reason. Bard could work; these fucks completely lose their minds the moment they hear "mean words", so Vicious Mockery sounds fitting. Paladin and Cleric fit, since both can be about faith and holiness and such. Monks fit, since the woke seem to hate anyone being healthy and such.

What do you guys think? What would you choose?
Straight white human male, brown hair, green eyes, Paladin of the local Lawful Good deity. Righteous, compassionate, charismatic. Always attempting to get other people to improve by his words and his deeds. Vanquishes unequivocal evil on the spot and doesn't allow himself to fall into obvious Evil ploys.

Competent, Unironic, Objective Ontological Good is anathema to these people.
 
What do you guys think? What would you choose?
Elf Barbarian. Forests aren't the safest places to live IRL, and that goes treble in D&D where being attacked by wolves is almost certainly the least dangerous encounter you can have. So I'd have them be someone who just went "Fuck it" and stripped down to their undies, grabbed some axes, and embarked on a do-or-die quest against everything nature could throw at them. Unironic murderhobo and completely devoted to Total Predator Death because he's sick and tired of all these motherfucking snakes on this motherfucking plane of existence.
 
I know that Barbarian and Druid have had some issues with woketards disliking them for some reason.
Aren't Druids not just neutral but aggressively neutral and outright refuse to take any position on good and evil because they're about balance? I'm out of touch with 5e enough I actually don't know, but the original Druid character was an alignment called True Neutral which was defined by willingness to disregard law, chaos, good and evil in favor of balance, so if one side was becoming too powerful, they'd oppose it, being more concerned with some sort of global ecosystem rather than any individual (including themselves).
 
Make a jock dudebro Monk. Instead of spiritual balance, he's all about physical perfection and lifting heavy things. Total Chad/chud. Buff, loves red meat and raw eggs, loves flexing for pretty ladies, punches things so hard they explode.

Although, mechanically, a strength based Monk would be hard in 5E. But maybe that's part of the joke.
Pathfinder 1E has the brawler, which is custom-designed for this kind of hilarity. You can build Marv (from Sin City) using that class.

But the best way to annoy them is to play a PC, any PC, whose worldview simply isn't interested in their stupid struggles. Doesn't matter what class, just make sure your character considers their angst to be trivial and boring.
 
But the best way to annoy them is to play a PC, any PC, whose worldview simply isn't interested in their stupid struggles. Doesn't matter what class, just make sure your character considers their angst to be trivial and boring.
Hence my post about Druids, who would support even orcs if it meant the balance prevailed. True Neutral not only doesn't care about your struggle, it actively fights for NEITHER side winning, whether it's law/chaos or good/evil.
 
I'm actually curious if anyone here has good rules for combat morale that they use. I have been trying not to be lazy and make every enemy fight to the death, but every time I remember morale I just roll a d20 and make an ad hoc decision about whether the roll was high enough for morale not to break. This feels unsatisfying, and I'd like to hear if ya'll have a better approach
Like others said, I just wing it. Have guys run away if combat is starting to drag and PCs have the upper hand. Have them fight to the death if the pace is going well.

What I've not seen mentioned is that having enemies running away tends to put players in a panic to kill them in case they come back with more.

Anybody else ever write (and sometimes even stat) characters you know you'll never get to play? I've never played Starfinder, don't know anybody who does, yet somehow here I am writing a brief backstory/personality/etc for a character I know will never get used.

What did my brain mean by this?
Starfinder is such a cool setting that nobody wants to play.

I tend to like one shots and shorter campaigns because people seem to love making characters. Maybe it's the people I hang around with, but they always have more character ideas than games to use them in. I also have a couple of PHB character concepts I can stat quickly in case someone wants to run a one shot or someone drops. Only used them twice.

Bit of a dumb little joke question/challenge for you guys; for DND 5th, which races and classes do you guys think would fit best for an anti-woke character? Like, if you guys wanted to make a character that was basically a gigantic middle finger to WOTC and their woke crowd, what would you run?
Something homebrew. WotC seems to have an autistic obsession with controlling what people can and can't do at the table. Homebrew is the opposite of that.

Semi official, Bloodhunter, given how Critical Role has changed from figurehead of the hobby to persona non grata.


And, credit where it's due, nWoD did try that to some degree with the God-machine,
I really liked The God Machine. While it wasn't as rules heavy as I'd like, it was solid as an idea factory. I remember a bunch of one paragraph examples of people turning away from the God Machine that was basically a list of adventure hooks. I think it could make a good twist in a spy game. It would start off like Person of Interest and then become The God Machine.
 
I just hope Starfinder 2nd doesn't suck, there's dozens of us looking forward to it, DOZENS! Also, I'm gonna miss those mafia family Apostaen Drow, Not that that's going to stop me from cringe headcanoning them back into existence, love me those weird, backwards, demon worshipping, strangely gynocentric elves.... Actually if they roll them into the standard elves but as a strain like I tend to treat Cavern elves, I guess it'll be fine, even if it's not the same.
 
What do you guys think? What would you choose?
Okay, since I can't stop coming up with ideas once my neurons get activated, my latest one was some sort of detective, probably using the Rogue class given the similarities in skill set. Someone who believes heavily in law and order, and that boundaries and responsible behavior are all that separate man from beast. Someone with a strong moral code who will refuse to engage in illicit acts to catch criminals, even when threatened or brow-beaten by his social betters into doing so.
1702612165386.png
Fortunately, Xanathar's Guide to Everything has the perfect Archetype for it, the Inquisitive.

Since you need at least three to a party and need some sort of caster, a Paladin of Vengeance. One who has vowed to become the one thing wretchedness fears most. A man who none have seen his face, only his helmet, for he has chosen to become something more than a person. He has become an ideal. He is... THE LAW. And you bet your sweet ass the Paladin of Vengeance gets an extremely fitting Channel Divinity for THE LAW.
1702613700917.png

Before you ask if these three can work together, well, dangerous animals tend not to be given any sort of legal status other than "Kill on Sight", and in cities a Barbarian obsessed with being the biggest fish in the pond by murdering everything else would gladly go after criminals. "You know what happens when its every person for themselves? I happen." And its not like the other two would care so long as their target is wanted dead or alive.

You may have noticed a bit of a theme with these two, but let's face it, for people who love nothing better than trying to pervert and corrupt society for their own selfish needs, there's nothing they hate more than people willing to tell their general kind "No".

Shit, screw D&D. I think I've given you an idea for your next campaign. Bounty hunting in a weird west setting, with elves playing the role of the Native Americans.
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
Reactions: Scream Aim Fire
Mike Mearls has been laid off. Your reward for your cuckery is a pink slip, Mike. Don't stumble on your way out the door.

View attachment 5561774
The contrarian in me doesn't want to be happy since insane lefty types have been calling for his head for how many years now, Four? I Was also pretty pissed at the time since his streams got cancelled overnight and he was shuffled into the background. Yet the 5e player in me thinks nothing of value was lost, he seemed a mediocre game designer at best (I could be wrong though)

Edit: forget what I said, I remembered he was the faggot who went on about gatekeeping, fuck that balding faggot piece of shit. Hope pandering to insane progressives was worth it, you cunt.

Since we are on the topic of Mearls: these past few days, after watching a video which mentioned how gygax would run games at conventions and how wotc only goes to cons to advertise new products (which isn't an issue tbh, they are a big corp after all) got me thinking how D&D 5e design team doesn't really have a "face" anymore: You used to see/hear of mearls and crawford all the time up until 2019 then it just kinds stopped?
Perhaps I am wrong but isn't this worrying? Are all of the D&D designers/writers just freelancers or something nowadays?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Brain Problems
I just hope Starfinder 2nd doesn't suck, there's dozens of us looking forward to it, DOZENS!
I have a soft spot for Starfinder. It's one of the few RPGs I actually spent money on for physical books. It's somewhat cheap with the core rules and monster book being a cheap paperbacks. So yeah, while the game itself has some serious issues, you can get all the books you need for <£40, compared to DnD needing* three £50 manuals, and it's widely available, which can't be said for Savage Worlds.

I enjoy the setting too. They handled things like warp drive and races. The Gap and erasing Earth Galarion from existence are also handy for stopping players from getting tangled in a backstory nightmare. I actually played a game of that setting in another system, but it kept confusing my players. I don't know why.

There are some "easy" fixes. Switching the PF2s three action economy, and cutting the obscene math bloat and tiered gear would require a lot of tweaking of various rules which is why it's not easy to homebrew in but is perfect for a new edition.

*There's some debate if the DMG is required or not.
 
Does anyone actually* have an issue with women in tabletop gaming? Assuming they're not just the tourist gf of one of the guys or something.

I've heard more horror stories than I can remember, however from my own personal experience at the Table and online women haven't been much of a problem. The major offender are "girls" the trannies who have invaded the space and spergs with no social skills.

I've run some CoC/DG games for some normie female relatives, so that is likely why my experiences are good. They were all eager to roleplay, investigate and learnt the game quickly. Weren't overly careful and we're interested in pursuing threads and leads. Something my games with entirely nothing but dudes would often flounder in, instead of trying to come up with a elaborate plan. They simply just chose to do stuff.

All in all. I think running for normies is significantly more enjoyable than actual fans of tabletop games.

They really enjoyed role-playing and creating their characters.
Showed interest in advancing the plot.
Took their combat turns pretty much instantly.
"I have a flashlight right? I'll go in then"
"I'll shoot it in the head before it does anything"
 
Does anyone actually* have an issue with women in tabletop gaming? Assuming they're not just the tourist gf of one of the guys or something
Pretty much almost every TRPG group I've been in has had woman. Both from the perspective of me as a GM and me as another player. Never had a single problem. Of course, almost everyone that I have played with in either role have actually been co-workers (or former co-workers as people switched jobs) as we would play after the work day most of the time. So in all cases we had worked together in a professional capacity and so there was already a good feeling about who would be invited in or not to the games based on their work behavior.
 
The no girls belief is some high school level shit it was a two way street, once you got out of high school and weren't hung up on petty school cliques then it was thrown out the window and call me old man yelling at clouds and dated but back in my school days in the 1700's girls were either hanging out with eachother or dicking the jocks or gangbangers or smoking and drinking on the weekends not a whole lotta room for ye old dungeoning to be had.
EDIT: I'll add a little more if given the choice way back then between a he-man woman haters rpg club or going to hang out with some college kids who scored some beer I'd choose the latter.
 
Last edited:
  • Feels
Reactions: Ghostse
Back