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

[BlazikenLover]

View attachment 5576096
View attachment 5576123
View attachment 5576125
No way! A faggy looking soy boy that gets upset over drawings of sexy women being in older Dungeons and Dragons books turns out to be GAY!? There's a reason why there is a stereotype of 5E players being dumb. This guy made multiple videos explaining Pathfinder, a game based on 3.5 D&D rules made to be similar to Dungeons and Dragons, like its new trivia. The Rules Lawyer is a public defender that has to live off Patreon and YouTube money because he said his public defender job doesn't pay much.

Started following him earlier this year since I wanted to get into PF2e and boy was I disappointed when I saw that last thumbnail. By the way, when did he get upset about sexy female art?
oh and small correction, he mostly deals with pathfinder second edition which is VERY far removed from 3.5e and PF1e

 

[Martys_not_smarty]

Not for nothing but weren't there just as many scantily clad Conan clones in those early books as well?

 

[AnOminous]

Not for nothing but weren't there just as many scantily clad Conan clones in those early books as well?

Early D&D art was highly influenced by artists like Frazetta and Vallejo, well known for both their muscular (and totally no homo) beefcake musclemen and scantily clad wenches in unrealistic armor.

 

[Capsaicin Addict]

Early D&D art was highly influenced by artists like Frazetta and Vallejo, well known for both their muscular (and totally no homo) beefcake musclemen and scantily clad wenches in unrealistic armor.

I'm sure they've been trying to figure out how to cancel the guys like Elmore and Caldwell for a while, but have settled for waiting them out and hoping to sweep their works under the rug when they get the chance.

 

[AnOminous]

I'm sure they've been trying to figure out how to cancel the guys like Elmore and Caldwell for a while, but have settled for waiting them out and hoping to sweep their works under the rug when they get the chance.

And then there are the nearly forgotten like David A. Trampier who died in obscurity.

 

[Snekposter]

I go back and forth on this. In a way pen and paper is both an easy target, but also one they are not effective against because it's trivial to house rule and write your own adventures. So as a DM who runs modules a lot, wokeshit never makes it to the table. I remember one adventure where the starting scene was the PCs were at a wedding for two grooms when the villain crashes the party. I changed it to a holiday festival and bingo, no wokeshit.

I would have kept it a wedding, but have the villain kill the two grooms, and then let the players chase him down for denying them free drinks and thirsty fag hags at the reception.

 

[Martys_not_smarty]

oh yeah and who could forget the great Les Edwards.

 

[Quintus]

Basically, what I'm saying is; woketards are obsessed with magic and try to make evil look good - though not being above hiding behind seemingly good monikers to try and deflect criticism - so what do you guys think could be an interesting counter to that? Like, aside from the obvious like a witch-hunting Paladin, Ceric, Monk, etc.; what are some of the more "out-there" ideas?

I have recently found playing a character with any convictions and or general disdain for opportunism can be quite bothersome to woke/woke adjacent people. A lot of people, especially ones with video game backgrounds tend to be extremely flexible with any morals the character they are playing might have. I realize that's quite broad, but hope that gives you some ideas.

 

[Judge Dredd]

I just ran a one shot. Modern setting, but I'll use Shadowrun terms to explain it. The PCs were tasked with travelling to an island and handing over a case to a Mr Johnson. During the hand off, the group is attacked by a bunch of thugs. A firefight breaks out between the thugs, the PCs, and Mr Johnsons bodyguards. Mr Johnson escaped with the case, but the PCs dropped their money during the gunfight and fled. As I narrated the ending and the consequences of it, one of my players said "That's it?".

After the game, this player (who is not a gamer, and this is his third time playing a RPG as far as I know) asked me if there was going to be a part two. He expected that the PCs and Mr Johnson would be friends due to escaping the gunfight and should work together having adventures on the island. They thought it was strange that Mr Johnson was only mentioned during the briefing and at the very end, and seems to be expecting that we'd learn more about him as a character.

I don't know if this is a good thing. On the one hand, they want more. On the other they seem disappointed by the sudden ending. The concept of a Mr Johnson seems alien and confusing to them. It was also interesting that a game that, to me and other gamer friends, is rules light and simple, seemed hard for him to grasp (1-3 d6, each 5+ is one success).

 

[King Dead]

I have recently found playing a character with any convictions and or general disdain for opportunism can be quite bothersome to woke/woke adjacent people. A lot of people, especially ones with video game backgrounds tend to be extremely flexible with any morals the character they are playing might have. I realize that's quite broad, but hope that gives you some ideas.

At my table, I have slotted into the role of "single lawful character in a party of chaotic retards." I don't do it to annoy them (my group's hardly woke), I do it because I like the contrast of personalities and because I just want to be helpful. Great power and great responsibility, all that jazz.

It's all too easy to give into temptation and use your unnatural powers to murderhobo your way to whatever you want, but it's more satisfying to me to be a person that helps out the less fortunate.

 

[Ghostse]

I just ran a one shot. Modern setting, but I'll use Shadowrun terms to explain it. The PCs were tasked with travelling to an island and handing over a case to a Mr Johnson. During the hand off, the group is attacked by a bunch of thugs. A firefight breaks out between the thugs, the PCs, and Mr Johnsons bodyguards. Mr Johnson escaped with the case, but the PCs dropped their money during the gunfight and fled. As I narrated the ending and the consequences of it, one of my players said "That's it?".

After the game, this player (who is not a gamer, and this is his third time playing a RPG as far as I know) asked me if there was going to be a part two. He expected that the PCs and Mr Johnson would be friends due to escaping the gunfight and should work together having adventures on the island. They thought it was strange that Mr Johnson was only mentioned during the briefing and at the very end, and seems to be expecting that we'd learn more about him as a character.

I don't know if this is a good thing. On the one hand, they want more. On the other they seem disappointed by the sudden ending. The concept of a Mr Johnson seems alien and confusing to them. It was also interesting that a game that, to me and other gamer friends, is rules light and simple, seemed hard for him to grasp (1-3 d6, each 5+ is one success).

From having run people sorters before:
The fact they care is a huge and a good sign.
On the other hand...whew lad. I think I might toss that one back.

 

[robobobo]

Here's the thing about characters: They should have character. Goals, hopes, dreams, fears, a personality, etc. Bad gamers of all stripes don't do that, they just self-insert and start doing whatever the fuck the player feels like. Kill a bunch of shit, be a loot goblin, hog the spotlight, lol seduce all the monsters, whatever. The character is just a puppet, and it shows. Doing shitty self-insert wish-fulfillment is not unique to the recent set of wokies infesting the hobby, they're just a highly visible demographic.
Throwing them off does not necessarily require a complete goody two-shoes, but playing a character who actually acts in character. If for example you have a ranger pursuing a lifelong grudge against aboleths, every minute spent interrogating the local yokels about aboleths is one intolerable minute where the sock puppet characters aren't jerking themselves off.

 

[cerulean hydra]

They thought it was strange that Mr Johnson was only mentioned during the briefing and at the very end, and seems to be expecting that we'd learn more about him as a character.

I can kind of understand this. The concept of a Mr Johnson/anonymous contact with a one-time job is pretty genre-specific. The amount of conflict that can be generated is limited, and they aren't really common in modern stories. It's probably just his first time encountering something like it, especially if he's consumed a lot of TV/Movies where every character is important and recurring in some way. I haven't played D&D in a while, but the last adventure I did even felt like the main quest giver had an entire narrative arc. Not sure if it was an official one or a third party one though, I wasn't the DM.

Since I'm sitting and thinking about it, could the player have been shocked that it was just a side quest in the grand scheme of things?

 

[Scream Aim Fire]

I really hate DDOS attacks; seriously, half the time I can't ever respond to anybody...

Aasimar are an obvious choice, they're basically the opposite of tieflings, being descended from angel-ish creatures instead of the various demons. You could do an upstanding moral person for basically any class; paladins and clerics are pretty obvious, but any martial class would do fine too, or something like a sorcerer that's drawing from divine blood rather than demonic blood.

Aylin from bg3 but a guy, essentially.
People can't talk shit about him either, cuz girl boss but cock.
Then you go "so the tiefling is just your self-insert then?" When they bitch about their tiefling being ignored.

Yeah, I've noticed that the woke REALLY seem to love tieflings; that entire "The Second Stranger" Transplanar game with the multitude of "non-binary"/mentally ill and delusional tieflings is a pretty good example. Pretty telling that the favored race of the woke is a bunch of creatures that are related to demons, but I digress...

The basic thing is that your average boring D&D character is always in it for themselves, there's sort of a horseshoe theory thing going on where both the murderhobo nerds and the genderspecial rainbow-haired elf twitter users are in that same boat. A character that is actually working towards a selfless goal is these peoples' garlic and crucifix; if you go into a session with them and divert every attempt they make to spotlight Fagnolius the tiefling assassin who's totally misunderstood and persecuted unfairly and instead go on about how the party should be focusing on saving orphans and selling off the magic loot to feed the poor, you will absolutely drive them up the wall.

I have recently found playing a character with any convictions and or general disdain for opportunism can be quite bothersome to woke/woke adjacent people. A lot of people, especially ones with video game backgrounds tend to be extremely flexible with any morals the character they are playing might have. I realize that's quite broad, but hope that gives you some ideas.

Here's the thing about characters: They should have character. Goals, hopes, dreams, fears, a personality, etc. Bad gamers of all stripes don't do that, they just self-insert and start doing whatever the fuck the player feels like. Kill a bunch of shit, be a loot goblin, hog the spotlight, lol seduce all the monsters, whatever. The character is just a puppet, and it shows. Doing shitty self-insert wish-fulfillment is not unique to the recent set of wokies infesting the hobby, they're just a highly visible demographic.
Throwing them off does not necessarily require a complete goody two-shoes, but playing a character who actually acts in character. If for example you have a ranger pursuing a lifelong grudge against aboleths, every minute spent interrogating the local yokels about aboleths is one intolerable minute where the sock puppet characters aren't jerking themselves off.

This is all great; having a character with actual long-term goals, and not just being a murderhobo looking to sow chaos, is definitely something that I try to go for whenever I play games myself. Hell, even characters that have some relatively "small" goals can be done well - one of my favorites is basically just a guy who took up adventuring because he just both really enjoyed travelling and was in need of money, and I've also did a few stories as a classical knight errant - but the problem is, is that the woke don't care about story. The only thing that the retards think about is "how can I make all of this about me and my views" and nothing else.

And yeah, generally being a decent person is something I can really get behind; it might be cliche, but playing a "knight in shining armor" - or at least a wandering hero - can be a ton of fun. At the very least, playing as a genuinely decent person trying to do the right thing is still a far more interesting plotline than propping up/having to enable some woketard's Mary Sue insert.

 

[Quintus]

Bad gamers of all stripes don't do that, they just self-insert and start doing whatever the fuck the player feels like. Kill a bunch of shit, be a loot goblin, hog the spotlight, lol seduce all the monsters, whatever. The character is just a puppet, and it shows. Doing shitty self-insert wish-fulfillment is not unique to the recent set of wokies infesting the hobby, they're just a highly visible demographic.

Very true, it's not really woke specific. The number of such people in the hobby just sees that they are overrepresented. Thankfully, I've only really had two players like this. One is no longer apart of my friend group for other reasons and the other isn't really that bad, we just have to work around her bloodlust.

This is all great; having a character with actual long-term goals, and not just being a murderhobo looking to sow chaos, is definitely something that I try to go for whenever I play games myself.

In general, this is what you should shoot for. But I don't really think tying yourself to long term goals are strictly necessary at least from the beginning. I've played a couple of characters with no real long term goals in mind for most of a campaign. Something comes up eventually most of the time later in the campaign that becomes a long term goal though. There are some players too that aren't really as interested in the story and just want to roll some dice with their friends. So some kind of long term goal for those players might not really be a priority.

I think the biggest thing is to remain consistent within reason of course. People don't generally start acting differently whenever it's convenient for them.

 

[derpherp2]

You know playing kingmaker really made me miss actual cooking rules in tabletops. I really want to make a cook that botches food on purpose so when I end up poisoning someone to death they just laugh it off or some shit.

That and ezpz eternal stat boosts and another pseudo-crafting mechanic. But gathering 'ingredients' is fucking retarded. I remember there was a way to buy special ingredients too.

Hopefully they add some mythic shit now as well. A la wotr for PF2. They already technically added legend mythic via dual classing.

 

[Corn Flakes]

You know playing kingmaker really made me miss actual cooking rules in tabletops. I really want to make a cook that botches food on purpose so when I end up poisoning someone to death they just laugh it off or some shit.

That and ezpz eternal stat boosts and another pseudo-crafting mechanic. But gathering 'ingredients' is fucking retarded. I remember there was a way to buy special ingredients too.

Hopefully they add some mythic shit now as well. A la wotr for PF2. They already technically added legend mythic via dual classing.

Crafting and consumables are cool in concept, but for most games it's just another layer of bookkeeping that doesn't really add much outside of fairly plain bonuses.

What I'd like to see are more poison rules. Not just for combat, but for when you want to do very specific things on the down low. Not just killing, but also sleeping, plying people to make them suggestible, inducing/faking certain conditions, etc etc. Of course, for most fantasy games you'd also have to limit magical healing and/or detection otherwise the whole thing falls apart the moment a level 1 Cleric enters the room.

 

[Battlefield2142EU]

I hate to defend Hasbro, but anti-AI art is becoming a mindless witch hunt. When it is clear, AI is just going to be another tool for artists. How soon the industry just ignore the anti-AI Twitter talk talks? Not only wizards of the coast keep getting caught in using AI art. But they quickly replaced the AI art online with worse-looking hand drawn art. A good example, the glory of the Giants used AI art to create an alien dreamlike world. The AI got replaced with a cartoony art style that conflicts with the rest of the book. The giants were suppose to look weird and unnatural.

 

[Sinner's Sandwich]

The giants were suppose to look weird and unnatural.

True but the problem is that Hasbro couldn't be arsed to hire an artist to correct the obvious AI fuck ups. Such a big company can afford someone to improve AI art.

 

[Alabama Gamer]

I want to play in a Starfinder game just so my character can design an evil-detecting and -smiting computer program called I/O MEDAE.