Wallace
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2015
Based on a few checks of the Wayback Machine, at their peak ten years ago, they were around 500 members online. Now it's down to half of that.
RPGnet Forums
- Thread starter Randall Fragg
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
If there's anything that makes me want to curb stomp this entire batch of joyless faggots American History X style it's this kind of "take that SINNER" mod message. Go get pancreatic cancer and die screaming you batch of church ladies.
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2019
He’s right though, that is a thing of beauty. Even as someone who’s never played Vampire, I can recognize a lot of the jokes and parodies. It’s well-written and funny.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2018
I don't know how to feel about these guys that are trying to fight the good fight and rebel with mild bits of humor and common sense. On one hand I salute them for even trying, but there's also something just so incomprehensibly maddening about it. Do you fucking know where you are? Your words are being policed by legitimately mentally ill people. They'd honestly have a better chance in Judge Roland Freisler's People's Court in 1944 than trying to bring common sense to that hellhole.
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2018
I want to point out something here.
The poster who originally linked the, how shall we say, problematic article? Nothing happened to them. The guy who joked 'that's a thing of beauty' eats a warning, but the original poster doesn't get so much as a hairy eyeball?
Getting a funny feeling. I could be wrong though.
NerdShamer
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2018
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2021
One was probably a member in good standing of the modclique cool kids club, the other was already on the watchlist and had the mods itching for any excuse to let the hammer drop.
There is no "rule of law" on RPG.net, it is more like a pre-Napoleonic feudal fiefdom where the lords get to whip their serfs as they please for the most threadbare shred of an excuse.
Hm, an account with a name that popular must already be quite old to have snatched it... Yep, 2004. The user has been around long enough to watch in real-time how the place and its moderation were detoriating, if you still hang out on RPG.net after 17 years without ever looking for greener grass you get what you deserve.
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2018
Never go against the narrative or you will be cast into the outer darkness.
Probably. It just struck me as hilariously blatant.
Eh, I can sympathize to an extent. 17 years is a LOT of time to sink into anything, and in Internet terms that's a fucking eternity.
But he should've seen it coming.
Wallace
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2015
The hits keep on coming.
It's genuinely impressive how just about any viewpoint can be viewed as sexist, ableist, or any other sin if you look at it the right way.
It's genuinely impressive how just about any viewpoint can be viewed as sexist, ableist, or any other sin if you look at it the right way.
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2021
Wow. RPGnet mods not being on the side of a wrongly convicted and imprisoned black man who has finally won his freedom despite an oppressive justice system rigged against African-Americans. That’s not very progressive.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2019
I love how they turned a commentary about hating men into one about trannies. I guess if this is TERFism then transwomen are men after all.
Somehow they really managed to make a good ruling (this freak is a male-exterminationist and his opinions are weird as fuck) but do it for the exact wrong reasons.
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2019
I mean, they’re right that suggesting that murdering all men would benefit society is pretty deranged. But the fact that it’s really because they’re mad he made a TERFy argument is pretty obvious.
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2019
This won't be the last ban associated with Y: The Last Man. There's just no way to square its plot and philosophy with current gender dogma.
Edit: fucking called it
Edit: fucking called it
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2021
I can't even believe a thread on that lasted an hour on rpg.net. The thing is such an utterly stupid hot potato at the moment for entirely scientific reasons that fly in the face of idealogical ones.
Apparently the tv series was announced in 2015. It's like a time capsule that's suddenly been opened and found that in 5 years time it's become unacceptable in certain parts of the internet. Which kind of says it all about how quickly things are likely to become "problematic."
NerdShamer
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2018
Why not just ban every form of fiction, while they're at it?
Edit: Banned for citing the rulebook of an RPG.
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2021
Don't force our chosen users to defend the actual context of what they're lying about. Take a week off.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2021
Pendragon is the kind of old-school RPG that gets Netters seething anyway: You play Arthurian knights, which means only men are playable, and women exist only on the character sheet to produce babies and sustain your dynasty.
That was already an unusually harsh decision on PC gender for 1980s RPG standards. In le current year? Literal fascism.
That was already an unusually harsh decision on PC gender for 1980s RPG standards. In le current year? Literal fascism.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2019
They actually did have a struggle session about Pendragon not allowing female characters. This was only a year or two ago as far as I can remember, and I think it was posted about in this thread.
Fictional Character
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2020
As someone who played Pendragon, he's 100% correct and the person he's replying to is full of shit. And by playing Pendragon, I mean played through the entire fucking Grand Campaign over four years.
The current edition rulebook (and probably the final one, RIP Greg Stafford) pretty much says "There aren't female knight in the source materials, but the Arthurian legend has survived so long by changing with the times. If you want to play female knight, go ahead."
And there are rules for playing regular noble-ladies and minmaxing their stats, so they take care of your estate better. You could probably even play one as your main character, you just wouldn't be able to do anything. But that book is probably even more forbidden by rpg.net because the rules for Saracen characters have them as medieval stereotypes.
Like I said, Pendragon explicitly allows female characters. I played one with explicit blessing from the rulebook. She was a neurotic with higher Chaste stat than Sir Galahad because I didn't want to take the chance of having to roll for Childbirth and potentially dying instantly during downtime. And that was before they had their struggle session if it was only year or two ago.
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2018
I would like to note that CK! wrote out a fairly involved explanation as to how certain things that seemed to be broken weren't, over multiple posts. Maybe he did get a trifle obnoxious but what happened to 'threadcrapping' as Cheeplives was doing?
I can't help but wonder if Cheeplives was trying to bait him into catching an infraction. I know, paranoia, but still.
I can't help but wonder if Cheeplives was trying to bait him into catching an infraction. I know, paranoia, but still.