OSR:
>more ranting about SJWs than actual play
>goal seems to be pain and suffering and drudgery rather than creativity and fun
>110% neckbeards, no women will ever play this
>ridiculous amounts of gatekeeping
Story Games:
>pronouns everywhere, fricking pronouns
>everyone and their characters has weird hair
>there's chicks, but they're all extremely mentally ill
>ridiculous amounts of gatekeeping
Sell me on either I guess
weak bait. sad.
>Sell me on either I guess
No. Embrace crunch.
>>more ranting about SJWs than actual play
That's the Ganker modus operandi
's chicks, but they're all extremely mentally ill
That's every woman
Maybe you should try spending time around women who are not the fat man that is your mom
Maybe you should take your own advice.
And no, your discord friends who wear programming socks don't count.
Repulsive homosexual.
I did take my own advice which is why I don't post moronic things like you do.
But I spend more time with the fat b***h of your mom, as does the entire hood
Nice projecting about your mom gaylord
OSR
>more ranting about SJWs than actual play
Don't believe the memes kido
>goal seems to be pain and suffering and drudgery rather than creativity and fun
You aren't handed a victory just for showing up.
>110% neckbeards, no women will ever play this
Hmmm okay.
>ridiculous amounts of gatekeeping
Probably judicious gate keeping.
Storyshitting
>pronouns everywhere, fricking pronouns
Yep + consent forms.
>everyone and their characters has weird hair
Playing a game is secondary to the narcissists playing it (or pretending to).
>there's chicks, but they're all extremely mentally ill
Yeeaaah what did you expect?
>ridiculous amounts of gatekeeping
These are the type of people who mentally never left college, so expect 'safe spaces'.
>don't the memes
>believes the memes about story games
Uh huh...
>story games
misnomer.
>claims "OSR is more ranting about SWJs than actual play" is a meme
>proceeds to rant about SJWs
Depends SJW is a catch all these day, I prefer 'fricking obnoxious' as a more accurate term.
I prefer the academic term Scientific Gnostics. Scientific Gnosticism is the underlying thought system of leftism, namely that existence is a prison, that man can destroy the prison by remaking the world in his subjective image, and that by working through dialectical contradictions, each person may come to secret knowledge of how to allow everyone to live in their own subjective heaven at the same time.
Bruh
Leftism is one of 2 things
1. Progressives as it was in french revolution where left wing of the room was occupied by those who wanted to abolish monarchy
2. Redistributionists
What you are describing my good sir is moronic liberals
It's funny because the biggest story game I know is entirely focused on getting players to play the game and outright tells the GM to avoid writing any story or spending too much time preparing because the players are supposed to have lots of agency.
I almost can't believe you're not trolling when the first thing you said was to deny that you have a weird fixation on SJWs and then the last thing you said was a crack about safe spaces.
>deny that you have a weird fixation on SJWs
The thread is partially about 'sjws' in gaming. Mentioning those type of people in a thread about them is having a weird fixation on them according to you?
> the last thing you said was a crack about safe spaces.
Are 'safe spaces' not something sjws endorse? Could have sworn they are.
Re-read your post and then congratulate with yourself for wining the "most brain-dead anon of the week" award
I suppose you would react like that, truth hurts sort of thing.
>truth hurts sort of thing
what did he mean by this?
He means he's balls deep in denial, anon.
I mean by this it's an accurate reflection possibly one that you identify with and have become incredibly defensive in denial.
then your assumption has ben proven wrong,
Lol it's isn't an assumption.
See here's where you get blown the frick out. Answer these questions, no cowarding or attempting to avoid answering. Only Yes/No are acceptable responses to the questions I'm about to ask you.
>pronouns
This namby pamby emphasis on demanding other people refer to them by such because they said so is a trait generally associated by most ordinary people with a collective group commonly referred to as sjws? Yes/No.
>consent forms
Is this a recent introduction to TTRPG'ing over that past several years or did I just make that up? Yes/No.
>safe spaces
As above, is this something pushed for by sjws or something I just made up? Yes/No
>gatekeeping
Have sjws adopted this noticeable tendency to screech irrationally about the non issue of so called 'gate keeping'? Yes/No
>self obsessed narcissists.
This is kind of a no brainer but...Yes/No
>mentally ill danger hairs
As above. Yes/No.
Bonus question and addendum: Correctly identifying you for what you are, guess what is going in the field? This one doesn't require Yes/No.
I'll play your little game, but i'll also elaborate on my answers
>pronouns
No, many people that you wouldn't classify as sjw also use them
>consent forms
No, you just made it up, it's not enough of a widespread phnomenon to e worthy of beeing called a "recent introduction", it's a non-issue that i don't need to worry about, plus i'll bet my left kidney that if you go back far enough you'll find nutcases like this even in the 80's
>safe spaces
No, not only sjws engage in safe spaces
>gatekeeping
No, i've only seen a handfull of complaints, so nothing major, if anything it's the "gatekeepers" that rave ednlessley about how they must gatekeep the hobby and then snarl and growl when they relizae that a hobby is a house without walls
>self obsessed narcissists
No, are there "self obsessed narcissists" among those that you would call Sjws? sure, are all of thoe you consider Sjws "self obsessed narcissists"? lol no
>mentally ill danger hairs
No, same as above, some of them have mental illness, some of them have colorfull hair, but not all of them
so what's the score Doc? how cringe am I?
>Storyshitting
And here I thought you were about to be based. But no.
>Storyshitting
I said the word, seethe, cope, dilate.
How about you play games you like with people you like? You know, friends? You have those, right?
Where do you think you are?
What if your friends are normies that don’t like TTRPGs?
If you have that little in common with your friends, do you have friends or do you just have people you regularly play looter-shooters with?
>Sell me on either I guess
I would have to want to play with you, and you're posting like you mostly want to be mad rather than actually play.
I don't mind what style of play someone wants so long as they're there to actually play and willing to compromise slightly so that everyone gets to indulge their goals a little, but if someone like you showed up I'd probably end up asking you to leave.
Low quality bait thread.
OSR
>challenge is about using tactical thinking and player experience to guide an avatar through a string of dangerous situations designed to test or kill him. Rewards are concrete: satisfaction of character survival.
Storygames
>challenge is about being handed a specific set of tools and using them on the fly to create a coherent and satisfying narrative. Rewards are less concrete: "good" session harder to define.
Just pick the one that sounds better. Those are the only real differences if you want to take them as a pair of wholes, being more granular requires some examination of what the terms actually mean and what counts as either.
Also to add, story games are hard to pull off. You need the right group to do it with and with people who know that sometimes losing something is the more gratifying route for a story.
Old-School:
>exciting
>fun
Story Games:
>predictable
>dull
That's all you need to know.
Now go outside, make some friends, and play.
I've had a lot more fun with story games than with old school stuff.
i guess people really are different
If that was true, you wouldn't be here.
>OSR
Filled with old men shouting at clouds and hipsters who never experienced the 70s/80s complaining about the "right" way to play.
>Story games
Filled with community theatre sjws and hipsters complaining about the "right" way to play.
The correct answer is to play rules medium/crunchy games. BESM (2eR), Valor, Mutants & Masterminds (2e), HERO System, etc. Get yourself a bunch of weeb friends and enjoy better games than literally anyone else.
>calling hero system rules medium
That’s a frickin understatement
>BESM (2eR), Valor, Mutants & Masterminds (2e)
Where you'd put OVA in that? Medium light or Medium rare?
They're both pretty fun but rely on you actually liking the people you play with so they're not a good idea for most fa/tg/uys.
>There are only two moronic extremes
Embrace crunch. I’ve played in games with an actual Nazi and a lesbian ancom who didn’t realize it because they were so busy arguing about rules.
>you can play with autistic people all you want, just give them something else you yell endlessly about!
Sounds horrible to me.
> pronouns everywhere
You ever notice how the incels who get so butt-blastedly twiggered over — gasp, shock! — someone using the PRONOUN they prefer to describe themselves — history’s worst atrocity!!! — ever notice how they don’t seem to give a shit about any other grammar? You never hear them shrieking and wetting themselves over past participles or relative determinatives or gerunds. Why?
Well maybe, just maybe, if they were any less than completely intellectually disingenuous they wouldn’t find it so effortless to ladle weepy self-pity over themselves because someone somewhere out there might just be — horror of horrors! — expressing their own identities the way they see fit.
Well, no matter what, don’t anyone tell the poor oppressed babies about the Vietnamese language which has over 20 pronouns! They might bite their down to gues off in incel rage (or shoot up the nearest shopping mall, given their grip on both sanity and basic ethics), blaming of course those eeeebil “SJWs” hiding in every shadow.
Of course to be fair they don’t JUST b***h about pronouns, they’re also pathetically thin-skinned about spacing.
Nice bait
Great copypaste, i'm gonna use it.
I think Finish has the best approach to pronouns (if I'm remembering this correctly). An informal one for everything and everyone, and a formal one used for God.. and cats, and sarcasm.
japan does it by putting the burden of pronoun genders on first-person pronouns so its up to the person to use it without forcing it on everyone else
japan doesn't even have gendered language jesus fricking christ, most of the time you don't even use persons in speech, you say something that would translate as
"this is very important (to me)"
this gendershit is a purely American issue and yet you're infecting nations that were perfectly fine before with your schizophrenia
at the cost of getting arrested I will keep calling men he and women she, it's fricking reality. the burden is not on me to not believe my own eyes, if you want me to believe that you look like a woman then you should at least fricking pass, and you never will, trannies can't even pass on the internet where they can doctor every fricking frame and pixel that makes them look like a man.
>the best approach to pronouns
Is to exclude anyone who uses self selected pronouns. If you do this there will never be a problem with pronouns at your table.
The problem with "pronouns" is that the identities these narcissistic homosexuals insist on "expressing" is 110% fake, and its normalization is an assault against the society as a whole.
You spiteful mutants deserve to be bulldozed into mass graves, and deep down everyone knows it.
>assault against the society as a whole
My God... Someone call 911! Society has been assaulted!
Imagine being this thin-skinned.
Imagine living life so sheltered, this is an actual problem for you
Imagine being so young and naive, you even give a frick at all about a non-issue
Get a job, touch some gras and I guarantee the "problem" will disappear - simply because you will stop obsessing over it.
>people have a panic attack and demand society completely alter itself to suit their whims
>push it so far that people are fired and ostracised for refusing to play along
>call everyone who tells you to frick off that they're thin skinned.
If you aren't a woman you are in training to behave like one. This is crazy ex-tier logic
If you don't notice a problem, its not a problem
>Ask me how I know you don't work Trades.
Couldn't all this be said about SJWs too?
They are obsessed about the races of characters, for example.
>Entirely histrionics.
Why is it whenever someone makes a comment, observation or expresses a general opinion no matter how mild we get this torrent of hyperbole? You might as well have not bothered responding for the value of what you actually typed.
"Deep down everyone knows it" is such cope no matter who is saying it. Deep down is filled with such chaos and confusion about everything.
Everyone knows you are a dumb homosexual
>You're assaulting society by your use of words!
>threatens to put people in mass graves
homie I don't think you know what assault is.
>normalization is an assault against the society as a whole
AIEEEEE!!! REANDOM PEOPLE THAT I WILL SELDOM (if ever) INTERACT WITH WANT TO BE CALLED "SHE" INSTEAD OF "HE"!!!!
SOCIETY IS COLLAPSING!!!!
lol
>and deep down everyone knows it
lmao
If we all lie it be be omes the truth
>nothing bad could ever happen be ause of this.
then so be it, why would i be vexed by such a thing?
Aforementioned bad things, but don't worry I'm sure someone will sell you a reassuring lie if you ask for it.
besides "assult on society as a whole" (still funny btw) i don't see how this will, in the end, hurt me, maybe it will hurt you, but not me
YAWN
gay.
>the PRONOUN they prefer to describe themselves
if they're using something other than I/me/my they might have a brain problem
>someone using the PRONOUN they prefer to describe themselves
They're using anything other than "I"?
Go away.
>t. someone with a small smooth brain
>I don't have an argument so I am going to make an inflammatory comment because I don't know how to walk away from something I don't like.
I was not replying to an argument, moron.
oh ok, you were just obnoxious for no particular reason then
thanks for the clarification
>demands argument for his meme post
Burgerstan is somehow evolving more moronation despite achieving "drink bleach to cure viruses and eat detergent for memes" levels of stupidity.
That's concerning.
Watch how he recoils. "I've been found out."
Yes, we found out that you are dumb
I exercise my will to power by calling the troony a man.
You'd be taken more seriously if you didn't write like an emancipated onions guzzling homosexual, unironically. You discredit your own position by virtue of your existence.
No anon, I don't think he sould be ever be taken seriously.
This.
You don't rule over me, I may call you whatever I please. If you are a man but want to be refered as anything else, not only i'm not obligated to follow that request, I may honestly believe you have mental problems.
>should
could*
I'm not talking about gender moron, I'm talking about names.
Yes, I've heard of things like that happening, but it doesn't seem very common to me. Probably depends on what circles you're in, but in my experience malicious nicknames are like getting swirlied; happens in fiction more than in real life.
Also, if people call you nicknames you don't like and you continue to be friends with them, you're a cuck.
i'm Australian anon, nicknames are more common here than actual name, hell, several of my IRL players dont even know my real name, because they call me by a shortening of my last name.
i also dont know the real name of 2 of them, because we call one of them by his old everquest character name, since thats how the mutual friend introduced him, and the other is the aforementioned ranga that we used to call ron, before his old school friend visited, and the name stuck better than calling him ron weasly.
theres also one of my co-workers who goes by their stage name bambi, which apparently is a leftover from a school play.
and yes, about 50% of the people i know just go by their real name, but most of them also have nicknames that just don't stick as well.
>someone using the PRONOUN they prefer to describe themselves
No, you idiot. They can refer to themself however they please, it is their right. They can't tell OTHERS how to refer to them. If you think that people have that right then address me as Sir, with a capital fricking S because I want you to.
Pronouns are like nicknames, or real names. You don't get to choose them.
>Pronouns are like nicknames, or real names. You don't get to choose them.
Is this bait? People literally do choose their own nicknames and names sometimes. If someone says, "my name is Benjamin, please call me Ben," literally everyone respects that request. Similarly, you can get your birth name legally changed and your new name will be put on all official documents and everything.
yeah, but sometimes you also say "hi my names Benjamin, call me ben" and then you're called ranga for the rest of your life because you have red hair.
you can then leave for years, only to have one of those old friends turn up, call you ranga once, and have everyone call you that from then on.
or it could be goatfricker, really just depends on how you got the name.
You're not asking to have your name short-handed, you're demanding to be nicknamed penguin of doom, and no, I would not and will not respect it, nor would most people.
>You're not asking to have your name short-handed, you're demanding to be nicknamed penguin of doom, and no, I would not and will not respect it, nor would most people.
So if she/her is "penguin of doom", you think your fricking mom and sisters have gone by penguin of doom all their lives?
This might be a good comparative for people that wanna go by xir/xim/tethihdfak;alihzl;kh, but it's pretty fricking awful in the context of standard english pronouns.
Shortened names aren't nicknames.
A nickname is calling your kid "Trey" when you named him Billy Ray Cyrus III.
A nickname is not calling your kid Bill when you named him Billy Ray Cyrus III.
Fricking hell people.
You get the pronoun that you look like. Stop walking the FLGS looking like picrel and demanding people call you ma'am and the rest of us will roll back how much we mock you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak
>Newspeak is a controlled language of simplified grammar and restricted vocabulary designed to limit the individual's ability to think and articulate "subversive" concepts such as personal identity, self-expression and free will.
So language that limits how people can express themselves is newspeak? Something like "there are only two genders and how dare you try and make it more complex than that" would be very newspeak-esque, right? Language that doesn't let you criticize police officers and question authority too, right (Blue Lives Matter)?
Just curious.
Doublespeak is a form of newspeak.
>doublespeak
Dog whistles aren't really a thing with the neolibs. Their game is just blatant lying.
>This namby pamby emphasis on demanding other people refer to them by such because they said so is a trait generally associated by most ordinary people with a collective group commonly referred to as sjws?
Nope. Kinda started with nobility and royalty, later doctors and senators. Now the poors are getting in on it with pronouns.
>Is this a recent introduction to TTRPG'ing over that past several years or did I just make that up?
Goes back to the 90s, actually. There just weren't premade forms back then. Back then it was just called the "social contract".
>As above, is this something pushed for by sjws or something I just made up?
Not something you made up, but it's pretty a pretty fricking old concept with a new label. Churches have existed as a safe space for bible thumpers for as long as anyone can remember, for example. Then you have the Legion/VFW for veterans, and plenty of other safe spaces for whatever groups.
>Have sjws adopted this noticeable tendency to screech irrationally about the non issue of so called 'gate keeping'?
Not just sjws. How many people foam at the mouth from the recent trend of "nazis can't play my game" paragraphs in books?
>Kinda started with nobility and royalty, later doctors and senators.
Pronouns are not the same thing as professional or titles of nobility instead they are 'refer to me by this because I said so'.
>Back then it was just called the "social contract".
But not once did I refer to 'social contracts' I was referring to actual physical hold in your hand pieces of paper.
>Churches have existed as a safe space for bible thumpers for as long as anyone can remember
There is a huge difference between sheltering people from persecution and physical harm or death to the imaginary 'persecution' of hearing someone say something you don't want to hear, that isn't persuction.
>How many people foam at the mouth from the recent trend of "nazis can't play my game" paragraphs
They don't, instead those publishers are black listed.
>Pronouns are not the same thing as professional or titles of nobility instead they are 'refer to me by this because I said so'.
It's always "because I said so", anon. Objective morality doesn't require you to address nobility, doctors or senators by special titles, only their demands (and traditions inevitably created by those demands) make it so. The only real difference is that nobility can threaten your life if you refuse.
>But not once did I refer to 'social contracts' I was referring to actual physical hold in your hand pieces of paper.
This was something discussed in 90s games, writing down expectations for the playgroup. While most social contracts are informal, many games of the time encouraged you to make it a physical document so everyone knew going forward what was to be expected and no one could claim that they were surprised by something.
>There is a huge difference between sheltering people from persecution and physical harm or death to the imaginary 'persecution' of hearing someone say something you don't want to hear, that isn't persuction.
The first formal "safe spaces" which inspired later ones were battered wife shelters. Literally to keep them safe from their spouses. I'm sure some people use it to avoid dissenting opinion, but that's not the original purpose.
It's like being mad at guns cuz bad people use them for mass shootings. That's not the intention of the gun, just what it's being used for in a narrow context.
>They don't, instead those publishers are black listed.
Just another gate to keep in a new style and format.
>It's always "because I said so", anon.
A formally recognized title is not 'because I said so' maybe not in the sense refer me to this on fear of pain and death but the fact that it is a designation speaks volumes.
>many games of the time encouraged you to make it a physical document so everyone knew going forward what was to be expected
Many in the 90's? Nah you just made that up.
>The first formal "safe spaces" which inspired later ones were battered wife shelters.
I refer you back to what I said battered wife =/= hearing things I don't like.
>Just another gate to keep in a new style and format.
Consumer choice is gate keeping according to you.
>Many in the 90's? Nah you just made that up.
The White Wolf books mention it, Nobilis had info on writing one up.
You just didn't know this because you're a nogame homosexual whining because no one wants to let you GM a game of RaHoWa or FATAL for them.
>I refer you back to what I said battered wife =/= hearing things I don't like.
I refer you back to churches.
>Consumer choice is gate keeping according to you.
Yes, duh. Now you're fricking getting it.
That's how you close the gate on game companies you don't like. You vote them out with your wallet.
>The White Wolf books mention it, Nobilis had info on writing one up.
Screenshots or it didn't happen. Also they have to conform to the current understanding of 'consent forms' where the players are given the option to state preference of what they will/will not experience.
>I refer you back to churches.
Churches didn't coddle whiny narcissists cooing to their mental illness of pretending to be victimized for self importance narcissism reasons, so there's that.
>Yes, duh. Now you're fricking getting it.
I'm certain you aren't. Gate keeping (at least in this context) refers to who should or shouldn't be permitted or excluded from a group activity, claiming consumer choice as to what disposable income is spent on equates to gate keeping is disingenuous to say the least.
>Screenshots or it didn't happen.
Page 77-80 of Nobilis 2nd Edition (the GWB). The literal first section is named "Player Comfort", and a later section is called "Sex, Violence and other Issues".
I don't keep my books on my computer, anon. That's what my phone is for. Look it up if you like, or don't.
>Churches didn't coddle whiny narcissists cooing to their mental illness of pretending to be victimized for self importance narcissism reasons, so there's that.
Most Baptist churches literally teach their followers that everybody else follows Satan and is actively persecuting them, so you're completely and utterly wrong on this.
>Gate keeping (at least in this context) refers to who should or shouldn't be permitted or excluded from a group activity
And in your intelligent opinion you cannot gatekeep product producers out of your group activity by actively refusing their products until they take their business elsewhere?
>claiming consumer choice as to what disposable income is spent on equates to gate keeping is disingenuous to say the least.
It's a form of gatekeeping, anon. Not the only kind. Gatekeeping is any tactic you use to make people get out of your group activity. It's a broad term, not some narrow specific series of actions but any number of actions you can take to do so. And its not limited to specific types of people you want out of said group activity. And finally, it's not limited in who you can gatekeep... you can gatekeep more than just product consumers, you can gatekeep businesses and virtually anyone you so choose.
The limitations are in your head, anon.
>Page 77-80 of Nobilis 2nd Edition (the GWB).
So you won't mind showing a screenshot of the consent form when you have access to your computer then?
>Most Baptist churches literally teach their followers that everybody else follows Satan and is actively persecuting them.
Weird take on baptists anon.
>Gatekeeping is refusing to purchase something you don't want to buy.
Anon acquire some common sense.
>I can't do research
I'm sorry, how is that my problem anon?
>I'm Baptist and I'm triggered by your description
Explains your attitude. Is the satan everywhere, anon?
>I can't comprehend English writing
I'm sorry that your idea of gatekeeping is everything that liberals do to make you cry. Hopefully one day you'll be able to lube up your anus enough to remove your head and you'll realize the Earth isn't nearly as shitty as what you're seeing right now.
>I'm sorry, how is that my problem anon?
You're made the claim ergo onus on you to support it. I doubt the accuracy of your claim ergo no obligation on my part. That's how it works, how do you not understand this?
>I'm Baptist and I'm triggered by your description
The accuracy of your claims have been shown to be of doubtful authenticity, for example right now you're outright stating I'm a baptist. This is not correct, how is anybody meant to take you seriously?
>I'm sorry that your idea of gatekeeping is everything that liberals do to make you cry.
We've already established your skewed perception of what gate keeping means is incorrect. Why did you think you could try slip by another incorrect statement?
>You're made the claim ergo onus on you to support it.
And I did, by citing specific pages and the book you need to look in to find it.
>The accuracy of your claims have been shown to be of doubtful authenticity, for example right now you're outright stating I'm a baptist.
You took offense to what is a pretty standard fare description of their view. They believe themselves the only true church of Christ, and that anyone not serving Christ is serving Satan.
How else should I interpret your defensive response to my description?
>We've already established your skewed perception of what gate keeping means is incorrect.
You've actually established nothing, as you don't even have a description of gatekeeping that excludes such tactics as I reference. You yourself stated that gatekeeping "refers to who should or shouldn't be permitted or excluded from a group activity". Now you suddenly change that definition to exclude merchants for absolutely no justification whatsoever. You tell me why this magic exemption exists, and maybe I'll agree with you.
>And I did, by citing specific pages and the book you need to look in to find it.
a) I don't own that book b) I don't feel inclined to go searching for something (namely a consent form) we both know I'm not going to find.
>You took offense to what is a pretty standard fare description of their view.
Taking offense is an assumption and a bit strong, laughing at your desperate attempts to sound authoritative would be more accurate.
> They believe themselves the only true church of Christ, and that anyone not serving Christ is serving Satan.
Really? I think I might have met a Methodist on occasion and didn't strike me as the fire and brimstone types. I find it more likely that you're using your jokey should not be taken seriously under any circumstances hyperbole again.
> You tell me why this magic exemption exists, and maybe I'll agree with you.
So by me not wishing to purchase a particular product means I'm gate keeping some hypothetical mentally ill weirdo does it? What horseshit Pip!
>b) I don't feel inclined to go searching for something (namely a consent form) we both know I'm not going to find.
See
. I told you there was info for writing said consent form up inside that book, and that fillable premade contracts are a new thing. I specifically said this in
:
>There just weren't premade forms back then.
>Really? I think I might have met a Methodist on occasion and didn't strike me as the fire and brimstone types.
Are Methodists Baptists, anon? No, they aren't.
>So by me not wishing to purchase a particular product means I'm gate keeping some hypothetical mentally ill weirdo does it?
Is this what it's all about? You're offended by the thought of gatekeeping others because you think "gatekeeping bad"? Well let me give you an example of good gatekeeping.
This anon, if not terminally single, is likely the abusive partner of some poor woman being forced to have sex with random strangers for his amusement and gratification. He threatens people on an anonymous board because he is too impotent to actually do anything of value beyond wishing gas chambers upon people. This is the entirety of his pathetic life. No game table would be improved by bringing this cuckold to it.
The best anyone can do is gatekeep him from tables while he rants pathetically to whomever will listen until his inevitable suicide. You don't do this by being mean, you just do this by not bringing him to the table.
The same is true for anyone, including businesses. If you keep their products off your table, whether they be dice or books or what have you, your refusal to patronize them contributes to taking sales from their ledgers, which has the potential, with enough critical mass, to make them leave the market. I won't call this gatekeeping to avoid offending you, but it has the same exact effect, ultimately pushing them out of the hobby and industry, purifying it of the presence of those who would ruin the community.
>there was info for writing said consent form up inside that book
I don't believe you.
> and that fillable premade contracts are a new thing.
Ahhhh glad we agree then.
>Are Methodists Baptists, anon? No, they aren't.
Methodist / Baptist whatever I don't believe they are the paranoid Satan hiding under the bed types you make them out to be.
>you think gatekeeping bad?
No you misunderstand me, far from it. In fact I actually endorse gate keeping as a good way to keep the undesirables who I have no wish to interact with, out.
>I don't believe you.
That's the beauty of truth, anon. Whether or not you believe me does not determine reality or the facts. But the idea that it might is certainly a fairly modern idea which I thought you didn't buy into.
>Ahhhh glad we agree then.
Specifically in the context of premade forms. Those early books recommended writing up a contract for your group. In the case of Nobilis, it was recommended that the GM write the first draft and the players recommend revisions. In early WoD games you were suppose to sit around in a group and discuss the game content and write down what everyone might not want in the game. They all had different approaches.
Fillable forms is just the hyper-commercialized version of what these early games already did.
>Atheist/Muslim/Micro Machines they're all the same and no one is ever paranoid
Okay? Can't convince you that paranoid people exist, so if you don't believe in them I guess oh well.
Since I'm obligated to coddle your beliefs, do you also have a specific gender you believe yourself to be? I can address you as such.
>No you misunderstand me, far from it. In fact I actually endorse gate keeping as a good way to keep the undesirables who I have no wish to interact with, out.
Then why are you so bothered by the possibility of gatekeeping undesirable merchants from the community? Or believe that refusing their products is not part and parcel to said gatekeeping?
>Specifically in the context of premade forms.
So now can return to the original point of dissent, you now agree with me that consent forms were not a thing in the 90's great glad we finally agree.
>Okay? Can't convince you that paranoid people exist, so if you don't believe in them I guess oh well.
Didn't say that, I said the religious people I have met aren't which is contrary to the way you're trying to pass them off as.
>Since I'm obligated to coddle your beliefs,
Wut? You're really not.
>do you also have a specific gender you believe yourself to be? I can address you as such.
I don't use that term being that it is utterly meaningless without first referring to biological sex to understand what is meant by gender. So no, it's an irrelevant term to me, anything you have to say about it is equally irrelevant.
>Or believe that refusing their products is not part and parcel to said gatekeeping?
Accuracy matters, word precision matters saying boycott accurately describes what is occurring whereas the implication of gate keeping in this context is ambiguous at best, misleading at worst.
>So now can return to the original point of dissent, you now agree with me that consent forms were not a thing in the 90's great glad we finally agree.
Yes they did exist, but they were called "social contracts" by the games that used them. And they were often written out.
If you're asking about premade forms and that is the sole version you're trying to discredit, then sure. Premade social contracts weren't a thing, most games told you to write out unique ones for your game group. I already discussed this earlier.
>Didn't say that, I said the religious people I have met aren't which is contrary to the way you're trying to pass them off as.
And you cited a Methodist, which has totally different religious views from a Baptist. It's like someone saying "hey I met a violent Muslim", and you saying "gee I met an Amish guy he didn't seem bad" and thinking that's a solid contrasting argument.
>I don't use that term being that it is utterly meaningless without first referring to biological sex to understand what is meant by gender.
So you need to know what the temperature is to discuss the price of tea in China. Got it.
>Accuracy matters, word precision matters saying boycott accurately describes what is occurring whereas the implication of gate keeping in this context is ambiguous at best, misleading at worst.
Only if you're being intentionally obtuse, or are explicitly ignorant.
Methodists and Bapists have far more in common with each other than the Amish have with Muslims.
>Only if you're being intentionally obtuse, or are explicitly ignorant.
Literally you.
>most games told you to write out unique ones
You keep saying most games, yet you've only managed to name one which I doubt actually says what you claim it does.
>And you cited a Methodist
All I'm saying is I've never met these alleged zealots you claim think Satan is hiding behind every corner.
>So you need
No I'm just not interested in using the word gender in any discussion of any consequence to me.
>Only if you're being intentionally obtuse, or are explicitly ignorant.
That's rich coming from someone who thinks saying 'gate keeping' is instantly equatable to meaning boycott. Learn to precisely express yourself otherwise people will know you don't understand what you're pretending to.
>You keep saying most games, yet you've only managed to name one which I doubt actually says what you claim it does.You keep saying most games, yet you've only managed to name one which I doubt actually says what you claim it does.
I cited specific pages in a specific book. Up to you whether or not you wanna do the research. And I also mentioned the older White Wolf games as well. Look them up.
I'm sure other games mentioned social contracts. They weren't exactly uncommon in games originating from the 90s.
>All I'm saying is I've never met these alleged zealots you claim think Satan is hiding behind every corner.
Cool. I've never met you. Prove you exist.
>No I'm just not interested in using the word gender in any discussion of any consequence to me.
K
>That's rich coming from someone who thinks saying 'gate keeping' is instantly equatable to meaning boycott.
Can you cite where I stated that the word boycott and gatekeeping are synonymous, such that there is no way to gatekeep people that do not run businesses as you cannot boycott their products? This is, after all, what you are accusing me of claiming.
We shall take screenshots.
>I cited specific pages in a specific book. Up to you whether or not you wanna do the research. And I also mentioned the older White Wolf games as well. Look them up.
Yeah so bullshit in other words. I can't be arsed to respond to anything else you typed.
>Yeah so bullshit in other words.
Can you give examples of bullshit coming with citations?
shut the frick up troony. do everyone a favor and find a gun and rid the world of your shit-smelling axe wound. your face will probably look better after the deed as well, and your relatives might bear to look at you for once before burying you with the name you were born with.
>horny for me
I'm sorry anon, but you'll have to find someone else to sate your chick with dick fetish. Have you heard of fetlife?
>They don't mean what you described, the term you're looking for is 'consumer boycott'.
Anon, I'm not a liberal so I won't play terminology games. Words can often have overlapping meanings; all milk is dairy, not all dairy is milk*.
Consumer boycotts can gatekeep businesses out of the hobby, but not all gatekeeping activities are consumer boycotting.
*peanut oil is not milk
cont
I missed this bit.
> I won't call this gatekeeping to avoid offending you, but it has the same exact effect, ultimately pushing them out of the hobby and industry, purifying it of the presence of those who would ruin the community.
It's not offending me in the slightest. However when someone speaks about gate keeping they mean deliberately excluding an individual or group from a social activity for their own reasons. They don't mean what you described, the term you're looking for is 'consumer boycott'.
Are you fricking Chenk Yogurt? You keep quoting imaginary people to argue against instead of the actual person and what they're saying.
I'm not obligated a good faith argument with someone who's acting in bad faith, anon. Whenever he tones it down, so do I.
>Methodists and Bapists have far more in common with each other than the Amish have with Muslims.
All four of them believe in Jesus, only two of them believe in Orthopraxy (Amish and Muslims).
The only thing that separates the Muslims from the rest is that Muhammad dude and his writings.
But the point is they're all different, with little actually bonding any of them your experiences with any one says nothing about any of the others. That you think it would is a perfect example of you being intentionally obtuse or explicitly ignorant.
INCELS could be here, xe thought
>ridiculous amounts of gatekeeping
How'd you get in?
Cope, seethe, et cetera, read Yoon-Suin and realize how foolish you are.
Is OSR really all about literal dungeons, evading traps and fighting monsters? It seems like that from what I see online.
No, there's also hexcrawls, domain play, etc. What there isn't is a strong focus on the story.
No it's also about boomers making moronic posts online where they shriek over ANY criticism
It's weird to me how politicized OSR seems. Even more so than Story Games.
I am sure there are plenty of players who just want to game, but any creator I actually look at, they suddenly have an opinion on Roe v Wade or feminism or whatever.
Often times you explore a sandbox setting, so you get to choose which dungeon or castle or wilderness to explore. Once you are at the location there will be story elements but they will be less obvious and players will have to investigate if they want clues. Often the story information exists in a way as to allow the players to make tactical decisions, as opposed to the story providing story beats to encourage players to engage with the narrative the GM presents. Railroads(I guess people call them story games now) use reward mechanics like milestone xp so the players get xp just for being present at the table, no matter how the game pans out. The reason for this is the logic being that players are being rewarded by experiencing an engaging narrative and don't need xp rewards for specific behaviors.
Tldr: Storygames/railroads if broken down to their base elements are a series of planned encounters designed to make players experience a pre-meditated story line. They receive xp no matter what happens and cannot fail in any meaningful way, which means it's more like watching a movie then playing a game.
OSR games give players the ability to gain rewards or suffer consequences as a result of the actions they choose, often resulting in emergent story telling.
Story games literally are the opposite of railroading. You may think of things like Dungeon World whatever you want, but they actively discourage prep and actively encourage improv and even include the players in world building from the very first step.
why would I want to sell you on a game? read the rules my dude. which game seems more fun to play?
>ridiculous amounts of gatekeeping
The only people who complain about gatekeeping are the ones who the gate was made to keep out. Sounds like it did its job.
>The only people who complain about gatekeeping are the ones who the gate was made to keep out.
Anyone who says that is someone too stupid to play any kind of tabletop game.
t. Gatekept
>t. dumb nogames who has no idea how the hobby works
>t. called out and mad about it
>t. nogames who eats all the wieners.
Seethe
Sneed.
>implying that gatekeeping is a bad thing
Everything that wasn't gatekept lost its essence. The only subcultures that maintain their core values are the ones with a high barrier to entry. ex: extreme metal
this
implying you have enough brain cells to play anything.
Can't enter in the comfy zone. Stay mad.
No one want to be in your B.O zone.
>Everything that wasn't gatekept lost its essence.
Can you show examples of this in Chess or Go?
their core values are the ones with a high barrier to entry
Their difficulty to master are the gates.
So gatekeeping is just the casual filter renamed.
/v/ermin go and stay go
They aren't the same, they just have the same outcome. No one gatekeeps to gatekeep the objective is to filter the ones entering for the wrong reasons.
https://meaningness.com/geeks-mops-sociopaths
Come home, white man
God I love the idea of meeting a chubby hipster girl with danger hair in flannel playing some storygame garbage and hooking up with her after the game. Has anyone done this? Please share stories. I want a flannel hipster gf so badly.
>playing some storygame with gm being a "nonbinary" girl who is actually just making things up about herself for attention
>had some steamy dms with her in the past before she started giving herself all these cringe labels that don't actually fit her
>5 other players
>alcoholic dude who never shows up to a session and half the shit he says makes me think he was dropped on his head
>gay dude who insults everyone but tries to frick any male npc
>emo dude who sulks the whole session
>skinny nerd girl who tries to flirt with my character and wants to basically be a couple but is too shy to keep going when I respond in kind
>finally, chubby goth girl who wears flannels and has dyed hair
>goth girl is casual about flirting, sometimes flirts with my character and nerd girl gets jealous while gm provokes it further
>gm and goth girl goes into some details about how our characters frick
>goth girl asks me to take her home after a session one night
>sucks my dick in the parking lot
occasionally she'll ask me to drive her home and we'll frick, skinny nerd girl doesn't know but if she found out she'd probably quit the group. she already has a hard enough time when our characters flirt. maybe I'll try to hook up with her too but she's a virgin and probably doesn't suck dick very good
zoomers gtfo, e-girls and scene girls aren't goth
>the antiosr bait thread uses the same image as before
>/osrg/ has huge uptake in shitposting and trolling
Its good there's pushback so there will be less tourists and grifters but at least use a different picture.
Both are fine if that's the sort of game you want to play. OSR is a style of roleplaying and problem solving that appeals to me. I like the emphasis of rulings over rules (allowing for creativity) and act of engaging with the world around you to problem solve (as opposed to relying on a roll of the dice to do so). OSR absolutely leans towards the lethal, but I'd argue that this contributes to tension and excitement rather than kills it. Especially when the bandaid of character death is ripped off. Once you get to experience it, you realize the stories that you create in spite of the threat of death makes you feel more like an adventurer.
OSR
>you have never actually sat down to play this
>neckbeards have moved on to story games
>gatekeeping is done by mellowed out 40+ longhairs and their IT career younger counterparts
>night consists of throwing characters into the meat grinder and talking shit across the table.
>there will be BO and cigarettes
>Story Games
>no matter what I say you will continue to play this because 5e is the game of choice for 90% of modern tabletop groups
5e isn’t a story game
The only defining characteristic is that both of these extremes are populated by obnoxious narcissist who lean into their given identities because it's what draws their respective crowds to them for the sake of throwing money at their patreon.
>>more ranting about SJWs than actual play
OSR isn't limited to /tg/
i dont get it
why do these people hate OSR so much and spam so many bait threads, like no one is forcing them to play that system
Because OSR is the last vestige.
Envy.
Why do you need a fricking deliberation. Just fricking run a test session or Just download Old-School Essentials or Dungeon Crawl Classics or Basic Fantasy or OSRIC or FATE and see if any of those sound fun
>no women will ever play this
Behold the perfect rpg.
OP like you never played OSR games or any other tabletop game
Have you tried playing 4e?
Have you tried playing Pathfinder 2e?
Yes, the former is a fine enough skirmish game if you want high fantasy superheroes, and the later has a lot of good ideas, but the nature of feats for everything is a bit of a millstone around it's neck.
Just as how at launch 5E was a premature ejaculate of a game that really wanted to be OSR but lacked the balls to commit. PF2E wants to be a point buy system, but refuses to.
>22
imma gonna call this post underrated !
5th ed did feel like it missed the mark - usually when brought up eventually somebody would even post that the 'play-test' was better than the final product.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/qwk8517jn2knnnb/AAD9jRQ6uEWXRWnwaowt7llWa?dl=0
Yes. They're both still garbage.
They will remain garbage no matter how many times someone as mentally ill as you post it.
The only meaningful mechanics concept in OSR is keeping track of in game time and resources. You could easily 1:1 any BX module in any other system. Every other OSR golden calf is D&D specific and can be safely discarded.
I run a story game and I voted for Trump. In roll20 no less, using discord as VC.
Nice to see the gays for trump showed up.
>more ranting about SJWs than actual play
Yes people tend to be pissed at a group that are changing and destroying their culture
>goal seems to be pain and suffering and drudgery rather than creativity and fun
Skill issue but some systems are brutal misery simulators like Flame Princess.
>110% neckbeards, no women will ever play this
Is that an issue? Most women prefer more rules light games which is perfectly valid for them.
>ridiculous amounts of gatekeeping
Rules are not gatekeeping. Also they have a good reason to gate keep if they even wanted to.
>pronouns everywhere, fricking pronouns
Yes because of the type of people who are attracted and make those types of games and want to get into the table top RPG hobby but don't want to read more then 2 pages of rules and admit its mostly a game of pretend so they tack on some rules to feel better. They also focus on trying to act cool and make the most special character ever.
>everyone and their characters has weird hair
Again, see above.
>there's chicks, but they're all extremely mentally ill
Again, its a rules light system which girls love and see above.
>ridiculous amounts of gatekeeping
This is an actual case of gatekeeping telling people "if you are in a different political alignment then me you are not allowed to play my game!"
Overall it just sounds like you want to b***h and are not actually looking for a system to play because the only real critique you gave was how OSR is sometimes too brutal which is true depending on the system.
>110% neckbeards, no women will ever play this
Living the dream.
>listing presence/absence of women as a meaningful factor
hobbies don’t have to move you toward sex, it’s okay to just enjoy things
The kind of people you play with is critical to your enjoyment of the game. Nobody wants to sit down and play with unhygienic, cantankerous old men. The only reason why you might not understand it is because you're one of these men.
Way too many thirsty homies out there.
I'll sell you on my freshly polished boot in your ass, you lazy homosexual
>He doesn't put a question about pronouns in his prospective player form to weed out both the snowflakes and the /misc/tard in one move.
Americans are so moronic. I for example live in a second world country, so if I try pulling some pronouns shit in any game no one would ever want to play with me. The rest of the world is pretty normal. You're not the only country that exists
This shit happens in Europe too
>this shit happens in the american puppet states too
yeah which is why I made sure to explain that I'm from the second world
Whenever need to put my pronunce anywhere I just write it as ba/sed
>>more ranting about SJWs than actual play
That's just the threads not the actual games.
>goal seems to be pain and suffering and drudgery rather than creativity and fun
Creativity is how you can get around the pain and suffering! Is that not fun? I think so.
>110% neckbeards, no women will ever play this
Almost certainly the truth.
Gatekeeping this hobby begins and ends at your table. Run whatever you wish, invite who you want, kick out problem players.
That's all there is to it.
>complains about pronouns everywhere
>uses four pronouns in doing so
Just once I want one of these antipronoun-bros to show me what pronoun-free speech looks like so I can see the kind of language they want us to use.
Grug say pronoun not important. Grug not use pronoun ever. Pronoun cringe.
Oh god they want us all to sound like we've committed generations of incest.
>she 18? hulk smash!
Have you considered playing the enormously successful fifth edition of the world's most popular tabletop role playing game? With so many people are playing, you're sure to find the right group for you!
No.
Instead I'll ask you to have fun. If that doesn't include tabletop games, godspeed.
Nice bait
"more ranting about SJWs than actual play"
OSR gameplay is done at the actual tabletop, not online, which is for commenting, not playing.
"goal seems to be pain and suffering and drudgery rather than creativity and fun"
Character death is not pain and suffering, any more than it is in a video game. It happens, start again. Drudgery to some, is endless fun to others. Again, OSR creativity is largely at the tabletop, that being said there are a *lot* of imaginative OSR products out there.
"110% neckbeards, no women will ever play this"
Agreed. I see this is a positive. Women and gaming rarely mix well.
"ridiculous amounts of gatekeeping"
People that love a thing for decades of their life, typically have strong opinions about it.
>t. never played and is dumb
Find a middle ground and some players. I was able to make most of the /osr/ thread acknowledge Mork Bork as OSR, so anything's possible.
>110% neckbeards, no women will ever play this
I used to believe this. At first I resented it. Then I played with a few ladies and realized it was a stage to them rather than a game, so I went full grognard. Then my wife wanted to play OSR and she loved it. So now I don’t know what.
OP here, I can actually imagine my wife enjoying OSR more than story games. She is not very spontaneous nor creative so story games aren’t for her, but sue loves puzzles and meticulously tracking details.
>No women
What are you talking about, we have a ton of trannies.
And femboys. Don't forget about them.
That is less because you play OSR games and more because you spend a lot of time around trannies
You know, you can just find a gaming group which works for you. There is a whole ass board on here dedicated to finding people to game with and probably other places where you can wrangle people together to play whatever game with who will gel with your playstyle.
Also >no women will ever play this
Tg is the wrong hobby if you are wanting to interact with women.
Presuming this isn't bait and actual disillusionment, don't fall for the false dichotomy. Just put yourself out there, tell people the type of playstyle you prefer, and you'll find people to play with.
>Tg
Sadly /tg/ Is dead and all that is left is r/Tg.
OSR sounds perfect.
I like osr books. I wish I could buy some of them physically, especially dungeon crawl classics. I'm having a really hard time finding a group where I live, though.
VTT with a group you like is better than nothing. Do it.
>Story Games:
>pronouns everywhere, fricking pronouns
Who the frick cares and no there aren't. If you're unlucky a player or table might ask for them at the start, and they never come up in game. You'll get lesbians, gays, everything, but you don't get pronoun frickery in games.
>everyone and their characters has weird hair
Again, who cares about the players hair, and if a character has weird hair, it might come up at character intro, but never again due to unimportance.
Only exception I've seen to this is when a PC got mood hair dye, and described their reactions by what colour their hair changed to.
>there's chicks, but they're all extremely mentally ill
Played with chicks. Yeah one, see above, was a bit mentally ill, but the other four were fine. Which was not too far off the ratio for male players either. Hell, two of them were stunning for RP, especially as newbies.
So long as female player isn't a diva or self-styled popular chick, odds are she's fine. If she is a Diva, she also thinks that she's the icon of desire at the table of nerds, like how Russia thinks of itself for Soviet states.
>ridiculous amounts of gatekeeping
Lmao never seen it, they're too desperate to show how inclusive they are to everyone. Only if you act like a tard, can't keep personal or political shit to yourself or your own time, or you're being that guy, will there be a chance of you getting booted.
Worst thing I've seen from these games, without bringing in thatguys/girls is DM's telling the players their characters won't die, or at least, get a one-off chance to not die to a mortal blow or shit. Which was kinda an ass thing to do, but we'd played for a year and many new people were attached to the characters I guess.
Allow thatguys/girls in, and the worst you might get is someone throwing a crying fit at the table because something in the story happened that they didn't like.
Story games aren't for everyone. But none of the things OP gave really are actual issues.
You see your a lefty moron so you have no issue with the gatekeepers. Just see what happens if you don't agree with them entirely about everything, all the time.
>You see your a lefty moron so you have no issue with the gatekeepers.
Bro nobody honestly has a problem with gatekeepers. The only difference between you and him is who you wanna gatekeep... him to you, and you to him.
Soon as you frickers realize this, the better it gets for everyone. Denial is poison, anon.
So gatekeeping is based for everyone? Glad we agree homosexual.
>So gatekeeping is based for everyone?
Depends on why and who.
>Glad we agree homosexual.
No shit cum guzzler.
I hate commies and troons but none of this is clear cut. Both scenarios have some wiggle room although the vast majority of players will be hard leftists which is annoying. Playing with /misc/gays if you're not hard into /misc/ yourself just to avoid trannies is always a disaster. I have no reliable method to filter leftists that doesn't just result in reactionary /misc/homosexual LARPshittery, so your best bet is getting with people who aren't too overt about their leftist politics and hiding your power level for as long as you can while you play morally grey characters. Godspeed
Obvious bait.
And you should gate-keep your tables. All it takes is one bad player frick up everything.
>Sell me on either I guess
My strong suggestion is to not believe anything you read on Ganker.
>Dog whistles aren't really a thing with the neolibs.
Doublespeak is a type of lying through obfuscation.
>OSR:
>more ranting about SJWs than actual play
Terrible falseflag thread
Nobody cares about justifying this shit except troony agents of the Party. The point of pronoun homosexualry is forcing everyone to low key signal his agreement with gender theory which is like the 2+2=5 bit in 1984, giving up on reality. You see a man in a wig and lipstick and your brain needs to instantly go "that's a woman" and actually believe it. If you do not do this you're not broken yet. Even if you say your pronouns are he/him you are still signaling that you obey. It's all literally just a way to filter people who don't want to comply with the technological totalitarianism that's taking place every day. Same with this moronic use of they and other troony newspeak shit. It's exactly the IngSoc playbook.
>The point of pronoun homosexualry is forcing everyone to low key signal his agreement with gender theory which is like the 2+2=5 bit in 1984, giving up on reality.
Except it's literally not. They aren't trying to redefine biological sex, which is why they use the term "gender". You're just assblasted that people want to create their own identities, ironically that being like newspeak's goal of "limit the individual's ability to think and articulate 'subversive' concepts such as personal identity, self-expression and free will". You're mad that they won't ascribe to a personal identity you wish to assign to them, and you ironically twist the metaphors of a book written by a man you villainize thinking that it fits your worldview better, much as those like you did with the Matrix.
>It's all literally just a way to filter people who don't want to comply with the technological totalitarianism that's taking place every day.
No you fricking clown. It's how corporate America turns the poor on itself; by complying with one group's needs in a way that inconveniences another group, all while relying on the corporate brainwashing they've already received to code their minds into avoiding blame being set on the elite forces that play mind games with you.
You see a corporation "swearing allegiance to gays", while gays see a corporation giving them meaningless pandering. All the while the corporation sits back and hopes both groups murder each other providing the public cull they want to reduce the costs of maintaining the country for them.
>It's exactly the IngSoc playbook.
You literally didn't read that fricking book, it's a comedic farce that you try and reference them as an illustration for your garbage allegory.
>Except it's literally not.
not going to read your wall of shit but yes it is. next year you'll say that yes, it is but that's a good thing. frick you. you are scum, the enemies of humanity
>you are scum, the enemies of humanity
You could have just said you were an incel and I wouldn't have made the effort anon, please use the magic noose to join your comrades in heaven.
No thanks and I hope one day I'll get to wave at you from outside a gas chamber, you fricking snake
Maybe play a style of game you and your friends enjoy? Stop worrying about labels and what others are doing?
I would still be interested in an answer to OP's question.
As.I understand it, gatekeeping means someone established in the hobby expresses their non-globally-inclusive preferences for play, without actually having any power to stop anyone from doing anything. Is that about right?
It's all largely true. Three things wrong
>OSR
>goal seems to be pain and suffering and drudgery rather than creativity and fun
Well, the goal is that it's 'fun' to use creativity to overcome suffering/danger and succeed.
>a trap set into the doorframe disintegrates anything human-shaped that gets too close
>so in town you ask tailors to make a set of four-armed coats for you and some puppet-makers to make you an extra set of fake arms to fool the trap
>or the magic-user casts a darkness spell on the carved eye of the doorframe so it can't 'see' the people approaching
>or you crawl on all fours, moving like quadripedal weird things
If you treat it like 5e and just passively walk from scene to scene, you'll die. It's asking you to take an active role in the game, think about what you're hearing and come up with ideas about how you interact with it.
>Storygames
>ridiculous amounts of gatekeeping
No, they're very welcoming.
Even if you didn't know the rules, they'd love to have you just take it part in their story.
>there's chicks
>extremely mentally ill
Depending on your views on trans identity, you will categorize these people into only one of these two groups.
>>OSR
>>goal seems to be pain and suffering and drudgery rather than creativity and fun
>>Well, the goal is that it's 'fun' to use creativity to overcome suffering/danger and succeed.
I understand that this can be fun as ONE ASPECT. But it just feels very limiting you know. There are many ways to create challenges and tension. Not everything has to be grimdark.
>OSR
>goal seems to be pain and suffering and drudgery rather than creativity and fun
>Well, the goal is that it's 'fun' to use creativity to overcome suffering/danger and succeed.
Maybe I've just been given shit luck in my area but every single OSR GM I've played under has either been a vindictive shit who gets mad and hostile if you solve a problem in a way they didn't expect, absolute sadists that will find every possible way to stop you from using creativity to overcome their mudcore suffering and dysentery simulator or both.
>goal seems to be pain and suffering and drudgery rather than creativity and fun
osr is all about using creativity to avoid pain and suffering
What the frick is a story game?
>What the frick is a story game?
It's a phrase that makes morons cry for days on end because it's associated with games that scare them.
Basically any RPG that doesn't try to simulate laws of physics with its game mechanics.
it's an RPG with "Arcs" and "Character development" instead of Dungeons and XP. Not necessarily bad, but certainty an acquired taste. There's a notion that they're slowly replacing more traditional style games and in my experience that's true, but good players are willing to go back and forth and be good sports about it.
I don’t think story games will ever replace traditional and OSR and all the other games. They might be growing, but there are intrinsic reasons for why theyre always going to be niche. (Much like OSR)
>What the frick is a story game?
Make shit up, go wild, write a verbal interactive novel, you aren't playing a game because there are no hard rules.
A forced meme from a few years ago.
Story games gave rules that less try to emulate the physics of the game world or provide a tactical challenge, but to help construct interesting stories on the fly directly. (Not saying other games dont result in gold stories, just that story game rules are directly focused on that whereas OSR etc games have other direct focus)
why should i sell you on either?
>more ranting about SJWs than actual play
What game did you go to where play was held up by a rant? You're not some nogames homosexual just making up a story for (you)s, right?
I admittedly have never played OSR (played plenty of other stuff though), this is just the impression I get online. That’s why it ends with “sell me on either”
Why would I? You're never gonna play a game anyway.