Have you ever had a game collapse with one of the big reasons being that another member of the group tuned you to be...

>Triggered the club's resident Anarchist last night
>Called bitcoin krypto-currency used to buy drugs and child pornography
>Goes on a five minute rant about how state backed currencies have been used to buy those things and they themselves are build on the product of centuries of accumulated violence, conquest and rape
>"So you're saying we have a rape based economy?"
>Explodes again "rantrantrant, I refuse to be talked down to by someone so wilfully ignorant."
>Oh sweet we're up to ad hominem, if we work together I'm sure we can reach smug anime girl posting
>Most people's sides are destroyed at this point, the English student is beating his head against the cupboard
>Stroll on out of there to dinner and tell Anarch he should be more patriotic and use the pound

In hindsight it was all a little childish but I've put up with this man's shit without complaint for three years, I'll be gone soon.

I'm the most conservative member of my gaming group, but I don't bring up politics and other shit during gaming sessions or start arguments, because I'm not a massive fucking faggot that feels the need to ruin game night with real life shit. My left-wing analogue who has a boner for communism and never shut up about TYT got kicked out though for sperging out too often and threatening to sue someone over a minor chip on his coffee table. For an encore, he tried to get everyone to shun this cute little vietnamese woman who joke punched him during a party, claiming he was uncomfortable and did not feel safe around her any more. See if you can guess who we kept around: the manlet drama magnet or the vietnamese qt that makes us eggrolls?

You should tell him next that bitcoin's value is a price abstraction of electricity and silicon chip manufacturing and thus ultimately dependent on USD.

It was a mixture of /pol/, /k/, and being a scaly. "Dare you enter my magical ancap kobold utopia" went really sour really fast.

I don't bring politics to the game table, and I don't encourage or discuss with others when they choose to. We are all here to play a game and have fun, if you want a political debate with me hit me up when I am not in the middle of something else.

I don't think I bring politics to the table, but I had experienced - luckily only a few times - outrages from players who thought my world building/GM'ing was allegedly very politically charged.
Then again, I don't have my worlds have things like strongly diversified gender roles to make a political statement. I do it because my world building is based on traditional societies and mythologies, where gender roles and their profound differences were just extremely important part of the culture.
Just as I don't feature themes like child marriage or slavery because it serves some kind of fetish: I do it because they add to complexity of the political and social landscape, provide more hooks, more possible scenarios etc...

Every now and then, I find someone who has troubles understanding it though. Had to kick out two players because of this.

Reminds me of people harassing Josh Sawyer on twitter and his Q&A tumblr about including themes like rape and child slavery, because it's "triggering" people's alleged PTSDs.

The inability to seperate reality from fiction is a serious issue. This also goes for those who wish to cram things like LotR full of their own real-life prejudices, declaring it a trilogy-sized analogy to the righteous white man's war against the darkies of the east and south. Real low-grade philistines.

Which is ironic, considering how /pol/ and /v/ like to freak out and throw tantrums about how Sawyer is a total SJW.
I don't think the problem is so much separating reality from fiction though. In cases of people freaking out about "triggering" it's just a total lack of dignity and responsibility over your own emotional states: the actual idea that "if I'm feeling uncomfortable, it's SOME ELSE'S FAULT and I have the right to blame him" bulls hit, combined with general obsession with self-victimization.

In the case of the two players I had lost it was just obsession with "moral righteousness" and the idea participating on a world where things are not happening according to their idea of what is morally right somehow "taints" them. The problem I think is also that it throws their own ideology in question: while I'm definitely NOT a proponent of things like slavery, it's true that it has served functional role and could not always be considered unquestionably evil (similarly as featuring women in extremely traditional roles does not mean that they are all just poor suffering victims), and I guess in those two cases, the idea of displaying traditional social order in any other light than purely negative was causing some serious discomfort of having to slightly question their own beliefs.

Interestingly enough, one of these cases, a player having serious problems with the particular case of child marriage issues, actually turned out into one of my most successful and interesting campaigns. That guy, however, was a great person, willing to go out of his comfort zone and face uncomfortable ideas, rather than just throwing a tantrum. He still plays with us.

>makes us eggrolls

ForeverGM/mooch here, her power level could be biblical and she'd still have a spot at my table.

There's a reason why politics and religion are the two taboos of any polite society.

Oh I won't being pushing it any further but I he starts again thanks for the tip, I'll being going away at the end of semester and I know he'll want to run for club president in my place.

Motherfucker is getting sabotaged on my way out, I won't let him ruin what's been built.

Please, if anything the problem is they aren't /pol/ enough.

I once had a friend who wanted to make an entire D&D campaign around a race war, I really wanted to do it, but we didn't have time before he had to move away.

No, but i was in a 'red-pilled' group once a few years ago, which was pretty fun.
I put red-pilled in quotations because all but one where more Veeky Forums-edgy than /pol/.
I mean, if you want to get all preachy about it, we where normalizing racism, antisemitism and misogyny, but we never where serious about it...

One is very /pol/ like but doesn't talk about it. The issue I have is a NEET tumblr type we keep around for numbers who at least once a game will stop in the middle to say something politically charged but ultimately dumb as shit. No one has ever taken the bait so we have kept together so far.

>people willingly and unironically bring their politics and religion into their group
Doing it for roleplay purposes can be fine with context, but why would you push your own crap? It's just poisoning the well.

This actually raises a pretty big question.
What does it exactly mean, "to bring your politics into a game". The religion thing I kinda get, but I'm pretty curious what is your idea of introducing politics or political ideas into a game.
There is a famous statement by bitch par excelance Carol Hanisch "The Personal Is Political", which eventually became the poster tag for radical left-wing ideologies that formed contemporary "progressive left" and feminism in particular. We live in a time where - mostly due to growing importance of left-wing ideology, virtually every aspect of social organization or even personal beliefs, preferences and customs, virtually ever depiction or symbolism in fiction, all of that is consistently reinterpreted as political.

So I wonder where you people actually do think the line is.

I'm a lefty but TYT are awful I hate it that they claim to be on "my side" they are a bunch of incompetent buttholes
(Would fug ana tho)

It really is. There's a good 20 minutes everyone is gathered before we play and that is the time to talk about unrelated shit. Once I start running the game I get really pissed if anyone goes off on some shit sidebar about anything.

I've had a DM stop running a game when we came to a conclusion he didn't like.

The issue was that the PCs were fighting demon-worshipping orcs, but after the crusade was over, the influence of demons was broken. The remaining orcs - mostly women and children, because the priesthood had been devastated by the war and most of the fighting-age orcs had been killed - needed significant amounts of aid to get back on their feet.

The thing was, as PCs, we didn't see why we should help the demon-worshipping fuckers. Eventually, we decided to build a heavily-guarded border wall patrolled by angels, and to force the orcs out into the wasteland to starve and hopefully die, far away from civilized lands.

The DM said this solution was horrific, but the party didn't want to help demon-worshippers. So he sort of grumpily ended it when none of us wanted to work with the redeemed orc faction.

Obviously you just needed to put them into concentration camps until orc Jesus rises up and frees them.

This game didn't collapse, but I felt this PC went completely against the spirit of the campaign. We had a VR-themed campaign, where one PC had a side-plot involving a love triangle with his childhood friend and an AI. Like, the point was sort of to show the PC that the AI girl would never be able to reciprocate the way a real woman would.

He ultimately told the real girl to fuck off, and picked the AI instead.

>growing importance of left-wing ideology
Are you sure? In Europe and in America, right wing parties are rising and the left is falling to infighting. I don't think the broad left has had less power since WWII. Just because places on the internet like tumblr, reddit, and twitter and a couple of universities have a bunch of people pushing this stuff does not mean it's important. The majority of people are not left-wing. I would say that the tabletop demographic in general is conservative to moderate, even if the people who design and market the games are not.

The line is where you're espousing your own ideology for your own purpose, rather than the purpose of the game. It's even worse when they try to thinly veil in role-playing, ie their characters have no reason, backstory, or prior experience saying or doing political or religious charged actions, but suddenly they're doing it all the time.

Everything is political, in its own way, since politics is just that set of personal beliefs that affect other people.

So I don't really think about it much, unless somebody's actually verbally expressing real-life politics at the table. I'm always the GM and I do my best to squash it (reminding players that capitalism doesn't exist yet in this medieval world, or that the prison system in this cyberpunk future is different than our real life one because this one has vampires in it, or whatever).

Really, as long as people remember that they're at the table to talk about the game you're set. Anything that's either playing the game, discussing the game, or discussing something about the game is all cool. If you get further than that, I'll reign you in because I am here to play the game and if you want to rant about how government regulations are suffocating business then you can feel free to talk to me another time. But not now.

I would have chosen both
> AI girl would never be able to reciprocate the way a real woman would.
I think that's a little silly, especially for a sci-fi game

It was a semi-modern setting. The DM ripped off the plot of Ordinal Scale, but then the story went in a completely different direction.

It ended with two guys beating each other with lead pipes for the favor of m'lady, because both were obsessed with the AI girl at that point. The PC had an arm and leg broken, but he put the other guy in a coma.

I fail to see the issue here. This sounds like good storytelling and an interesting, though sad story.

That sounds great actually, I would consider that ending a success. Not every story has to end with someone "maturing", being the better man, undertaking some moral quest, saving the princess (real girl), etc.

>Are you sure? In Europe and in America, right wing parties are rising and the left is falling to infighting.
Yes. I don't want to get too deep into this because there is little chance that it will end well, but let me say that short term immediate fluctuations aren't quite as important as more deeply rooted systems, particularly academic and philosophical stances in the society. And while there is a current "rumble" in both America and smaller and less relevant portions of Europe (particulary eastern europe), they are still fairly insignificant compared to the overwhelming influence and control left-wing ideology has over academic bodies and larger, more important political bodies.
The majority of people in the west are greatly influenced by left-wing philosophy and aren't even aware of it, mostly because it became so deeply engrained in the public culture that it does not even seem like a non-standard attitude. ESPECIALLY among more educated people, sadly.
Hopefully, the current uncertainity might change that, though I'm afraid that it is either too late, or the counter-reaction to left-wing ideology might end up being equally as dangerous at this point, as the whole thing has been escalated to a rather worrisome degree already.

>The line is where you're espousing your own ideology for your own purpose,
But the problem is: how do you differenciate that. According to people like Hanish, there is no such difference. I suppose we could play the "intuition" card (I mean, in reality I think it's not difficult to figure out when a player or GM is becoming an asshole doing things that harm the session), but I think that is not actually a matter of "political or nonpolitical" issue. It's actually far more generic human and "don't be a cunt" problem.

Its number 2 in the world nowadays (speaking of /pol/).

While the subject of the thread is political, I want a setting based on this: m.youtube.com/watch?v=sUIcCyPOA30

Yeah, I mean, I see where the PC was coming from. To flesh this out, this was a game using ORE rules.

This largely centered around an Augmented-Reality game where weird stuff was happening. We had three PCs: A corporate agent (my guy), your 'highschool student caught up in the mess' (the other PC) and a livestreamer.

The 2nd PC's plot arc was that he fell in love with the game's mascot, a virtual idol. He actually met her in an odd 'tutorial' event, where he had to save the 'princess' from a monster. The problem was that the girl already has her own 'lover', the highest-ranked dude in the game who is actually her handler. (As in, he works for the company. He's also completely obsessed with her.)

So the AI is actually manipulating both guys to 'free' her from her logic boundaries. I don't think I got the entire plot, but basically if she became an unchained AI she'd be unstoppable, while the company wanted to use her to exert surreptitious control over people's minds via subliminals.

Ultimately, the AI's 'lover' and the PC confronted each other in a skyscraper where the server core was housed, while shit was going down. Instead of using the game's virtual 'swords', they proceeded to duel to the fucking death with lead pipes they'd picked up.

The PC won because he hit the other guy in the implant used to play the game, momentarily shorting it out. While the other guy was confused and trying to see where the girl was, the PC smacked him in the face and probably fractured his skull.

The sub-plot was that there was a girl with a sort-of relationship with him, who'd decided to date his best friend (semi-platonically). One of his motivations was resolving the subplot. After saving the day, she sort of wanted to resume their relationship, but he told her to fuck off.

What about setting a theme to every game?
One day, you are fighting the gods, liberating the mortals from the grasp of their cruel masters.
The other, you use the power of the gods to repel the horrors of the abyss, faith being the only the thing capable of saving the races of the world.
One day, the corruption of a magic society is fought by a technologically adept alliance.
The other, you use magic to destroy the soulless armies of a madman, whose mechanised forces are set on conquering the world.
After all, if variety is the spice of life, why wouldn't our games benefit from it?

I wish Vox Day was my GM

The lack of coherent narrative is bad for story telling, so changing ideas daily is not ideal, but doing something like that with plot arcs could be interesting, as long as it flows in a sensible way.

by your definition any message or theme is inherently politics, which isn't necessarily wrong. A plot in which you overthrow a tyrant is political, but pretty much everyone can agree that dictatorship is bad.

"bringing your politics into a game" is more when the DM or players decide that one viewpoint is "correct" and guides the narrative such that all contrasting viewpoints are wrong to the point of satire. Traditional games offer the most freedom out of any game style, so it's essentially detracting from players' agency when you decide that one viewpoint/poltics/narrative/story is the only correct one.

TLDR: bringing your politics into the game is only bad when it's railroading

>"The Personal Is Political"
By that same parameter "A man can no more possess a private religion than he can possess a private sun and moon.'', I'm one of about two confirmed Christians in my Uni RPG society, it comes up when I feel it's relevant and I refuse to be ashamed. I don't see what's so difficult about that unless someone is so uncomfortable sharing a space with someone different to them.

Not in that sense. Having a single campaign twist and turn around is never a good idea. Giving each time a unique driving force or theme can, however, be quite interesting.
For instance, you can have a Dark Heresy campaign centered around faith, bringing the Emperor's Light to darkest corners of the Imperium, while your Delta Green party is fighting cults and their maddened zealots.

Beliefs have consequences. Your religion is not a purely cosmetic choice, nor is their irreligion. You believe they are hellbound and they believe you are delusional. Their worldview is completely different from yours, and at least one of you is dead wrong.

Luckily my group dosent talk about politics unless its a event while were waiting for the dm to get ready.
We have a handful of friends that has been begging us to let them join us but they're totally /pol/ material and gets completely salty if you don't agree with them.
Why salt of all flavors?

No, but I have had several games collapse because people can't shut the fuck up about whatever part of the political spectrum they support and leave that shit at the door.

Lefties tend to break shit down incrementally over time, so that you get to suffer the death of what should have been a nice, long term campaign.

/pol/tards tend to throw their shit in your face immediately all at once as a defense mechanism and prevent anything from getting started.

I hate them both.

I fervently believe that the moment you die you're being magically teleported to a pit of damnation where you will be tortured in agony for all eternity, but we can be friends right :^)

Absolutely, all I ask is you respect my beliefs and I will respect yours.

>Beliefs have consequences
>one of you is dead wrong
Having differing beliefs isn't enough to stop some people from enjoying one another's company, or respecting their right to hold to those beliefs without snapping at them or mistreating them.

It's not fuckin' hard. You're there to play some games, not yell at faggots for being wrong about everything in their worldview.

>You believe they are hellbound and they believe you are delusional
I'm not sure what prevents a friendship in this situation.

I'm super /pol/ but I've never ran into problems for it. Once in a while I might crack a politically incorrect joke about something happening in-game, which the one other /pol/ person that's found in each group will chime in to, then the GM might roll their eyes and we continue with the game, and that's about the extent of it.

Idiots that only identify as one thing and are unable to accept others beliefs, basically any fanatic.
I have Atheist friends, Christian friends, feminist friends, and hell even a Naziboo friend, I don't agree with most them at all, but unless they want to talk faith or politics we are perfectly amicable with eachother for the interests we share, and we just ignore the other shit unless we feel like a political or theological debate, and after? We are still friends because there is more to who we are then that shit and we know how to respect eachothers differences.
The problem is most people feel respect is only applicable to people who agree with you.

>unless we feel like a political or theological debate
Exactly, there's nothing more refreshing these days than slamming out your beliefs with someone you respect and having to be afraid you're going to face total social ostracism in the aftermath.

This. While SJWs have spoiled more of my sessions than /pol/, I've had to deal with both types of assclowns.

SJWs tend to inflict a "death by a thousand cuts" where /pol/ simply nukes things immediately.

Rule 0 in my games is "Leave your shit at the door". If you can't leave it at the door, don't let the door hit you in the ass.

The fact that 'Christians' can keep both these things in their head at once and feel no contradiction shows they don't REALLY believe what they think they believe. It's more a social monkey I-belong-to-this-belief-tribe thing.

Which of course is great: it's why loads of Christians are really decent people despite ostensibly horrific ideas.

I am the GM. So no. Because everyone gets screened. No memes allowed. You meme, I kick you out of my fucking house.

It got Thailand'd. The Sotho people and language extends far beyond it, but the other natives, Boers, and Brits chewed away at it until it became an enclave.

>The fact that 'Christians' can keep both these things in their head at once and feel no contradiction shows they don't REALLY believe what they think they believe.
Motherfucker, my Christ hung out with sinners and non-believers.

He very never afraid to tell them how they could live their lives better but your ideas of segregation don't fit with the inherent evangelising qualities of my faith.

Except that's objectively wrong, social christian.

You die, you rest until judgement day, THEN you're sorted out to hell.

This is literally in Revelations AND Samuel, both testaments, so you can't wiggle out of this like the shellfish thing, either.
The witch of Endor brings up Samuel and he's like 'The fuck you waking me out of my sleep for, bro?' - Note SLEEP, not hell, not heaven, not paradise, and Saul is like 'I don't know what to dooooooo' and Samuel is like 'Fuck you for waking me up, you're dying tomorrow.'

The only one flocking around in Heaven might be Enoch, the good sinner crucified with jesus, and a smittering of others, but not your grandmother. Likewise, hell is all but empty at the moment.

This also means Hitler is basically snoozing, but whatever, I like to think of it that when every 120,000,000,000 or so who ever has lived has amassed in front of god, we can all laugh at Hitler when he's sentenced to hell.

While his actions were a bit bad, him telling the girl to fuck off was completely legit too. I'd say he picked the Bad Ending but it doesn't mean it can't be enjoyable or happy for the character, just less complete. Being able to make the morally "wrong" choices is important for an RPG.

Golden Ending would have been telling both to fuck off and going it alone from the sounds of it here.

Reminds me a bit of the Bard's Tale game where you can pick the Bad End where the apocolypse happens and the dead lord over the living, but you get to marry the queen of the Dead and live happily ever after. Or you can pick the Good Ending where she is banished forever and you end up going back to being a homeless vagrant bum. Or the neutral ending where you just fuck off and leave the Good Guys and Bad Guys to their own quarrels.

Why would Hitler go to hell?

No Memes is a Meme.

>"The Personal is Political"

I very recently left a game over our GM making it a thinly-veiled political tirade, and after sitting through his whole "oh well Shadowrun is cyberpunk it's an inherently politicized genre" speil I finally got him to say "well EVERYTHING'S political!" while pressing him on why he insisted on making those themes so strong.

I think the tipping point was when one of the other players told me to read Moorcock's "Epic Pooh" essay and tried to assert that *EVER* engaging in fiction that existed to "comfort instead of engage" was morally irresponsible. I tried to explain that I roleplayed for escapism and got told "that's complacency. We shouldn't get to ignore what's going on right now."

I don't hold any ill will against any of them. My political compass is probably closer to most of them than to the other end, but I really, really can't imagine being that all-in, all the time with politics and actually still being happy with my life.

I had a DM that was super big into traditional gender roles and it caused issues whit my female friend basically not being allowed to play since she had made her character a woman. There was all sorts of jokes about her character belonging in the kitchen (out of character) and she had to deal with extra mechanical shit that the male characters didn't have to we both lasted two sessions before leaving.

Because he very obviously didn't believe in Christ or follow his tenets. I mean, just look at all the occult research and and research into witchcraft he condoned.

Making jokes out of character? No big deal in my opinion, adding mechanical flaws to playing a female? That is just dumb.

This didn't happen.

if the jokes had been in any way clever not just the comedic equivalent of "your mom" I may have felt differently.

The only way I can believe this happened is if the "mechanical flaw" was tied to race instead of gender (+2 cha instead of +2 str because you're an elf) or was tied to the gender as a minor, ultimately inconsequential status difference where you get bonuses in some areas and penalties in others.

More likely the mechanical flaws were not tied to gender at all and instead were the summation of inexperience on the part of the player, poor build choices, and/or poor rolls in crucial situations.

Getting crit by a hobgoblin and having the players joke about how the hobgoblin apparently thinks you should gb2kitchen is not other players trying to be sexist, and most people you make such jokes about your characters will make them about their own too.

Get thicker skin.

>Tfw you slowly but subtly subvert your entire gaming group to the point that they're AT LEAST as /pol/-tier as you are
I love being forever GM

My eclipse phase campaign could only happen because my group is filled with /pol/ gamers

You post on Veeky Forums, similar accusations could be made of you.

You shouldn't judge others like that, it is sinful. Hitler may well have been a good and pious christian.

Why couldn't they just say to her to no rather than have everyone suffer longer? If they want their sausage fest, then just say "we're kind of an all guys thing and we like to be crude". She would make a weak assumption that you're all just immature rather than have the confirmation that your DM is a real-life straw misogynist.

If someone wants to make an all-female group, I ain't gonna butt in because I probably wouldn't synergize well and would force them to conform, which defeats the purpose of having your private group with more lax social guidelines.

I AM the /pol/ player.

I don't bring politics up at the game, I'm no fucking savage, but almost all of my characters have a very individualist bend to them, consistently human (that feat power is great) and a hatred of High Elves (If they have knife-ears, get out the shears).

The group I play with is hard college left when it comes to the GM, so fuck doing anything else with that. But I can at least do other play styles than they can. Their Evil characters are trash because they're all obvious and bloodlusted, but my evil character wasn't even found out until I explained to them how he was evil.

The way I played it, the guy puts on different faces depending on who they're interacting with to earn their trust and be in a position to use them (The fact that he's a changeling was a thematic touch I put in for it).

They were very confused because the GM saw Evil as "Out to harm in an obvious way."

You've clearly never read Mein Kampf.

He knew of Christ and was not a Christian. That's heresy and get's you the seventh circle of hell.

>It got Thailand'd.
u wot m8. Laos aka Lan Xang is still majority Tai, Lan Na got absorbed into Siam, and modern Thailand occupies a lot of historically Khmer and Malay areas. The Tai peoples as a whole never diminished since the middle ages, they only grew and prospered, except for the Shan.

>seventh circle of hell.
Dante plz stop, your work is not a cutting or funny as you think it is.

>Ancap

Kill him to put him out of his idiot misery.

>he should be more patriotic and use the pound
>my sides

Please don't call ancaps "anarchists"
They're not anarchists. They're corporate fascists that haven't realized it yet.

why is it so hard for you to believe that people are dicks, user? why are you so autistic?