GM's plot is just a platform to express their thinly veiled political opinions

>not giving a fuck about politics means it can't ruin your entertainment

>local vampire lord assumes puppet domination of the local government
>starts importing race of ultra violent ratmen and rat women
>all the nobles think it's great, and filthy uneducated commoners need to get with the times
>meanwhile commoners being killed/raped at the market daily. home invasions.
>government begins evicting people to provide adequate housing for the rats
>PC's have to resurrect Dooga Drumpf in order to defeat the vampire lord and build a giant rat trap before the commonfolk are all killed

That's the entire setting of Eclipse Phase in a nutshell

>shitposter uses Veeky Forums as a platform for their thinly veiled /pol/ threads

>you must defeat the half ape/half mudshark beastman king and his cursed (after mistakenly putting on a girdle of femininity) bodyguard before he has time to spark a race war in your kingdom

>half ape/half mudshark beastman king
That actually sounds pretty badass.

>OP's thread is just a platform to express his thinly veiled love of dicks and politics after his last five threads didn't quell his lust for shitposting

>half ape/half mudshark
So he's just a gay black man?

They're always ideologues. As are most people with political "views"

You just have to play a Nazi every time.

> enemy is white
Racism!
> enemy is black
Racism!
> enemy is non-human
Thinly veiled racism!

Also

the twist is that the beastmen king is weak and has no power. hes just a puppet thats been propped up by the merchant guild of the kingdom to sow chaos for them to capitalize on and to put one of their own (the assassin known only as Killery) on the throne

I can't tell, is this another thinly veiled /pol/ general thread? There have been a bunch of them lately it seems.

>party imports cute catfolk after launching an anti-discrimination campaign
>nobles literally can't complain because they're brainwashed to think all diversity is great
>catfolk eat rats in the streets. total carnage
>party hailed as heroes by common folk and nobility

of course

>OP's post is just a platform to start a /pol/ shitstorm to express his thinly veiled /pol/-troll-faggotry.

>GM's plot expresses the exact opposite of their political opinions

Let's try and make this into something worthwhile.

Everyone in the thread put out a personal belief, creed or ideal they espouse to, and we can make a village or city out of it. Create an entire kingdom of contradictory or ideologically opposed people, then see what happens when they actually interact with each other. Assume the kingdom works under a system where one representative of each town is sent to debate for policy.

>why are liberals the worst at insults?
I mean "obummer", "obongo", and "killary" aren't any better than "drumpf".

And I don't know. I'm somewhat fond of Twitler and Mango Mussolini.

I'd say anarcho primitivists, but those are just elves.

I don't know why Tronald Dump hasn't caught on.

>OP's thread is a platform to express their thinly veiled political opinions

MONARCHIST>REPUBLICAN DOGS

French revolution, worse day of my life.

unironically this

Obummer is the worst.
You can practically smell the 60-year-old on it

>try to play the Nazi to get the politics to stop
>now we're a party of Thule society sorcerers and SS officers hunting for Hitler's frozen corpse in the center of the hollow earth

>boomer too scared of his pet niggers to call them niggers but mad that the most powerful person in the world got there by being a black who could manage to put on a suit

The hobos need to stay out of the downtown core. I dont want them pesteting people for money and I have sabotaged several attempts at that by destroying their signs or calling rent a cops.

give em the ol spicy copper

Don't get me wrong. My group loves to talk shit about Trump all the time out of character, and I even join in to make fun of the less talked-about mistakes he has made, but we only make fun of him four times a night at most, usually two, and our group hates doing stories that are too blatantly political.

>Mango Mussolini
I am one of those two-shoes that screech angrily at comparisons to despots such as Hitler, but my chortles betray me!

Drumpf is at least what his family name was before it got changed to Trump. It might be dumb, but it's not something they just made up like obummer or obongo.

Could always be worse user. At least your not dealing with Marvel "MODOK is now a giant Trump Head" borderline propaganda.

If all else fails, go Full Henderson on the thing and see what happens.

The problem is not truly a question of what gender one is attracted to or what gender one identifies as, but why we even have gender as a concept any more. Biological sex is a useful piece of information for medical purposes and breeding compatibility, but nothing more. Gender serves no true social function in the vast majority of contexts, and isn't worth keeping around.

In terms of a setting, this translates to a circumstance in which, while sexual dimorphism may or may not be discernible depending on the clothing worn, there are no gender divisions in any space. Be it clothing styles, expected familial roles, average salary, expected social roles, pronouns, or even bathroom use, everything aside from basic biology and medical issues operates on a monogendered system.

I prefer Cheeto Benito.

Just gotta wait until the show gets cancelled.

Monarchy is a shitty way of deciding who is in charge. Look at the few kingdoms left where the king actually has real power, like Saudi Arabia. Is that the sort of country that you really want?

I can't think of Drumpf without thinking of a caricature of Jon Oliver blurting "Drumpf." Still not as dumb as most of the Obama names.

Did we even have insulting names for Dubya?

Or was that back when politics were still something approaching civil, instead of the pointlessly contrarian clusterfuck like what we have to slog through today?

Our usual GM has sort of involved the King of the central kingdom in our campaign, who happens to be named Donald and has a tendency to use words like 'great' and 'tremendous' a lot- though we have yet to do anything but exchange a couple of letters with him. We basically just lodged a complaint against a local duke regarding some impropriety. We'll see where it goes, I guess.

I actively avoid involving my personal political opinions when I GM, since I never shut up about them when we're not playing and I imagine everyone gets tired of hearing what I think about it. That's pretty easy with a properly medieval fantasy, since any political thought more current than Locke and Rousseau would be mostly irrelevant.

Individuals should not be power players in their own right. No one should be able to amass enough wealth to become a meaningful powerbroker that you could appeal to instead of a broad swath of the population. In this way, the only way for a leader to retain power is to maintain the support of most of the populace.

Aside from Dubya, or occasionally Georgie, I can't really think of insulting names for Bush Jr.

Shrub.

I prefer "Orange-in-Chief" myself, but that's just me.

>Did we even have insulting names for Dubya?
Well, there were a lot of people making fun of him for his ears (seriously, the dude looked like a monkey sometimes), and far left progressive types were screeching about how Bush was Hitler back then, so no, it's always been a bit of a contrarian clusterfuck. The only problem now is one side seems to be reaching critical mass for absurd stupidity and is going to burn out (hopefully).

I try to ignore all non in-game politics when playing and never allow politics in games I run. I'm not a faggot about it, but if someone doesn't get the hint that politics aren't to be discussed I'll tell them in private. Had one guy who was really good at the game who made a joke about Trump and Putin or something wihle we were playing; the joke being ignored and topics quickly being shifted clued him in I guess.

It's nothing personal and I don't factor my own beliefs into it either way, I just think there's few ways to faster tear apart a group and cause animosity than discussing real-world politics in a game where you're supposed to be killing orcs, investigating intrigue, and looting treasure.

I'll gladly take it over:
>GM's plot is just a platform to express their thinly veiled sexual fetishes.

See, but that sounds like a grand old time. Playing a bunch of sneering Republic serial villains getting chased around by the Vril, kidnapping heroic lady archaelogists and having deadly duels over pits of lava with square-jawed American heroes, betraying each other, getting eaten by the giant monster we summon that we were sure we could control... sounds like a blast!

>I actively avoid involving my personal political opinions
I actually try to make sure that each sympathetic nation ends up with at least some political stances that I personally disagree with. Because I know that I'll unconsciously give them ones that I do agree with, and shoving in stuff I don't like ends up giving them more depth. Now, I'll admit that I sometimes soften things in some areas--for instance, I just wrote a section on the caste system in one nation, in which caste and social class are entirely distinct, rather than one dictating the other--but, in some ways, having an "acceptable" version of something that you don't like is still forcing you to compromise with the thing itself.

Who cares what the Saudis do?

Give me a King who hails from my race and tribe, and I shall follow him into the abyss.

>it's always been a bit of a contrarian clusterfuck
It got worse after McGovern "reformed" politics. Compromise used to be much more viable and much more common.

>The only problem now is one side seems to be reaching critical mass for absurd stupidity and is going to burn out (hopefully)
Everyone on this board has a different opinion as to which side that is.

So, every game ever, then.

We tried that for centuries. It created a really shitty system in which all the wealth and power was even more concentrated in the hands of a few noble families than it is today. Personally, I like having a government that is more responsive to the desires of the people than an aristocracy.

>its absurd to want to protect yourself and your country
>you should accept these uneducated strangers with impossible to check backgrounds because......?

of course the actual answer is to drive down wages, that way everyone loses. yay for the left

Compromise remained viable even after the McGovern-Fraser Commission. It wasn't until you got into the 1990s and the rise of Newt Gingrich that you really saw a ramping up of contrarianism that eventually led to the mess we have today.

I'm a right-leaning Libertarian myself, but I believe the ideal statist system would be a meritocratic oligarchy fragmented into several departments, with each presiding over a certain area of government. The checks and balances system dialed up to eleven, combined with a modernized version of the ancient Chinese testing system on steroids, with a heavy helping of laissez faaire economy and a pinch of traditional nationalism.

>drive down wages

lets not forget the easy to control and pander to voting block

> its absurd to want to protect yourself and your country
Literally no one says this. The disagreement is on how to go about protecting the people of the country.

> being this ignorant of what the left is saying
Just take a look at the garbage being churned out by the MSM. They're constantly screaming that anyone who wants to get the border back under control is Hitler.

shhhh. let him have his strawman, or he'll just throw a bigger tantrum.

>Literally no one says this

actually the meme that the left is rational is just that, a meme. the real life liberals iv talked to were more extreme and radical than most of the strawmen pol makes. as in they literally think it is absurd because "its not your country anyway" or that "your ancestors were bad so this is justice!". iv also heard the "white racism is bad but black racism is good" line in real life and unironically

t. californian

Yeah it actually does sound like fun.

>Everyone on this board has a different opinion as to which side that is
My money's on the ones the antifa types are currently running with, but that's just me.

>t. californian
>californian
There's your problem. Liberals in cali are stupidly progressive compared to the rest of the country. Hell, even on the Left Coast, they make the others look sane.

Actually, scratch that last sentence. My leftist nutjobs actually managed to out-Berkeley goddamn Berkeley recently over at Evergreen State University, so go figure.

t. Washingtonian

> The disagreement is on how to go about protecting the people of the country.
Name one thing that the left wants to do to actually protect the country. One fucking thing. I'll save you the trouble, there isn't one. They actively work against the idea of nations and borders, trying to push their idiotic vision of a globalized world. Any attempt to defend against physical threats like Islam or economic ones like immigration is dismissed and its proponents belittled as racists, sexists, homophobes, islamophobes, and whatever else they are screeching about this week.

There isn't a disagreement about HOW to defend the country. You do that by fighting its enemies, not welcoming them in and letting them slaughter your people in the streets. The battle between the left and everyone else is because the left thinks that defending yourself is "outdated" and "backwards" and that we just need to force more diversity on white nations and that will somehow make everything better.

>then continue to not give a fuck and move on afterwards

>months worth of "sideplot" sessions
You seem to think there is any moving on.

Fucking this. The country would be so much better off if we just fucking nuked them already. They already openly flout our laws and attack US citizens who dare to disagree with them. If that's not treason, then what is?

You should probably stop talking to the landwhales with brightly colored hair then, because liberals I've spoken to aren't that retarded.

t. Californian in LA

The death of machine politics and closed-room deals is what enabled the rise of that kind of contrarianism, though.

> strawman
It's not a strawman. Just turn on any MSM outlet and you'll see this stuff, plain as day. The left has lost its fucking mind, and the more they drift away from reality the more violent they become. Just look at what antifa has been doing in the last year. They're completely out of control, attacking people, destroying property, and actively blocking actual attempts to defend the country.

> liberal
> aren't that retarded
Pick one.

The US left haven't gone anywhere, and are advocating positions that would be centrist-right twenty years ago. It's not them that've moved, it's you.

and as a bonus catgirls for all. I approve.

What if we granted California and any states willing to join them complete political autonomy, but stopped sending them federal funds from the states that refused to join them, and states that refused to join them didn't receive federal funds from California and California-supporting states? We'd still be the same nation, allied in military matters, but able to govern our respective states as the populace deemed fit. That seems like a much more reasonable compromise.

>My money's on the ones the antifa types are currently running with, but that's just me.
Certainly one perspective, but let's not forget that the Republican Party lost control of their own nomination process and ended up electing a buffoon.

Liberals on the streets are going batfuck crazy, while Democratic politicians tend to remain fairly consistent. Conservatives on the streets are arguably more sane, but their political party is buckling.

> US left
> Centrist-right

Que?

> t. Californian
Opinion discarded. You people don't matter anymore, the rest of the country has finally started to see through your bullshit ideology. Those shrill hags you support have become irrelevant and impotent. And once your ridiculous fraud is exposed, no one with any sense will allow you to take part in elections again. You've signed your own political death warrant with your insane pursuit of "social justice" and "equality."

Are you familiar with politics in literally any country other than America?

Your Democrats aren't as far left as you think they are.

>GMs plot is an exploration of Nietzschean philosophy

I don't like Donald Trump, but he's a fucking cunning bastard. No idiot could manage to hide colluding with Russia so perfectly AND manage to takeover the government so handily. He's an evil genius, something straight out of /co/.

Because at that point, you beg the question, "well why don't CA and friends just be their own nation, since they can just use the money that would've gone to footing Montana's medical bills on their own military?" Also, the federal budget, much like any government budget, isn't as simple as your household budget, and trying to split federal funding according to state source would be a nightmare.

I was just about to ask which people would prefer dealing with. I think a few fetishes I could deal with better then anyone's political opinions.

To be fair its actually quite fun to try and work out the stress of modern politics by thinking how to apply them to a game without going overboard. Take for example, a knighthood order with pic related as a tenant.

That would be an incredibly unreasonable compromise, since each state does not necessarily contribute an equal amount of money.

>the largest state economy in the nation doesn't matter any more

California would still be a massive blight sitting right next to the rest of the states, flooding them with illegals and the drugs that they bring with them. It's a cartel state, and you can't stop that just by cordoning it off from the rest of the country. It's an infection that needs to be cleaned, not left to fester.

Besides, why should we leave those west coast ports in the hands of a bunch of unproductives? Those could be very useful to the rest of the country if they were in the hands of people who actually work for a living. Better to roll in, cull the infestation, and resettle the area with actually sane, hard-working people.

Even a dip in philosophical bits can be useful.

> literal marxists
> aren't as far left as you think they are
Fuck off europoor. Go back to rattling your sharia cage, the adults are talking.

Hmm, why not allow conservative and progressive states to divide over the course of half a decade, similar to Brexit, and have both new nations remain allied?

I hope this is a shitpost.

Such a thing can add the background for racial tensions between folk of a city or nation easily and give an understandable argument for each side. If handled well

I can't recall the last time that a Democratic politician advocated anything that could reasonably described as "literal Marxism"

>6th largest economy in the world
>The most electoral votes of any state by far