Ok WTF.
Look at this shit !
>https://www.artofmtg.com/mtg-set/streets-of-new-capenna/
Is this the fricken magical 1920s ?
>Cars
>Tommie guns
>Literally the 1920s dress style.
This is what happens if you allowed magic robots in fantasy.
 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
|
I know, cool!
I mean WTF. is this MTG or the cover of atlas shrugged ?
>Objectivist fantasy
I fricking wish someone would have the guts
Blame the Atlas Shrugged movies for being huge flops
wait, there was movies?
They couldn't get any of the actors from Part 1 back for Part 2, so every role was recast
>They couldn't get any of the actors from Part 1 back for Part 2, so every role was recast
Thanks however I did read the book.
PS: It is trash.
well, I didn't read the book and the trailer looks like pretty standard story of tycoons doing tycoon things
Its pretty wild as a book, because its so completely disconnected from reality. Reading it is like taking a peek inside of the mind of someone unambiguously evil trying to explain why everything they do is not just okay, but morally right but its so ass backwards you can't tell if its a joke or not.
>well, I didn't read the book and the trailer looks like pretty standard story of tycoons doing tycoon things
Basically:
>Rich people fiction.
>Some rich CEO invents a new metal his wife and friends laugh at him and ignore his inventions
You can clearly see that this was written by a nerd who was laughed at by others for her ideas by the jocks.
>Rich people get frustrated with taxes and regulation
>Rich people start blowing up their own factories (!!!!)
>Rich people have a secret hideout hidden by magic tech
>Then there the rich people storm some facility and wait for society of the normies to collapse.
And this is Atlas Shrugged.
>You can clearly see that this was written by a nerd who was laughed at by others for her ideas by the jocks
the actual life story of ayn rand is a lot more interesting than her books
she was a russian israelite who's family assets were seized by lenin. as an adult, she moved to america. she reasoned that the free market was the sole defining difference between her starving russian parents and her thriving american relatives. she then basically spent her life writing about heroic ubermensch capitalists.
>she was a russian israelite who's family assets were seized by lenin
I know.
Either by accident or by design to get loners into her cult she planet these parts in her books. You know
>you are very smart and a genius that the world depends on, however all these idiots are holding you back.
I know her pro capitalism however it is cope out of this world. She basically ass pulls her intellectual property in her book capitalism the unknown ideal. All she wrote was meaningless bullshit to justify why the American laws of her time are the best.
The strangest thing I remember from the books is related to countries nationalizing industries. The protagonist reasons the country will nationalize the railways, so purposefully sabotages the company until the national rail system is on the brink of total collapse. He does this with the reasoning he should provide the nation no fruits of his labor.
However from an outside perspective the country just saw the owner of the railways seemingly go insane and destroy the railroads. It was a self fulfilling prophesy because they created a situation that forced the government to step in because they feared the government would step in.
The book reads like parody.
>>The book reads like parody.
Worse.
> owner of the railways seemingly go insane and destroy the railroads.
Fun fact any economic system will collapse if you start blowing up all the factories.
It is basically a copy pasted and inverted Marxism
Marxism
>Workers you own the factories smash them to stop the capitalists !
Ayn Randianism
>Capitalists you own the factories (you own) destroy them to show the government who is boss !
Considering that it's an allegory on the US system, it's really kinda odd because the construction was financed by taxes every step of the way, meaning none of the money spent was earned by the sweat of any railroad tycoon's brow in the first place.
It was so bad they had to beg people to promote the movie, for free, since they had no money for promotion.
audiences shrugged
I mean, isn't all objectivism fantasy?
But more seriously, what you want is called The Sword of Truth.
I'm not versed in it, what is wrong with objectivism?
Wiki quote "the concept of man as a heroic being" seems a reasonable one.
It's incredibly selfish an-cap fantasy, sold entirely on "you are special and supersmart, if you only are red-pilled into being an incredibly self-centered and self-important piece of shit that actively works against anything that's common good"
Aka the sort of mentality your average 15 yo has, but then grows out of it, if he's not psychotic.
>but my fantasy, where I lead the revolution against the comically evil oppressors and bring utopia to the sinless plebs, is entirely selfless and certainly not self-aggrandizing
Anon, please...
Your common good never included my kind.
which is?
>I'm not versed in it, what is wrong with objectivism?
Jesus, where to begin?
For one it insists on itself as an egoist philosophy; which is totally fine. Nothing wrong with Egoism. But from there it basically goes to say "Laissez-Faire Capitalism is the best thing since sliced bread and you should always always always follow its tenants as we interpret it."
Which I mean, doesn't make much sense. You can say on one hand that there's no God and that Man should live for himself and follow his own ambitions, but then in the very next sentence it argues "But you have to play by the rules of Capitalism because... because!"
Like if a guy's business is at risk of going under and that's the primary way he supports himself, telling him in one moment that he's an ubermensch who shouldn't live for anyone but himself and then in the next say he should voluntarily let his business go bankrupt as opposed to sabotaging his competition or lobbying the government to keep him afloat because the Free Market is some sacred cow you can't touch is weird.
There's also its weird insistence that Objectivism is, well, Objective. As in it's THE moral system that defines what is good or evil. There's no such thing as "good for me" so much as "Good in itself" or "Evil in itself."
This leads to bizarre, often psychotic episodes like the Mr. A comic, about some ubermensch journalist that murders anyone he deems evil and has a pure Black and White aesthetic because Objectivist morality leaves no room for "shades of grey".
Nietzsche and Stirner did egoism better.
>Nothing wrong with Egoism.
No, that's literally why it's wrong. Every problem with it stems from that.
I wish there was more fiction for moderate egoist types. Like, something that isn't batshit insane anti-charity like Atlas Shrugged, but also not super whiney entitled victim mentality bullshit like Elysium. What happened to just good stories about heroes who work hard and sacrifice to achieve their goals, and also sometimes lend a helping hand to the less fortunate along the way?
Isn't that just heroic fantasy in general?
>voluntarily let his business go bankrupt as opposed to sabotaging his competition or lobbying the government to keep him afloat because the Free Market is some sacred cow you can't touch is weird.
The the whole point, you dont let it go bankrupt, you compete. You find a way to drive costs down, you figure out a way to do things more efficiently, or you pivot into a different sector.
Its about living and taking care of yourself.
Your
>why dont they just cheat the system
Is basically admittance that you cant govern yourself.
Okay, so the problem with objectivism is that the first half of the description always sounds great. and then you get to the actual ideology and it takes a sharp turn into crazytown. So it doesn't sound bad until you actually get down to what they are actually saying, not the sales pitch
Objectivism says that there are certain objective moral truths that are unassailable regardless of culture, to which man should adhere. Everyone thinks they agree with that, everyone thinks there are a set of rules everyone else should follow because they 'make sense' so the audience nods along as they hear that bit.
The next bit is that every person has a right to ensure their own prosperity and successful, and anyone who would take that right from you cannot be tolerated for they mean you direct harm. Again, this sounds reasonable. Philosophy does you little good if you have all your shit taken from you and are sold into slavery.
But what this evolves into, over bits and pieces and steps that SOUND good at first, becomes "Charity is evil, anything that benefits you is objectively good no matter who else it harms. ONLY you matter, because you are an intelligent wealthy superhuman, and everyone else is below you and a parasite trying to drag you down." Which is obviously pretty vile. Under objectivism, giving money to a homeless person is evil because it harmed you for no benefit to yourself, while kicking the homeless person and taking his cup of change is a morally GOOD act because you benefited.
And this isn't just me being hyperbolic. The establishing scene for the main character of one of Ayn Rand's books is that she is arguing with the conductor why they should ignore all safety regulations and blow through all of the checkpoints at maximum speed and force all other trains to get off the tracks so that she can get to her meeting faster because she is more important than anyone else on the railway, and the conductor is a *fricking moron* because he doesn't agree.
So it's just Judaism meets Karenism? No wonder Ayn Rand was the poster child of it.
>The establishing scene for the main character of one of Ayn Rand's books is that she is arguing with the conductor why they should ignore all safety regulations and blow through all of the checkpoints at maximum speed and force all other trains to get off the tracks so that she can get to her meeting faster because she is more important than anyone else on the railway, and the conductor is a *fricking moron* because he doesn't agree.
I seriously hope you're exaggerating.
He isn't. Ayn Rand's books read like parody of her own ideology.
To put it more accurate, Ayn Rand writes the conductor as a lazy, slothful oaf just who doesn't care about anything but getting paid. He "does his job" and nothing more. Meanwhile, the protagonist is a go-getting hard-working no-nonsense individual who goes out of her way to get the job done, because anyone who isn't industrious and driven in every aspect of life is subhuman.
I can post quotes from that passage if you like.
>I can post quotes from that passage if you like.
Please do.
She had fallen asleep and she awakened with a jolt, knowing that something was wrong, before she knew what it was: the wheels had stopped. The car stood soundless and dim in the blue glow of the night lamps. She glanced at her watch: there was no reason for stopping. She looked out the window: the train stood still in the middle of empty fields.
She heard someone moving in a seat across the aisle, and asked, "How long have we been standing?"
A man's voice answered indifferently, "About an hour." The man looked after her, sleepily astonished, because she leaped to her feet and rushed to the door. There was a cold wind outside, and an empty stretch of land under an empty sky. She heard weeds rustling in the darkness. Far ahead, she saw the figures of men standing by the engine—and above them, hanging detached in the sky, the red light of a signal.
She walked rapidly toward them, past the motionless line of wheels. No one paid attention to her when she approached. The train crew and a few passengers stood clustered under the red light. They had stopped talking, they seemed to be waiting in placid indifference.
"What's the matter?" she asked.
The engineer turned, astonished. Her question had sounded like an order, not like the amateur curiosity of a passenger. She stood, hands in pockets, coat collar raised, the wind beating her hair in strands across her face.
"Red light, lady," he said, pointing up with his thumb.
"How long has it been on?"
"An hour."
"We're off the main track, aren't we?"
"That's right."
"Why?"
"I don't know."
The conductor spoke up. "I don't think we had any business being sent off on a siding, that switch wasn't working right, and this thing's not working at all." He jerked his head up at the red light. "I don't think the signal's going to change. I think it's busted."
"Then what are you doing?"
"Waiting for it to change."
In her pause of startled anger, the fireman chuckled. "Last week, the crack special of the Atlantic Southern got left on a siding for two hours—just somebody's mistake."
"This is the Taggart Comet," she said. "The Comet has never been late."
"She's the only one in the country that hasn't," said the engineer.
"There's always a first time," said the fireman.
"You don't know about railroads, lady," said a passenger.
"There's not a signal system or a dispatcher in the country that's worth a damn."
She did not turn or notice him, but spoke to the engineer.
"If you know that the signal is broken, what do you intend to do?"
He did not like her tone of authority, and he could not understand why she assumed it so naturally. She looked like a young girl; only her mouth and eyes showed that she was a woman in her thirties. The dark gray eyes were direct and disturbing, as if they cut through things, throwing the inconsequential out of the way. The face seemed faintly familiar to him, but he could not recall where he had seen it.
"Lady, I don't intend to stick my neck out," he said.
"He means," said the fireman, "that our job's to wait for orders."
"Your job is to run this train."
"Not against a red light. If the light says stop, we stop."
"A red light means danger, lady," said the passenger.
"We're not taking any chances," said the engineer. "Whoever's responsible for it, he'll switch the blame to us if we move. So we're not moving till somebody tells us to."
"And if nobody does?"
"Somebody will turn up sooner or later."
"How long do you propose to wait?"
The engineer shrugged. "Who is John Galt?"
"He means," said the fireman, "don't ask questions nobody can answer."
She looked at the red light and at the rail that went off into the black, untouched distance.
So the conductor thinks the signal might be incorrect but doesn't want to take the chance because it both risks the safety of passengers if he is wrong and because he'll be punished for ignoring it even if it was broken?
That seems, reasonable.
But a real go-getter would either solve the problem or work around it. Waiting for the system to solve the problem for you is slave-think.
More that he’s passively accepted that the failures (of which he is also one) around him have sent him to a broken down dead end and he’s done nothing to avoid it or get out of it, to the detriment of himself and everyone one board (with at least one of such people being someone who actually matters)
It’s basically Karen seething that inept “people” below a certain iq not only exist, but they are the only ones who fulfill certain positions in the societal machine of capitalism. When someone who isn’t used to dealing with morons enters their sphere of influence, sometimes the change in conduct is shocking and infuriatingly dull and placid, without self determination or basic auditing of processes and people.
Basically rand needed rape correction and to stfu about things she doesn’t understand. Like the arcane process of asking menial workers questions about their jobs and how the trains they operate run.
>It’s basically Karen seething that inept “people” below a certain iq not only exist, but they are the only ones who fulfill certain positions in the societal machine of capitalism.
yeah atlas shrugged is specifically about hatred of stupid people. a stupid person operates the train, runs the train company, stupid people control the government and most private industries, etc
so a bunch of smart people, led by a guy who is really good at building train parts, just frick off and let the stupid people destroy themselves
it would be funny if it wasn't portrayed as an absolute moral obligation
Not him. LOL I literally did not notice this in that brick of a book. I was more memorizing this as
>bla bla lazy normie bla bla
>bla lba CEO cool bla bla
>bla bla socialism bad bla bla
However yes she would push them into a disaster. Since red light and all YO !
Also related
>"This is the Taggart Comet," she said. "The Comet has never been late."
It is literally like listening to a child speak.
>"Somebody will turn up sooner or later."
>"How long do you propose to wait?"
Ah yes if you populate your world with caricatures of humans then maybe your ideology for a 5 year old can look less insane.
>"Who is John Galt?"
Most cringe meme in that book.
If you are trying to get an understanding of the libertarian right read rothbard and mises not ayn rand.
>read rothbard and mises
EVEN MORE moronic.
> to get an understanding of the libertarian right
I already do.
>ONLY you matter, because you are an intelligent wealthy superhuman, and everyone else is below you and a parasite trying to drag you down."
I read Atlas shrugged and I never got that.
The take away was that if everyone took care of themselves first and foremost that the vast majority of things would be okay. Its not that you cant do interpersonal charity, but that once you get to massive philanthropic organizations, they are breeding grounds for parasites who just want to leech off of the good will and hard work of others (looking at the vast majority of ebt use its not wrong).
Its been a mintue since I read the train bit but iirc there was a bit more context to it.
Also that fricking 5-10page screed of her politics was nuts. Like the driest shit ive ever read
>I read Atlas shrugged and I never got that.
Agree, basically it is leftists trying to smear her with reasoning that only exist in the mind of a leftist AKA to a leftist everything is literally Hitler.
There are reasons to disagree and not like Ayn Rand.
>Also that fricking 5-10page screed of her politics was nuts. Like the driest shit ive ever read
Depends what you are thinking about however most of her writing are crap.
>Wiki quote "the concept of man as a heroic being" seems a reasonable one.
And that's how they get you. First you read a nice quote and then you're strangling Mexicans.
Objectivism enshrines anarcho capitalism as a the only moral system that requires people both be as ruthless and uncaring as possible, but never stray from the capitalist system to accomplish their goals. It also predisposes any form of personal trouble is an explicit moral failing.
The way I see it it's a moral stance that values authenticity over actually doing good.
You're not allowed to give to charity just for karma and self image, you actually have to specifically care about the individual people receiving the benefit. It has to make you happy because you care, not because you want to be a good person.
It's very clearly a matter of taste by Rand, not a matter of creating the most good for the most people.
Though she does the benefits of the free market to justify a self interested attitude, that's merely a laboured excuse.
>t. objectivitard
>Reactionary
I'm a socialist the real kind and marxists make me cringe.
Sure exploitation is bad and everyone can understand this however why the frick do you pollute the discussion with your marxoid shit?
>Reactionary
What the frick does this even mean ?
No seriously what the frick ?
Can you not use normal language ?
Like you know ? "Boot licker" ; "corporate drone" ; "corporate cück" ?
Looks like another example of made up shit, also is marxism not reactionary ? in like it reacts to capitalism existing and is a reaction to it ? Same for counter revolutionary.
Communists are counter revolutionaries. You know like the revolution that overthrew the USSR you are trying to counter it ?
Extremely stupid words, and they mean nothing they are self contradictory nonsense if explained.
Because it's basically a sinister cult recruitment pitch.
it makes commies and marxoids seethe, therefore it is based
ITT: lots of commies seething
I heard if you were eating shit and post a video of it, it would make a lot of people seethe
Objectivism is already fantasy.
Also selfish hoarding capitalism makes no sense in a world where you can literally magic food clothing and shelter into existence. It genuinely is better, even in a self-serving way, to be charitable. All of a sudden your wizard is now king of thousands because he's Jesusing an economy into existence for them while rich nobles step over them while they're lying in the gutter.
Surely, in such a setting, organizations of magic users don't pose a threat to the nobility, they already are the nobility and always have been as far back as anyone can remember.
... or not. Or some are, and others don't
I guess the joy of growing up in commie period is that you are actually capable of imagining a situation where people act in an entirely different system of values and chasing after completely different goals, rather than considering a single option to be the only possibility.
Tell me more anon. What goals did people chase after? What values did they live by? I was born too late elsewhere.
Depends on the situation they are in. But applying deterministic "things familiar to me must be universal and objective" is pretty moronic. For starters, I am just as capable of imagining a society with zero nepotism and one run entirely by it, along with different middle grounds, rather than being a c**t that insist only meritocracy/social net can prevail.
You're no more unique or intelligent in your imagination of societies w/ zero & +99 nepotism than people imagining purely meritocratic & social safety net societies.
c**ts always talk shit.
>Also selfish hoarding capitalism makes no sense in a world where you can literally magic food clothing and shelter into existence.
I mean most settings generally tie some sort of cost to magic, sometimes a literally cost in materials to cast spells, or you are limited in the amount of times you can cast per day or according to your pool of mana, or the ability to do it requires you to spend a sizable amount of time learning how to do the magic.
>selfish hoarding
Thats a funny way to say being responsible.
>Objectivist fantasy
>Porky boss leaves expecting factory to fall apart without his titanic genius
>Workers just take over the factories and do what they've been doing for ages, but with a more equitable distribution of resources
>Porky shocked when raping a random woman ends up with him getting shivved in the gut rather than being some romantic hero
>Galt's Gulch falls apart the second someone decides to use force rather than willingly starve to death because "muh market."
I can dig it.
>historical determinism
Yes Marxism is cringe and self contradictory like that.
>WE Marxists are for the workers
>So let me drop in my super special magical language now
Do they even understand that 99.99999% of factory workers have no fricken idea what these words mean ?
>t. actual moron who thinks factory aggitators use the same language as high-brow stuff addressing scholars and rich
Let me guess - American, aren't you?
>addressing scholars
Still self contradictory; and the 0.0001% who are Marxists today will speak to you like this on the internet; ensuring that no one listens to them.
You seem to think your average worker is a braindead moron or that some nerds using big words ever stopped workers from unionizing and wanting better working conditions. Jesus.
See:
As someone who has worked on the line a factory, yes.
>or that some nerds using big words ever stopped workers from unionizing and wanting better working conditions. Jesus.
You absolutely fail to understand me.
I'm a socialist you know the real kind.
My objection is not that I suck capitalist dick every day (I oppose capitalists) my objection to Marxism is that they literally will start throwing their shit words around instead of you know saying it in normal language like
>Unionize now
Oh no it is a wall of text with words that in the end mean nothing.
Socialists are cringe
At least the Stalinists will purge the troons and minorities
i don't want to defend marx or marxists, as they are both cringe and moronic, but it's important to know the difference
a blue hair grad student writing essays on how everyone else needs to rise up for gender reform holds a very different viewpoint from marx. marx did not give half a frick about most people. his ideology was basically about trying to get the people he hated most murdered by people he hated a little less.
>a blue hair grad student writing essays on how everyone else needs to rise up for gender reform holds a very different viewpoint from marx.
No. This is just as much a fallacy as the fallacy that the first generation of feminists were the good ones. The blue haired grad student is using the exact same dialectic as Marx, she just expanded it to encompass more than just the political dimension. Intersectionalism turned Marxism into a fill in the blanks exercise.
>The ___ is intrinsically oppressing the ___ through ___, which is a system that must be overthrown
>The bourgeois is intrinsically oppressing the proletariat through capitalism, which is a system that must be overthrown
>The male is intrinsically oppressing the female through patriarchy, which is a system that must be overthrown
>The white man is intrinsically oppressing the black man through white privilege, which is a system that must be overthrown
>The heterosexual is intrinsically oppressing the homosexual through heteronormativity, which is a system that must be overthrown
And I've saved the best for last
>The thin woman is intrinsically oppressing the fat woman through diet culture, which is a system that must be overthrown
>The blue haired grad student is using the exact same dialectic as Marx, she just expanded it to encompass more than just the political dimension. Intersectionalism turned Marxism into a fill in the blanks exercise.
we agree on this point. however, there are so many possible words for those Mad Libs that some contradict each other.
>The Christian is intrinsically oppressing the israelite through theocracy, which is a system that must be overthrown
would be considered common marxist language by the blue hair
>What is the worldly religion of the israelite? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money
would not. one represents Marx's thinking and one does not.
I can smell the Jordan Peterson viewership from here
At this point the only way to get the idea of what Marx meant would be by studying his books and history, any digital arguments, for or against are consistently fricky.
>At this point the only way to get the idea of what Marx meant would be by studying his books and history
Only he wrote like a pants shitting schizo. Assumed lots of things and did not explain core features.
There is a theory that legitimately he was fricked in the head because of syphilis.
The best WTF moment is after you finish the communist manifesto for Engels to drop in and say.
>BTW in the communist utopia there will be wealth inequality (rich and poor will exist)
WAIT what ?!
And you can not ask for clarification since they are dead.
>the idea of what Marx meant
He saw the prosperity gained from going from cottage industry to real factories and despised all the wealth going to the factory owners. He thought "What if we just murder the owner and take it for ourselves? We could make everyone rich" And he was an idiot. It DID work, sorta, for a time. But modern people want more than 3 turnips a day and hovel to live in. After murdering all the factory makers, nobody wants to do anything new least they get murdered.
>But modern people want more than 3 turnips a day and hovel to live in.
Amazon workers being allowed to go to the bathroom or not was a big issue just a year or two ago
>At this point the only way to get the idea of what Marx meant would be by studying his books and history
While true, it would be meaningless as anything other than either a historical exercise or a study where the modern left came from. Not even many self-proclaimed Marxists follow orthodox Marxism.
>full throated R's
uh oh
>answers the israeli question
UH OH
Not him.
>No. This is just as much a fallacy
Not really.
>The white man is intrinsically oppressing the black man through white privilege, which is a system that must be overthrown
>The thin woman is intrinsically oppressing the fat woman through diet culture, which is a system that must be overthrown
I agree that leftism or SJW evolved from the OG Marxism and Marxists evolved into new beasts the nu-Marxists are nothing like the old Marxists, I think it is hard to say about a dead ideology (Marxism).
Today even the most hardcore LARPing Marxist will in 11 minutes start rambling how whites need to be exterminated and how black power is important. no one cares about Marxist economics.
Why is the guy on the poster flattening pizza dough with the top end of a hammer?
that's the negative space of the sickle, not a pizza on top of a round board.
Historical determinism is cringe, but do you know what's even more cringe? Unironically believing in 'alienated labor'.
>>I can dig it.
The real question is how they got food there or after their revolution.
Why does one of the prisoners have a loaded shotgun?
Look at the first frame again.
hey that anon here
i'm a fricking moron and i suck wieners thank you for pointing out what should have been obvious. i'm so unbelievebly stupid and ugly and my parents don't love me but with my personality thats to be expected.
>History is a dialectical process
That isn't a given. People go out of their way to make it happen. People can easily turn all that around.
Exactly as cringe as Atlas Shrugged if not more so
why do commies seethe so hard at the mere mention of ayn rand?
Do you think The Fountainhead is nonfiction? Do you think Galt's Gulch is a real place? It's all made up, anon.
Yes, and there's entire fiction sections in book stores that are filled with books that don't receive nearly as much seethe
Use force to steal things. Still starve because they didnt produce anything. Collectivists everyone.
That’s communist fantasy moron
this completely misses the part where the farmer is left wondering who the hell he's selling his crop to so the factory workers can do their job.
there is a similar situation for any non-food related product.
Funny that they're both israeli and obsessed with money
Sword of Truth is pretty big.
>Objectivist fantasy
>I fricking wish someone would have the guts
How have you never heard of Ayn Rand?
That was decades ago. As far as I know nobody has bothered making a libertarian rpg in this day and age unless you count cyberpunk.
Sword of truth series. It's great
Sword of Truth series. It's god-awful. But pretty much all RPGs are unintentionally objectivist. Especially ones like D&D where the PCs are special and stand apart from the herd of inferior sheep.
there's a writer named ayn rand you should check out
I usually just get bored when settings are lazy.
I don't need 1920s Bright as a setting.
Fantasy usually draws on history for aesthetics, so going back 100 years seems like fair game to me.
>so going back 100 years seems like fair game to me.
What happened to my medieval fantasy and sword and sorcery ?
What happened to my fantasy tavern. Look at this shit they literally have stage microphones.
>What happened to my medieval fantasy and sword and sorcery ?
Oversaturated by like 11 different major franchises and countless pretenders to the throne, most of which are bad. Blame Warhammer, WoW, etc for destroying what LOTR built.
>WoW
Blocks your path.
It is everywhere.
Step aside, old man. Your time is over. This is XIV territory now.
Nobody will care about this weebshit, no matter how much you want to meme it into existence.
Sorry pal, but only people who still play wow are the gays who don't want to feel they wasted their lives playing a game made by a company that cares only about Chinese money
>Implying the company cares only about Chinese money
>And not just money in general
lol
lmao
I haven't played wow in half a decade but its setting is still leaps and bounds more interesting and better for roleplay than ffxiv
Pure unadulterated cope, with a twinge of seethe.
I don't even play MMOs, but XIV is far more popular than WoW now. I don't get it. Some of the classes look cool. The card one. Tactics was the best FF game by far though. WoW died after Cata, got fun in MoP for a bit (I love Pandaren lore and the Monk class was fun), then died again. WC3 (not remastered) is still the best Warcraft product though.
How to find a XIV troony:
>Mention WoW.
>That's it.
They'll come out of the woodworks to seethe just because you mentioned a game unrelated to theirs. It's that easy.
I don’t find the same elves/orcs/dwarves interesting because they’re in the 1920s.
>What happened to my medieval fantasy and sword and sorcery ?
It got stale
its still there for you to enjoy anon
>What happened to my medieval fantasy and sword and sorcery ?
It's still there, moron. You don't play games.
The joke in this whole thread is that the last set released is a literal dungeons & dragons set right?
Where do you see a stage mic anon?
It thankfully died a horrible death.
>one setting not being set in the Middle Ages means medieval fantasy is dead
Actual moron
>Actual moron
That's a baseline for posting on Ganker.
Mtg abandoned typically sword and sorcery pretty early on anon with phyrexia
They're still there, jesus christ, you act like they said every set in Magic from now on will be the Roaring 20s.
I swear, the "look what they took from you" types all huff cordyceps spores for entertainment.
You have plenty of medieval settings to enjoy but you choose to complain about one which isn't medieval.
where are the mics? am i blind or does this anon not know what literally means?
Comfy
and black people apparently
Time to allow magic robots in my setting.
>Time to allow magic robots in my setting.
I blame the inclusion of magic robots in fantasy. That shit should have never started.
You only get magic golems not magic robots.
>implying a dragon running the construction workers union, an illegal underground fight club and an "insurance agengy" isn't boss as hell
Fricking casuals, man.
not being the only game in town is different from not existing anon, you do have object permanence right?
Why would you play that shit instead of something set in the real life 1920’s?
because it's fun to be a wizard?
They literally have Tommy Guns now.
exactly, being a wizard with a machine gun sounds neat
Honestly, I don't understand why mtg dudes (idk who owns mtg) so afraid of something other than fantasy
I heard that they earlier had robots and battleships, but something happened and they made some autistic rules that everything should look "magic" Like pic
Why
I don't get it, why they just don't make fantasy setting but with some steam/diesel/atom punk aesthetics
Or full blown sci-fi like in pathfinder
i don't know where you're getting your information from
but here's a cyber ninja with a robot origami companion in a cyberpunk neon japanese megacity
For a long time there was a rule that guns were 'too advanced' for MtG. They showed up in a starter set back in the late 90s and people were wondering if you could get a 'wild west' plane or something similar. They stock response from WotC staff was that Mirrodin was as 'advanced' as they wanted the tech levels to get in MtG.
Like everything else that competent WotC employees decided, it was completely forgotten and ignored years ago.
Maro was still very Anti-gun that why everyone one on Kamigawa is still using magic swords
Cappena does have a magic tommy gun, although it seems to shoot lightning rather than bullets.
>too advanced
That's funny, cause Mirrodin has (previous) had some pretty crazy Sci-fi level technology stuff roaming around on it's world. No magic involved even, just straight tech.
Even in the main setting they've had some crazy levels of technology that we could only dream of on Earth. Even Pic (despite being manufactured with magical aid), was 100% mechanically powered in world. No arbitrary power stones or nothing. Just 100% machine in fiction.
It shoot laser, fireballs and missile just fine and this particular set was under the direct supervision of Maro.
I guess he just wanted a hard line against gun-guns. But everything else was fine?
Gun-guns do have the Concerned Mother problem, since they continue to insist that MtG is a game for children. Depictions of people being flensed alive or turned inside out through their face is fine when it comes from a spell, but their precious little angel can't be exposed to gun violence.
Aaah. The La-Stupids. Ofcourse.
There was a surge of interest in mysticism and occultism during those times. They could have magicians based on that instead of this overly flashy stuff. It just looks cheap and stupid this way.
Pretty much this, the fantasy genre is currently held together solely by the desire to swing a sword and use magic, literally swords and sorcery
>Why would you play that shit instead of something set in the real life 1920’s?
This is the question.
That's like asking why you would play in fantasy Europe instead of the real life middle ages. The answer is you want something with the style of the era with added magic, not the era explicitly.
>Is this the fricken magical 1920s ?
you're missing two of the important aspects of the era - prohibition and honest racism
>you're missing
No at this point I noticed that 2022 culture is saturated with 1920s
Lets see Demon Slayer
>Oh it is feudal japan ..... NOPE 1920 ! Now b***h !
Cuphead ?
The list continues. It is everywhere.
>2 examples
>1920 is a plague
>you're missing two of the important aspects of the era - prohibition and honest racism
That would require the world to have progressed like ours though.
But what I never understand is why these worlds without racism and wars and actual problems still have all of the weapons and technology that only evolved because of war.
What makes you think there have been no wars? I can't think of a single fantasy setting that has never had a fricking war, there is always a big frickoff war in the backstory that has some amount of plot importance.
>a big frick off war
Most leave it at that.
Very few actually have nations with political relations that regularly involve wars, or evolving conflict that calls for constantly updating ways to murder each other.
That doesn't make the setting pacifist, though. That makes the worldbuilder lazy/not included a glut of pointless information that serves only to distract the reader from what is actually important at hand.
Its like, you watch a movie about the rise of an underdog football team in some small town. Inspiring stuff. They don't fricking take a 45 minute pause to talk about the War of the Roses and historical uses of trepanning. Their exclusion from the narrative doesn't mean these things didn't HAPPEN, they are just fricking irrelevant to the story.
If we were talking about novels or films, sure.
But I'm annoyed by lazy settings where the world building implies a lot of real world similarities but also massive differences that make it so there's no way their world could be like ours.
>everything should only be one way forever
You are the opppsite of creative. Final Fantasy VI has more in common with real classic fantasy than whatever dumb shit you gargle with.
should only be one way forever
YES.
Or are you excited for MTG the space colony expansion ?
You do know mtg has had radically different sets for the longest time now anon? Like phyrexia is pretty out there and dominaria has golem and magitech galore.
You do play mtg right anon? You're not just some person who acts like they enjoy fantasy products but never actually plays them?
Nobody cares about Dan dare and other generic sci-fi in 2022. You have to come up with new stories eventually to keep people interested in the genre.
>Or are you excited for MTG the space colony expansion ?
If you're talking alien invasion it's called Phyrexia, anon. It's been around since forever.
the 1920 are closer to medieval times than they are to today. Fair game for "fantasy" imo
>the 1920 are closer to medieval times than they are to today.
Middle ages 1400 AKA 600 years ago
1920 AKA 100 years ago.
A lot more stuff happened between 1920 and today than between 1400 and 1920. There's way bore history and cultural change. A person from 1920 would be far more at home in 1400 than 2020. And that's just a fact.
You only think that because of improved recording keeping. Lots of stuff happened in those centuries, it just was rarely written down somewhere that survived to the modern day.
>A person from 1920 would be far more at home in 1400 than 2020. And that's just a fact.
Are you for real? The state of zoomer education.
>Welcome to 1420. We have no elections and no electricity.
>Welcome to 2020. My pronouns are xe/xer/xerself and I'm in a polycule with my three non-binary mates.
He's not wrong.
>thinking that more than 0.1% of human population cares about pronouns in 2022
>thinking that there were no elections or electricity in 1920
It doesn't matter how many "care" about it when it's something being promoted by the media, corporations, and academia. It doesn't matter if they do it cynically because they're still promoting it.
You'd think your Theory (tm) being essentially a book of madlibs would be a hint that maybe it's not a rigorous model of reality.
Then again, rigorous scientific methods are intrinsically oppressing to other ways of knowing through western colonialist criteria of proof, which is a system that must be overthrown.
>You'd think your Theory (tm) being essentially a book of madlibs would be a hint that maybe it's not a rigorous model of reality.
If unaffiliated morons using buzzwords on the internet invalidated a theory then there is not a single idea in human history that holds up to scrutiny
it doesnt matter if they are right or not if they put you in a camp after seizing your property, which is the goal
By the 1920s, electricity had been a feature of so many tourist traps that it was no longer marketed as an attraction, it was simply a given that any amusement park and carnival in any developed country would have it to run the lights and some attractions.
>My pronouns are xe/xer/xerself and I'm in a polycule with my three non-binary mates.
Considering these 1920s people did deal with religion and marxism he file this under "new crazy thing" and yes someone from 1920s be far more at home in 2022 then 1400.
Besides all you need to do is to go to the GOP and conservatives (~50% of the population) and none of that shit exists
Lets see:
>He knows cars
VS
>He can not ride a horse
While a lot of new tech will blow their minds it is not that far out. They understand what radio is so streaming from spotify is not that strange for them.
>So this is a radio station ?
>>No
>What frequency is it on ?
>>It is a app
>How the frick does it get here ?
>>over the cell network
>Is this something different to radio waves ?
>> [I'm a zoomer and I do not understand technology]
> *1920s gangster.exe stopped working*
BTW the cell network exists in a specific band of radio, not that tech illiterate zoomers can understand this.
Sure computers and internet and no news papers will blow his mind, and in minutes he will know he is in a strange land however he will not walk into traffic and can orient himself in some way.
Something like this:
1920s people know how elections work and what a president is.
Also moving pictures and photography. And guns did not advance so far.
Now try them to understand the feudal system. Or not get arrested for the real crimes in the middle ages.
to 2020. My pronouns are xe/xer/xerself and I'm in a polycule with my three non-binary mates.
That sounds like fun.
Anon is winding you up
You can't be serious.
I thought you were talking the Congress of Vienna as making the end of middle ages/beginning of modernity, a debatable opinion that has some academic support nonetheless, but instead you're just moronic.
I've never heard of anyone marking the beginning of modernity with the Congress of Vienna but maybe it's a European historiographical thing? In the US we typically start it with the French Revolution. CoV was certainly a milestone event but I don't think it was as defining as say, the Treaty of Westphalia.
I mean... 1920 is closer to 1492 than 2022
captcha: MEDWAL
Are you okay?
I know they're into teaching some really screwed up math these days, but could you at least attempt to handle mathematics better than my four year old cousin?
Ok this is ridiculous at this point.
This is cyberpunk not MTG.
> its an entire multiverse
> expects every single plane to be at the same tech level and aesthetic
But that would be fricking boring. Why bother having a multiverse if you are not going to play around with it?
I wish. Was just suck (besides the goblin faction as usual).
>magical 1920s
Sounds dope.
The genre is called fantasy, not "copy and paste Tolkien forever".
They did a Transistor?
I'm sold.
I wish.
There's nobody as cute together as Red and Mr Nobody in New Capenna
No skeleton mobsters, no buy.
Creative bankruptcy soon leads to actual bankruptcy.
IRL decent delivery in a style that appeals to your customers is more important than overflowing creativity.
>TSR
TSR literally died because it got too creative
Yeah, creative accounting. TSR mismanaged it’s inventory.
>being creatively bankrupt is trying new things and continuing to use the same generic fantasy setting for the 100th time
The challenge to good storytelling isn't to tell a new story. It's to tell an old story in a new way.
No the challenge is just to write a good story smooth brain.
It appears the real challenge, for you, is formulating a coherent argument.
ok
Fantasy is supposed to be anything you can think of. The only difference between the Honorverse and Lord of the Rings is who wrote them. They are both fantasy novels. The genres you put them in are made up and stupid. Hyperion is a fantasy novel. Foundation is a fantasy novel. All works of non-historical fiction are fantasy because none of that shit is fricking real and neither are the worlds they exist in. Don't (you) me.
>The genres you put them in are made up and stupid
Made up, yes. Stupid, less so. If I read Altered Carbon and I decide I want to read more like it, being able to filter results by genres like cyberpunk, science fiction, or detective stories is a lot more useful than just getting a list of fiction dumped on me that treats "Epic Legends of the Sword Kings" and "A Day No Pigs Would Die" as the same thing.
imagine wanting to limit fantasy
>Zoom-zoom shouting at clouds, pretending to be old man
EyeRollingMarcille.jpg
Don't let anyone show you 20 year old cRPGs like FF7 or Arcanum.
>crpgs
>FF7
Minor point but yes.
>mfw every final fantasy game is a crpg
Progressivism was a mistake
Is that progressivness with us in the room, anon?
>progressivism doesn't exist
>but it SHOULD!!!11!!
>20's asthetics are a product of progressivism
You know, I actually remember this a lot. I know that the Left has a tendency to idolize the Weimar Republic (and the 1920s in general) as a wonderful time. So much free expression, so much uninhibited sexuality! Women getting to express themselves. Flappers! F. Scott Fitzgerald and his actually insane wife writing sad stories about literal cuckolds!
What they miss is that it didn't last long. The pendulum swung back, and it swung back hard: At one point, the good citizens of Germany looked around themselves and realized their country was sinking into degeneracy. And they didn't like it.
Then one day, for no reason at all, everyone decided to vote for Hitler.
> https://youtu.be/DCc8kSdeqxw
>everyone
Despite the Nazi party only managing a working majority by pooling with the German Nationalist Party.
> Numerous shirtless men
> All women in full burka
Hashtag equality.
No one post Brother's war. Which looks so cool. I literally can't wait.
modern WOTC will find a way to frick it up there always do
I'd have agreed with you last year, but honestly Kamigawa and Cappena were pretty good. The art's not atrocious, the sets are fun in limited, I think that they're on an upswing. They even had some extremely low cut v neck dresses in Cappena, there's some real swinger fashion.
woah is that mishra?
>mtg does pretty much everything but medieval europe swords&sorcery for 30 years
>newbies suddenly think it's a bad thing when they can recognize the settings
I like art deco fantasy
that league of legends thing with that hot blue haired girl
>that league of legends thing with that hot blue haired girl
... do you have any idea how little it narrows it down?
it narrows it down to Arcane or league itself only one of which has an art deco aesthetic
that was it. I didn't watch it but they made her so hot and the setting is great.
> girl
Oh man, nobody tell him.
they trooned her out for brownie points?
No? I don't know what crack anon is smoking but he should switch to a dealer who uses less bleach
>This is what happens if you allowed magic robots in fantasy.
Zoomie you weren't even alive when that happened.
>it’s another “Frenchman complaining about nothing” thread
Did you people just discover the internet or something?
Eternal September isn't eternal without a reason, anon.
>It's another schizo thread about "New thing bad because it makes my brain swell up so much that I forget that old thing still exists!"
or
>It's another corporate shilling thread in disguise
>still have old thing
We're not mad new things exist We're mad that they are of substandard quality. New things are great if they are great. This is not the case.
>We're mad that they are of substandard quality.
Really? Let me look at some quotes from the threa-
>Is this the fricken magical 1920s ?
>This is cyberpunk not MTG.
>They literally have Tommy Guns now.
>What happened to my medieval fantasy and sword and sorcery ?
>Nooo you can't call the bad thing bad! It's new!
Lol. Lmao. You sound moronic
If you think that's bad go look up Kamigawa: Neon Dynasty. Literally just knockoff shadowrun with shitty MOBA splash screen art.
People who think that fantasy has to be one specific thing need to be publicly exposed and humiliated. It's such a brainless and anti-artistic mindset, a borderline mental disorder even.
>Enjoying chocolate ice-cream
>See someone else with strawberry icecream
>Begin shrieking and having a panic attack, and later go on /tg/ to complain that Tolkein ruined ice cream flavours.
>Nooo you can't call the bad thing bad! It's new!
I bet you also think Lightyear didn't deserve to bomb and Disney isn't a once great media company that's now creatively bankrupt.
>"New thing bad because it makes my brain swell up so much that I forget that old thing still exists!"
or
>Begin shrieking and having a panic attack, and later go on /tg/ to complain that Tolkein ruined ice cream flavours.
Lets see:
>Enjoying chocolate ice-cream
>Buy box of chocolate ice-cream from WTC that you did buy for years
>The box is full of strawberry icecream
>The box says chocolate
>The box is full of strawberry icecream
Internet gayot says:
>>Hur dur how dare you define what the word chocolate ice-cream means !!!!!!!!!!
BTW it was implied that I was talking about
Neo-Feudal or Sword and Sorcery fantasy. Feel freer to make this new magic 1920s only do not put it in MTG make a different grand for that.
Debunked see above
Wah wah.
Literally have a nice day, you midwit secondary. The unwillngness for fantasy to reach outside of the Tolkien and Conan buckets is the single largest reason why "Fantasy" has been stagnating as a genre.
>Literally have a nice day,
>Fantasy
>Fantasy
>Fantasy
Does SF AKA Science FICTION not exist in your head ?
We are talking a brand that is considered to be sword and sorcery fantasy. please do not put this in containers marketed as a sword and sorcery brand.
See
>Not knowing the difference between Science Fiction and Fantasy
Dude, let it go. You are just too fricking stupid to be involved in this discussion.
>SF is not fantasy
The levels of cope you need to engage in.
Tell me do you oppose playing cyberpunk unless it says FANTASY on the box ?
>Forgets that the genre is Speculative Fiction, with SciFi and Fantasy being subgenres.
You're not making a good showing here, son.
>We are talking a brand that is considered to be sword and sorcery fantasy. please do not put this in containers marketed as a sword and sorcery brand.
MTG has literally never been sword and sorcery. There have been mech suits in the setting for literally over 2 decades now.
>There have been mech suits in the setting for literally over 2 decades now.
And now we see the escalation of this !
From the moment MTG has a story it hasn't been Sword & Sorcery. Some of the earliest major arcs involve the Thran who did nothing but make godlike magical machines and the Phyrexians who are sentient evil metal & oil.
Thran Technology & the struggle over it has been part of MTG at its very outset.
Yea, not post the real, uncensored art
Ayn Rand died on social security and medicare
and they left a bouquet shaped like a dollar sign on her gravestone
Not him
>Ayn Rand died on social security and medicare
I know. Ironic
Ironic.
What’s wrong with that? The government takes my money with taxes. It is only fair I get some of it back.
So what you’re saying is from each according to their ability, to each according to their need?
I dont need government gibs but I will take as much as I am allowed to :^)
magic comes up with a billion sets a year, so what, one of them is the magical 1920s. it will be forgotten quickly and we will move on to next product.
>Is this the fricken magical 1920s ?
its arcane.
Arcane was successful.
clicked through your link, saw this one, instantly knew the insporation from the councilor lady.
https://www.artofmtg.com/art/vivien-on-the-hunt-variant/
Sorry normies but victorian crime is now the new in vogue trend of the year
>Is this the fricken magical 1920s ?
uh, yes. DUDE, it's MTG. Do you have any fricking idea how many fricking settings they've drilled, plumbed, tapped, mined, refined, processed, reprocessed, recycled, reanimated, killed off, recycled again, and THEN had a come back?
Before this it was cyber ninjas. Before that it was werewolves yet again. Before that it was vampire weddings. Before that it was generic americana horror. Before that it was D&D.
Now it's the roaring 20's. But fantasy, because it's MTG so of course there's goblins and elves and shit. That's really not optional.
Ugh, but they've got this "tri-color is modern" schtick going on and it's honestly annoying because fricking with that many colors always manascrews me.
if they didnt burn through sets and mechanics like coke fiends they would have years of ideas available and not derivative shit
but they have to come up with 4 sets + commander shit + 2 extra products + masturbatory masters + secret lairs every weekend sell sell sell
>Tolkienesque sword and sorcery fantasy is released
Wow wow wow what is this lazy rehash, original ideas sure are dead
>Fantasy that deviates from Tolkien
Ok WTF.
Look at this shit !
>https://www.artofmtg.com/mtg-set/streets-of-new-capenna/
Is this the fricken magical 1920s?...
Art Deco for some reason enrages people.
Why though? It's cool, it's among some of the better things that came out of the West.
>WotC shit
Low hanging fruit. Of course what that company makes is terrible. There's plenty of good fantasy fiction out there, even the techno-magical stuff you don't like can be fine sometimes too. It's just not corporate trash.
Tempus fugit.
lookk at those big breasts mmmm
Going through this thread, I develop a deep admiration for the power of Ayn Rand and her name to derail absolutely any discussion. I think from now on, any time I want to destroy a thread, I'll just namedrop Ayn Rand and watch this all escalate.
>I develop a deep admiration for the power of Ayn Rand and her name to derail absolutely any discussion. I think from now on, any time I want to destroy a thread, I'll just namedrop Ayn Rand and watch this all escalate.
You are welcome.
That's nothing new, OP. Roger Zelazny, Michael Moorwiener, and Glen Cook have mixed the fantastic with the contemporary to great success.
Art Deco is kino for architecture, but my main complaint is that the cards all still mostly have that generic semi-realistic Artstation aesthetic about them.
They should have just pulled the trigger and done the entire deck in faux Art Nouveau style.
You have to find somebody capable of that and pay their rates. Meanwhile, generic art station dudes are plentiful and cheap.
Way too many people forget that good art costs a lot of money.
Looks cool did those warhammer sets ever come out? Looking forward to the invariable 5e supplement.
Yeah, imagine that....
the point of the brothers war (not the next set, i mean the lore) is that two dudes fricked up multiple planes in an escalation of magical technology because they disagreed on the best flavor of fried chicken
Fatlas Tugged
You know that no one if forcing you to play in those settings, right anon?
Where have you been for like a decade? No sympathy though, I keep hoping Magic will kill itself so you guys stop literally stinking up the lgs.
m8 it is just the latest fad. riot is on the same trend with league. many will follow. it will be the hot new thing for a while and will get replaced with the next hot new thing.
>caring about mtg at all
you have no one to blame but yourself
dingus
>this Black person never played call of cthulhu
>fantasy does something new
What the frick is this shit with guns and 1920s
>fantasy does the same old shit
Tolkien ripoff what the frick
Should have been Eberron
guns are bad though
so enjoy your finger pointing
One of MtG's most important characters has been a Magic Robot.
And he's been in the story at least from 1997.
Unnamed magical robots have been in the game since it started.
Maybe MtG is not the best thing to make this stand with.