>wants to discuss narrative games>gets accused of storyfagging>wanna talk crunchy games and their mechanical intricacies>lol RPGs are all about storytelling lmaoWhy is the board like this now? Every fucking thread is just everyone deciding to be contrarian for the sake of it and no one ever wants to seriously discuss the topic at hand. You bring something up and people whine about normies and critical role but then when someone makes another thread about the subject you just get opposite opinion sperged out smugly. This isn’t even a case of “/tg/ isn’t muh hive mind” thing because the only thing you faggots wanna talk about is whatever is the contrarian opinion of the topic at hand.
>>97855543>wanna talk crunchy games and their mechanical intricaciesWhere?Can you provide links?I don't ever see anyone who wants to talk mechanics, and every time I try, people screech about video games.
>>97855573Yeah, that’s the kinda problem I’m talking about. If I make a thread about crunchy games people will just dismiss it and say that video games now fill the same niche (it doesn’t) and that RPGs are only good for storytelling, you do the opposite and now they complain about storyfagging. But no one ever actually wanna talk about their story games nor their mechanical crunch, only be perpetually contrarian for the sake of it.
>>97855543Storyfagging typically happens when you want to discuss something befitting a novel. I think everyone is interested in discussing premises and what actions players took, but almost no one wants to hear about fluffing it all up in some overly cinematic way.
>>97855626>almost no one wants to hear about fluffing it all up in some overly cinematic wayImpossible in a non-visual medium.You can fluff it up in an overly phantasmal way, sure, but that's not cinematic to any degree.
>>97855668Those world building threads are storyshitting 101, all the detail and fleshing out the setting is the opposite of discussing a premise and how players engaged with it.
>>97855609>>97855825Only trolls say "storyfagging/storyshitting". You've outed yourself. /thread.
>>97855543There's been a hostile takeover of both the /tg/ userbase and the moderation. Look at how Puckee threads are protected for a great example./tg/ is a defunct board. I hope you got a table from it in the past 10 years - if not you're fucked.
>>97855543Anon being a whiny contrarian isn't a bug, it's a feature.That being said, try to open a thread on a specific game, not give generic nothingburger adjectives.
>>97855856It's not trolling, it's highlighting an issue. If you're offended then it's time to reflect.
>>97855543Robo Ky is cooler than regular Ky.
>>97855573>people screech about video gamesI see you saying this at least once a month, but can you provide examples?
>>97855543>Why is the board like this now?I dunno. 4chan has become normified, and normies are all about forcing you to do things their way, I guess.
>>97855543People moved on, and the spirit of contrarianism remained. But true discussion is rarely rewarded on the internet, especially the chans, so even the contrarians are generally limited to the shortest, least arguable positions imaginable; trying to drag you down to an intellectual 'your opinion < my opinion' slap fight with no resolution and no end. Any debate or shit-flinging contest here will only end when someone puts down the keyboard, and that's only going to be to eat or sleep, not as a result of genuine reflection.Anyone trying to take a genuinely creative stance, either in game design, narrative and player relations, or some other tabletop related position, is going to attract more detractors than support. And if all your positions are wrong, and any position you could have is wrong, why bother talking about your positions? And that's assuming a mainstream topic that garners attention in a general, and not a one-off thread that leaves page 10 with ~27 posts.
>>97857294Choosing this place over reddit was really the worst decision I made 15 years ago
>>97855543I'm at the point where I tell people not to even come to place. Not because it's the problematic nazi chud website, but because this place exists to keep people around by starting and recycling stupid arguments. Would not be surprised to discover that the admins have a series of AI Bots running, like that infamous /pol/ incident.
>>97855543Isn't this from that troon fighting game? Guilty Gays or something?
>>97855543Because, as usual, both extremes are incorrect and the truth about TTRPGs is something in the middle.TTRPGs are games with mechanics that tell a story though the players roleplaying their characters - which includes acting and speaking as the character - using their mechanics as a point of reference for how the character should be played. Yes, some games lean heavier one way or the other (Narrative Games lean harder into the story, with mechanics built around giving players more control over said narrative and rewarding good roleplaying with advancement while crunchy games tend to lean harder on mechanics, having more intricate and often complex tools for the players to use and sometimes shying away from narrative in favor of things like dungeon crawling for loot or being more akin to a skirmish game focused on combat than a big adventure) but it's more a gradient scale than a black or white separation.>Why is the board like this now?A bunch of /pol/shitter nogames from Twitter showed up to ruin everything, then infested the moderation, so now there's no way to have genuine discussions about anything because the mods are busy flooding the thread with low-quality bait. If this post gets deleted and I get banned, all they've done is prove me correct. Unlike the mods, I actually run/play games so I have better shit to do than post here anyway, get fucked you loser cucks.
>>97855543What games did you try and talk about?
>>97857770I don't think OP wants to talk about anything because this is a troll threadPersonally though, I want to find a system for tactical mage vs mage combat.
>>97857790Strike! might work out. Its basically 4e but you can map the abilities around more easily. Savage Worlds could do as well.
>>97857794SWADE kinda bad.Never heard of Strike, if it doesn't massively improve on 4e though I doubt it'll do what I want.
>>97857807Strike is smelly dogshit made from the worst of 4e and rules-lite narrativist crap and its own promotional material can be used to demonstrate why.From its own website:>Every roll is 1d6 >Speed over everything >Variety without complexity>Still needs a map and grid to function at all>The highest praise for it is: "I'm very, very impressed with what you did here. It's probably the most clever design I’ve seen since Apocalypse World."
>>97857807>do what I want.Needs more description than tactical mage vs mage combat.
>>97857823That is very disappointing if true.>>97857851Sorry, it's difficult to really explain what I'm looking for because I've never seen it done before.To try and narrow it down, I want something that's good at specifically handling combat between magic-using individuals, and in a manner that encourages tactical thinking the way chess might.Not so much "I normally use my daily spells to beat this sessions encounter(s) and want to do so optimally to save resources, and also you technically could have me fight another caster instead of that" Much more "Here are explicit rules and maybe a subsystem for two wizards going head to head in a way that isn't just rolling until somebody gets unlucky and loses."Think like Ars Magicka's Certamen, if it wasn't just a shitty d10 roll with a modifier.I'd be fine if it included (or even focused on) non-mages too, just so long as it can handle their end of things well. I also don't care about scale or style a ton, the magic can be weak and focused mostly on tipping the odds in one's favor (Like the first couple books in the Dresden Files; You aren't casting Fireball, you're maybe transmogrifying your leather vest into kevlar or using someone's blood and a compass to track their location) or more like something out of ATLA or old crusty long-lived Ars Magicka wizards that can just rip you in half with a mean look if they know the right Forms & Techniques.
>>97855543Vocal minorities like to screech. I remember the "give your coldest take thread" and I literally advocated for.. I shit you not... "roleplaying". That "roleplaying in character improves your experience with TTRPGs". Spiraled right out of control, full skub. I think narrative games are fine and definitely not storyfaggotry. Narrative games just adjust the descriptive frame to an author stance instead of an actor stance. That's literally it. Some people like that because it gets mechanics "out of the way" of the stories they are trying to tell.I personally like crunchy systems (Mythras, etc) in spite of being very heavy into roleplay because I think crunch reinforces the authenticity of the world and actually improves on the roleplay experience by adding verisimilitude.
>>97857911That sounds more and more like a wargame than an rpg, not in a bad way, there's a lot of skirmish wargames with rpg elements. Its not my thing but actual Warmachine/Hordes could be interesting to you. Small forces lead by a magical/caster unit and tactical choices/combos from there. There's a new edition people seem excited about. Frostgrave is a lot lighter mechanically but is about warbands of fantasy looters led by a magic user fighting in frozen ruins. Ask /awg/ for more details, there's a bunch of choices and usually someone who can help narrow in on what you want.
>>97857936Nah Wargames aren't what I'm looking for. They're honestly all terrible for actual tactical combat, ironically.
>>97857989¯\_ (ツ)_/¯ glhf
>>97857929If it's not GPTbots programmed to just argue about anything, I'd hazard a guess that we've got culture warrior types who legitimately have never played anything, let alone ever read a book for any RPG, but feel like they have to tell everyone on the internet all the cool badass tough guy opinions they heard about the "real" way you're supposed to play RPGs, just to prove they're not one of those faggy theater kids they heard the cool guys complain about all the time (even though they don't actually have an opinion on theater kids or know why they're supposed to hate them, other than the presumption that theater kids are on the wrong side of the culture war)
>>97857742>then infested the moderationI suspected this too. Not like rapeape would've stopped them.
>>97857556It was a better decision at the time, things changed after that.
>>97857612Occam's razor says we just got hit by a bunch of sad fuckers that made shitting up the place their whole identity for the past decade, some of them openly said so, like the questfag.
>>97855543
>>97857556Nah mate, reddit it just the same shit, just that unlike here you'll never see people discuss it.
>>97855543>better """improve""" the board quality by posting yet another spamthread crying about the state of the board
>>97855543Just talk. The worst that buzzword faggots have always been here, in some form or another, and the worst they can do is make the thread hit the bump limit before any good faith discussion gets done.However, I do notice fewer people who actually play games these days and have actual developed opinions that can be expressed as anything other than buzzwords. And it's a bit sad.
>>97856265Often, if you open a thread with a specific game, you get told to go back to your general. But that's just noise.I do agree that opening with specific examples from specific games, then inviting others to give examples from their own games, is the best way to go.
>>97858646Yeah, the antiquestfags really started a bad trend by demonstrating that shitposting enough can get quality, well loved, and moot approved threads removed.
>>97859639That depends on what you want to talk about? Are you vaguely bitching about a problem that almost always strictly applies to D&D? Then fuck off. Don't make the thread. Are you asking a question that could be answered with 5 seconds of googling or posting in one of the multiple D&D general threads? Fuck off. Don't make the thread. Do you genuinely want to discuss some aspect of the system, but instead of articulating an intelligent question or topic of discussion, you just said some retarded shit like "Now that the dust has settled, what does /tg/ thinking about [game]?" Make a better thread or fuck off.
>>97861545>historical revisonismfag is back againI badly need you to understand what a colossal retard you are by constantly looking for reasons to try and tell people who probably weren't even on /tg/ before /qst/ was made how beloved and awesome you imagined quests were.
>>978571354chan has an archive, you know.Search "video games" or "vidya" or "/v/" and you're likely to find something.
>>97862038So you can't?
>>97861545Who-approved?
>>97862148He was the head admin of /tg/ in 2014 and before I think
>>97862148A very sensitive guy.
>>97862134I don't need to, I already know a majority of this board bitches about video games when someone talks about mechanics they don't like.
