Monsterhearts

>lol guiz, I'm totally not trying to viral my own gaem!!

Where the fuck are all these kickstarter shills coming from? More to the point, why do they mistakenly believe Veeky Forums is the best platform to advertise their crap?

from people who've got the 'sneak peak' for being backers apparently a couple of the playbooks (specifically the ghost and ghoul that we know of) have been changed significantly, also the basic moves have been altered, for instance there's apparently no more 'manipulate an NPC' move, it's entirely done using strings. In addition the MC rules were weaker than in other PbtA games so there'll probably be some changes there.

Not the user who wrote that post but you don't need to be the creator of the game to get fucking sick of how often people make assumptions about the game without reading a single word of it.

>Hey guys I found this cool thing on Kickstarter, what do you think of i-
>GET OUT OF HERE SHILL REEEEEEEEEE

I didn't say anything about the game itself. The game's pretty decent, but the trigger warning stuff just makes me cringe, as does this blatant shilling and the discrimination against non-"Queer" people

>Anyone who disagrees with ̶/̶p̶o̶l̶/̶'̶s̶ Veeky Forums's anti-SJW hate is a shill
I haven't even gotten to play the game. I just hate the bullshit.

>I reserve the option to say, "hey, that particular idea won't work, but maybe we can come up with a different one!" This might come up if there are concerns about cultural appropriation, for example.

>Cultural appropriation is literally the only reason that a skin will be vetoed, nothing else at all.

RPGs are a bad business for moneygrabbing, and Kickstarter projects barely meet the overhead. I've heard there are a few overhauls, though I've also heard some people aren't happy with them.

I mean, his assumptions aren't *wrong*, per se. He's just being an edgy shit. "lol, who has FEELINGS? Those are for pussies!"

>discrimination against non-"Queer" people
kek

It's pretty easy to spot the shills, desu. I mean, OP says:
>I haven't played the game
>the mechanics are amazing
>proceeds to rabidly defends game he's supposedly never played

>discrimination against non-"Queer" people
eh as marketing tactics go it's a pretty good one, can't fault trying to further appeal to a target demographic

This "trigger warning" stuff only makes little babies cringe. Adults understand completely why it exists.
>the discrimination against non-"Queer" people
I bet you think Luke Cage was racist because it didn't have enough white people.

>proceeds to rabidly defends game he's supposedly never played
But that's basically what this board is for.
People who read a game, like the mechanics, and will never actually roll a die aside from sitting at their computer wishing they had a group.

Number of posters stay the same as butthurt increases, we've got a butthurt tranny tumblerina

Speak for yourself, I've never discussed a system I haven't played or was in the process of starting to play

>2nd edition of a game I assume OP has played
>1st edition mechanics were neat, so it is reasonable to assume 2e will be neat unless they do a complete 180 and convert to gurps or something drastic.
>defends game from people shitposting Shill and SJW

>cheaper for queer teens
>made by tumblerinas, trigger warnings and hurt fefes everywhere

I'm a literal faggot, and even I wouldn't play this. There's nothing about D&D or WoD or any other standard role-playing fare that explicitly prevents my group from having gay characters, or acting out settings that involve "controversial" themes. As a matter of fact, some editions of D&D and WoD go out of their way to seem more inclusive by spelling out that a player character can be of any sexual orientation or gender identity the player wants to define.

Whoever wrote this shitty game, please be advised that they do not represent me or any significant portion of what you might consider my "community."

>le minorities can't be racist maymay

People have played the game though, retard. The kickstarter's for the second edition.

but muh reverse discrimination by the SJW is whats ruining society, just ask /pol/!

Nice try, but easily defeated by reading the OP, where he says
>I haven't played Monsterhearts
and not
>I haven't played Monsterhearts 2

The other 2 still apply however

>it's not currently affecting mainstream society, so it's not wrong
kek

Thanks for reminding me to keep watching Luke Cage, user. First two episodes were great, but I hear they messed it up toward the end with a worse villain

Her argument is literally "these kind of people have higher suicide rates" so where's the discount for every other group of people more often committing suicide, like veterans?

I actually literally said I haven't played it. The friend who said he'd run it just... didn't. The other friend who linked me the Kickstarter may run it, though. But I did love what I read, and what I've heard, which is why I've been wanting to play it so much.

Iunno, you seem more butthurt.

Just because a game allows something doesn't mean that it focuses on it. D&D is not really good for playing out *any* social themes, much less the manipulations of high school monsters.
World of Darkness on the other hand DOES focus on many of the same themes, but they're presented differently, due to Monsterhearts focusing more on the paranormal romance than the horror and dark action, and also using PbtA.
There is, however, a WoD PbtA hack, called Shadowed World or something.

If you haven't read the game and you're just intent on hating it to be cool... well, feel free, no one gives a shit how you feel.

Shh, don't reveal how the SJW Cultural Marxist plot to breed out the whites by making them all beta numale cuck bronies starts with adding queer people to elfgames!

It's still good, just has the same issue that basically every other Marvel netflix show has where the writers don't really get pacing. About halfway through they switch to a different villain who's way more cartoony. Everything except the villain is still pretty great though.

Was this a game about combat veterans? Must have missed that somewhere user.

Are you saying I can't play a straight character? You ableist fuck! Triggered!

>Iunno, you seem more butthurt.
Nah, I'm having fun. I was actually bored until I saw this thread.

>find trigger warnings
>post on Veeky Forums
>????
>drink /pol/ tears

i like it

He's a good villain, but he's basically a clusterfuck. Like, the actor is good, but the character is a nutjob who flipflops and ruins his own plans because he's a psycho. It good, but it's no Jessica Jones. Still, can't wait for Iron Fist and The Defenders.
>has the same issue that basically every other Marvel netflix show has where the writers don't really get pacing.
Not just pacing, but time. Like, the whole show seems to take place over the course of like two weeks. It takes them about two days to get to Georgia and back

If this were a game about veterans and they got a discount, no one would bat an eye.

Continuing my token efforts to make this thread about the bloody game: people who've played 1st edition, what did you like/dislike about it? Based on that what do you want to see be different in this version?

>If this were a game about veterans and they got a discount, no one would bat an eye.
So why don't vampires and ghouls don't get discounts? I will have you know as a vampirekin I feel discriminated against and am also hurt by this game culturally appropriating my condition.

I'd play a game about Veterans if it was as good as Monsterhearts.

Mostly just messing with the skins a bit to make them fit more with theme and give each skin something unique to them. The core mechanics seemed rather sound to me(even the manipulate an npc move which i'm kinda sad to hear is getting shuffled into strings)

>If you think you might be LGBTQIA+ but you just aren't 100% sure yet, you count.
I've fapped to trap hentai, do I count? Also, what do the I and A stand for?

reminder that the people who made MonsterHearts also made a game about lesbian sex: buriedwithoutceremony.com/aplacetofuckeachother/

I haven't gotten the chance to play myself, but I'm very familiar with PbtA games in general, and have seen a few actual plays. Altogether, it seems like it might be the most tightly-designed deriviative of Apocalypse World. The mechanics for social influence are pretty interesting, and I hope they stay intact.

Like AW2E, I think it'll probably be a lot of small changes and clarifications. Things like rewriting the section on highlighting stats so it's more clear, would be nice. More playbooks wouldn't be a bad thing either.

Yeah, when I played, at first everyone grabbed whatever skin they wanted, but soon enough, everyone was only interested in the skins that had unique mechanics like the Angel.

elaborate

Intersex and Asexual

Actually, you literally can't. In fact, that's part of the point. Every character is in a state of teenage uncertainty and discomfort. If your character is male and you don't like guys, a guy can use the Turn Someone On move to... well, turn you on. It's your choice in how you act on that, but you're still popping a stiffy and having erotic thoughts, or whatever.

If that makes you uncomfortable, well, good thing the game comes with trigger warnings.

Powered By The Apocalypse is pretty easy to hack. Don't let your dreams be dreams, user.

Intersex and Asexual.

>Mostly just messing with the skins a bit to make them fit more with theme and give each skin something unique to them
makes sense, which playbooks did you have in mind for needing some tweaking, I'd nominate the werewolf personally, I never had the clearest image of how it was supposed to play.

Intersex (e.g. hermaphrodites and other rare genetic conditions), and asexual, I believe.

I could see John Harper doing a good job at that

>Actually, you literally can't. In fact, that's part of the point. Every character is in a state of teenage uncertainty and discomfort. If your character is male and you don't like guys, a guy can use the Turn Someone On move to... well, turn you on. It's your choice in how you act on that, but you're still popping a stiffy and having erotic thoughts, or whatever.
So I can't play an Asexual character. Sounds like discrimination to me.

The friend who linked me the kickstarter really wants to play that. She also made an Apocalypse World hack about living in a queer commune in the Apocalypse.

They literally linked the game, user. How much more elaboration do you need?

I would have personally liked the Queen to be changed to have a more clear definition on what the fuck it actually was. It seemed to not be actually supernatural at all last I looked over it.

My favorite example is the ghost: it focuses way too much on the brooding about your death and not enough on- you know- being a fucking ghost.

Like if you even want to do some poltergeist sort of stuff to get revenge on someone you have to take moves from other skins like the Fury, which shouldn't be the case imo.

Even worse, all characters are Bi. I honestly don't see how that's supposed to help a gay or lesbian teen out any.

The game's message is pretty clear: Sexuality doesn't exist, everyone is just bi.

Why you'd want to market such a piece of hateful propaganda to queer people is anyone's guess.

>but you're still popping a stiffy and having erotic thoughts, or whatever.

I don't think so, unless I forget how it works. Yes it's part of the point that you can't outright have full control over your sexuality (or emotions in general), but it doesn't mean successfully having that move used means you were turned on. All it does is give that person Strings on you, which could represent other ways they got your goat. That loss of emotional control, whether it's due to arousal, disgust, anger, embarrassment, is what the String represents IIRC.

this is interesting to me because I often find the classes with unique mechanics to be less well designed overall

I don't know much about it, just what's in the link I gave

an asexual character would actually be kind of OP in MH when you consider it makes you immune to one of the main forms of PCvPC influence

"From a purely mechanical point of view there's no way to gain a string on an asexual character. As such any Asexual character is going to be effectively outside the string economy which I am not sure is wise."

It's definitely an option. Haven't read through all the available rules yet to see how it's implemented.

There are some ways to make it supernatural, with some of the moves going into mind control type powers. But I'm pretty sure you can play it as a mundane Regina George type character.

>I don't think so, unless I forget how it works. Yes it's part of the point that you can't outright have full control over your sexuality (or emotions in general), but it doesn't mean successfully having that move used means you were turned on. All it does is give that person Strings on you, which could represent other ways they got your goat. That loss of emotional control, whether it's due to arousal, disgust, anger, embarrassment, is what the String represents IIRC.
Yeah, that sounds much more reasonable (and what I remembered vaguely from having heard of it. You can be embarrassed by a gay dude hitting on you without being attracted to him. Though seems to disagree with that. Though, is sexual attraction really the ONLY way to gain strings? I thought it was just one of them?

See

>She also made an Apocalypse World hack about living in a queer commune in the Apocalypse
I read the rules for that game, I found the description odd since there's not really any queer content, it's just a roleplay game about managing a post-apocalyptic community, like AW just with a focus on the whole hardhold instead of specific characters (although each player does have a single PC)

>I would have personally liked the Queen to be changed to have a more clear definition on what the fuck it actually was. It seemed to not be actually supernatural at all last I looked over it.
A few of the playbooks are only optionally supernatural, the queen could be the head of a club, a gang leader, or just a really popular kid. Or they could be the leader of a hivemind and have a telepathic link to all their members

>I honestly don't see how that's supposed to help a gay or lesbian teen out any.
Actually, that IS one of the reasons a friend of mine is uncomfortable playing Monsterhearts. She's dealt with a lot of shit about her sexuality, and she's uncomfortable in any game that essentially forces her to be turned on by men. And that's okay.

But, yes, being awkward and hormonal and having a body that doesn't react the way you want it to is part of the theme of the game.

I'll defer to you. I haven't played it, I just remember that being one of the examples. You're turned on (they succeeded at the Turn Someone On roll), but you're in control of whether you act on that or not. Your heart is pumping and your body is doing things it does when you see a pretty girl, not a pretty guy, but it's not a "sleep with me" roll.

>Though, is sexual attraction really the ONLY way to gain strings? I thought it was just one of them?
Tons. Fights give strings. Most special abilities give strings.

I think that's the point. I mean, it's a Skin that could be supernatural or could be mundane-but-good. One of the things I like is that nothing is set in stone and you can play the supernatural creatures however you want, as opposed to one specific set type, like in WoD.

>Though, is sexual attraction really the ONLY way to gain strings? I thought it was just one of them?

Some of the other basic moves can also give you Strings on people. Lash Out Physically (for physical violence), and Shut Someone Down (for socially rejecting or pacifying someone) also do.

"Everyone is Bi and people can roll to make you gay," is a meme. It's like people saying Apocalypse World requires ERP, or GURPS can't be played without doing calculus. There's a grain of truth somewhere, but no one who repeats it has read the source material enough to even know what that is.

>It's like people saying Apocalypse World requires ERP
Well, I mean, you can have a steak sandwich without cheese, but why would you want to?

>Though, is sexual attraction really the ONLY way to gain strings? I thought it was just one of them?
the 'turn someone on' move is the main (non-class specific) way in which PCs gain strings on characters, you can also gain them from 'lash out physically' on a 10+ or from a 'shut someone down' if you get a 10+ and they have no strings on you. And NPCs can gain a string as a by-product of some of the PCs moves or from the MC making a hard move.

So for player character the easiest way to get strings is by turning someone on, but no it's not the only way

>not being turned on by a sexy upperclassman vampire.
What are you, fucking gay, user?

>Tons. Fights give strings. Most special abilities give strings.
So wait, does the creator not understand her own system? Or was that quote from someone else?

here

I don't know what the quote was from, but Turn Someone On is the primary way of doing Strings.

it was from the creator, it was an exaggeration of the advantage an asexual character would have, I'm not sure why they chose to say that. Although it does still clash with the themes of the game

The one about asexuals being outside the string economy? I'd hope it's from someone else, because that'd be a really strange thing for the creator to say

I feel like some of the impact is lost due to the creator not being good with English but writing a game in English.

This looks interesting, thanks

The game is not balanced for asexuals, so you can't play them.

That's hilarious. That is actually hilarious.
Especially for a game dealing with teenagers working through puberty.

That's not what it says at all. In fact, the Vampire is asexual. Their entire schtick is avoiding sex while still turning people on with their aloofness. In fact, they don't have a Sex move, they have a *Deny* Sex Move.
>When you deny someone sexually, gain a String on them. When you have sex with someone, lose all Strings on that person.

they're not asexual though since another player could still use the 'turn someone on' move against a vampire PC and suceed

It works perfectly fine for asexual characters though. The player is still in control of their character's reaction when someone else uses the move that's being discussed, and the reaction doesn't need to be arousal. And even if it is, it doesn't mean your character has to sleep with someone just because they rolled a 10+ on Turn Someone On. The bottom line is that it represents the attempt somehow getting to your character. That's perfectly consistent with playing a character who doesn't have interest in sex.

What would mess with game mechanics is if you declared that your character is absolutely immune to any physical, social, or emotional effects of people trying to seduce them.

People who haven't played the game have no idea of it beyond what they think it is about, but man, do they talk.

that seems to dominate most conversations about the game I see, we only recently got past seeing 'the GM can tell you when you get a boner' coming up every time

Being turned on by a guy doesn't make you gay, user.

Trying and succeeding. Though I will say that one thing I'm concerned/interested in is how the whole... "it's equally easy to seduce a choirboy as it is a slut" thing works out.

>This move implies something about sexuality, and particularly teenage sexuality. We don’t get to decide what turns us on. When you make a move to turn someone on (with a character action or with scene description), the other player doesn’t get to exclaim, “Wait, my character is straight! There’s no way that’d turn them on.” That’s a decision that we as players can’t make for our characters. The dice are going to be the ultimate referees of what is and isn’t sexy for these characters. Their own sexuality will confuse them and surprise them; it’ll show up in unexpected places and unlikely situations. Regardless of the results of the roll, however, each player still gets to decide how their character reacts. Being turned on by someone doesn’t imply or demand a particular reaction.

>Being turned on by someone doesn’t imply or demand a particular reaction.
You just copy/pasted it?

>"it's equally easy to seduce a choirboy as it is a slut"
not quite, they're equally likely to be attracted to you, however while the slut might respond by jumping your bones, the choirboy would probably just get slightly flustered but otherwise not act on it

Basically every thread.

I did.

Yeah, but it's interesting that there aren't really any... penalties or defenses in PbtA games.

>Yeah, but it's interesting that there aren't really any... penalties or defenses in PbtA games.
there are if you count strings, gangs, and conditions.

Strings can be used to gain a +1 or impose a -1
If you have your gang for support you get a +1 (if it makes sense)
If you target a character's condition you get +1

...

and that's actually not counting the various class-specific situational modifiers, the Queen imposing a -1 on anyone acting against them when their gang's present, the fae getting a +3 (I think) to turn someone on if they give the person a string

It's from non-creator - just a playtester feedback thing

>86 replies, 12 posters
>heavy queer themes
>pretty heavy themes
>heavy themes

Ovary Mcdildo, we know it's you. Stop pretending. Your game isn't deep or meaningful. It's just a way for you to wank to your forced sexuality fantasies and inject your horrible fetishes into the games you love. You are the real life whizzard and you're shilling is too obvious. Please retake Astroturfing 101 before you return.

>inb4 "y u so assblast trigred pol internet hat mashin u mad"

I think /pol/ likes accusing people of being shills because it implies people care about Veeky Forums. People can like things you don't.

I actually didn't know Strings could give negatives. Still, I'm so used to trying to hit a DC, or subtracting a defense value.

So you're saying the earth doesn't revolve around memes and Veeky Forums?

By what kind of moon-logic is that the reason for veteran discounts or anything approaching an acceptable way to address elevated suicide risks?

It's crap like this that breeds accusations of virtue signalling. It's easier to assume that it's a cynical front used solely to try to draw in sales rather than to believe that someone interested in those issues seriously thinks that it's an appropriate way to address them. Shit's downright exploitative.

The pathfinder thread has 314 replies and 56 posters. 5.6 average per poster. We're sitting at 7.2. Checks out. Especially if you count all the samefagging shill parts.

Niche game is niche, your point user?

Countering the user implying we had too many posts-to-posters by showing the ratio of a much more popular game had only slightly better post-to-poster ratios, thus undermining the further implication that this is some sort of shill thread?

We fucking up now tho.

No one *actually* cares about issues. They just pretend to, to look good for other people who pretend to care about issues.

If talking about why a game is good is shilling, little under half of Veeky Forums is shills.
Not all, obviously. Most of Veeky Forums is about how games suck and fun is dead.