Unironically creates a high fantasy setting with lots of cliches (medieval fantasy setting, Good kingdoms...

Nothing. That stuff is fun. Not every setting has to be genre shattering or totally antithetical to established themes.

Have a character who is writing his own original fantasy novel in-setting that is the most stereotypical thing you can think of. Have him brag about how original it is, because rather than the plant people elves that the world he lives in has, they're just pointy eared humans that live a long time.

Play Don Quixote.

Its why the warhammer fantasy setting was actually good

>lots of cliches
Literally none. A cliche is something that's been done a million times. Tolkien invented those themes. You can't be a cliche when you're the original.

Cliches can be fun

It's called having fun you jerk.

>Unironically

Kill yourself faggot.

kek
stealing this

should he do it ironically?

Postmodernism has become so pervasive that playing cliches straight is more subversive than subverting them.

Subverted cliches/anti-cliches are now cliches. Going back to honest adventure stuff is now the new edgy

Truth

I enjoy those settings the most. In a world where everyone insists on subjective morality and tearing down tradition, a seeing like that is welcome.

>Subverting tropes and cliches just for the sake of subverting them is cancer.
nah, not necessarily.

>Sometimes you just want to slay a dragon and rescue a princess.
yeah but sometimes you want the dragon and the turned-evil princess to be in league and avenge the villagers they have brutally murdered.

>I guess what I mean to say, is there a way to subvert the subversion without causing friction at the table?
why would you want to try to sabotage the running campaign? find consensus in your group about what kind of campaign you'd like to play and then roll with it.

as usual, most problems can be solved by talking openly about them and compromising.

See and try to digest and comprehend what user was saying, because you are the cancer my friend. And the sad thing is you don't even know it.

More important question: Why can't I play games with people who aren't CN dickbags every single time they roll up a character?
>Good guys are boring

Because good guys are boring

seems like you both don't understand the point of subversion. most of us have been in the hobby for a long time and have been the stalwart hero who rescues the princess countless times before. subversion for the sake of subversion creates new and different situations. it provides variety to gameplay.

subverting cliches is bad if and only if you don't get to explore the situation it creates.

GMs who subvert cliches and then refuse an exploration of that are truly cancer and deserve to be called edgelords. but people who reject subversion out of hand are just as bad.

You need to find people who have matured, and preferably become well adjusted members of society. Consider why you end up playing with these types of people? Is it the location where you locate others to play with? The enviorment you play in? The type of game/ the game you play? Or is there something about you that either attracts those sort of people or drives the reasonable well adjusted people away? For instance if your name is Drew, and you happen to know Markus and Scott, then I must inform you your inability to find a decent play group is because normal people cannot stand your shit and that's why we never tell you when we get a game going. Because we do not want to play with you, because you irritate the fuck out of literally everyone I know who knows you, but it isn't socially acceptable to tell you that so we just kind of smile and try to be as polite as possible while subtly indicating our discomfort and displeasure with your conduct but you are too dam thick to realize it.

Because you insist on playing D&D.

> implying implications

I understand the appeal of trying something new, I can understand that after rescuing the princess a few times you want to try something new, and I understand that subversion of popular themes can result in an interesting new Idea that is fun, but there comes a point where subversion is frankly inane and silly. The example you posted struck me as inane edgy horse shit. It isn't a good subversion, it's overly blunt and tasteless to the point where I can't even ridicule it, i can only shake my head in shame.

Actually I just wanted to rant and most of the answer was the ones before that, just think about why and then address it. I don't honestly expect user himself to be the problem, though for some people it really is.

Only if you don't have any imagination.
No one else in town that I know, don't like joining in on strangers games.
Pathfinder, Eclipse Phase, SOIAF Roleplaying, Black Crusade, Dark Eye, Delta Green/CoC, Paranoia, ADnD, and a couple more that I don't have the names of.

Several reasons why nothing is wrong with you.
First, he started it in a way. so its not cliche.

Second and most important, in a world obsessed with moral ambiguity, and moral relativism (which we all know is utter bs), where no one is ever at fault for their actions and choices, where its always because someone elses, (or just white people) its comforting to return the a more basic truth of the world, some people are fucked up without reason other than their own choices and their own desire to control and have power over others, that some people are "evil" pure and simple.

Without blurry lines, without ambiguity, without doubt, this person needs to be defeated, this are the heroes without having to question their motives and shalamanana plot twists of evil guy was good guy all along!!!

Simplicity and clarity are many times the best storytelling.

>The example you posted struck me as inane edgy horse shit.
it's no more less inane horse shit than a dragon abducting a princess. if you can construct semi-plausible reasons for why a dragon should do that, i can construct semi-plausible reasons for why a princess and a dragon should ally and kill villagers.

>implying only dickbags play D&D
The worst people I've ever played with were Rifts players.

no but only dickbags with CN characters play D&D. also Rifts has a pretty good alignment system.

>moral relativism (which we all know is utter bs)

>most of us have been in the hobby for a long time and have been the stalwart hero who rescues the princess countless times before.
>it provides variety to gameplay.
Then you're not subverting for the sake of subverting; you are subverting in order to create variety and try new things.

So no only you are cancer, you are also a moron who lacks basic reading comprehension.

No, not really.

That sounds boring as fuck.

>Subverting tropes and cliches just for the sake of subverting them is cancer.
>Then you're not subverting for the sake of subverting
>So no only you are cancer, you are also a moron
based on the above, i feel pretty safe in claiming that the moron is you. also, we'd have to debate what the definition of subverting for the sake of subversion is but since you seem to be not very intelligent, we'd best leave it off here.

it's as interesting or boring as a dragon holding a princess hostage. anything interesting about either situation can only come in via the background: why does a princess form an alliance with a dragon? or: why does a dragon abduct a princess? what's the true backstory here?

you are cancer for defending subverting tropes for the sake of subverting them and not beign able to tell the difference or understand what you're talking about,

>debate what the definition of subverting for the sake of subversion

there is no need to debate, as the definition is self explanatory.

>Sometimes you just want to slay a dragon and rescue a princess
And sometimes you want to lay a dragon and be rescued by a princess.

>there is no need to debate, as the definition is self explanatory.
bullshit. the expression merely implies that the person doing the subversion sees something inherently good in subversion, thus subverting for subversion's sake. that may be variety or might be because they believe subversion is edgy and cool or it might be something entirely different. if it makes subversion inherently good, they're still subverting for subversion's sake.

I don't think anybody has ever subverted for the sake of subversion. People do it because it seems like a neat spin on a familiar tale. Or other reasons (such as shock factor).

no, the definition is pretty clear that the person does the subversin simply for the sake of doing the subversion, not for any other purpose.
>sees something inherently good in subversion
yes
They do a subversion simply because they like the idea of doing a subversion, but they don't have any other purposes for it.

If you're subevertinf for variety then you're subverting for variety, not for subversion sake.

>the person does the subversin simply for the sake of doing the subversion, not for any other purpose.
this literally never happens, everyone has an ulterior motive, even if it's lolrandumb fun

Cliches are staples for a multitude of reasons. Subversion can be good if done well, but so can cliches. Cliches or subversion aren't nearly as important as quality of presentation.

This

This. This so much.

Screencap for posterity. Because sometimes you can find pearls of wisdom/clarity in Veeky Forums.

find another GM you passive aggressive redditor

have you thought of sitting down and talking it out like a mature person?

Plots are irrelevant. Character development is the only thing that anyone ever enjoys. Movies, games, comics, tv shows, novels--plot does not matter. the greatest story can revolve around selecting a favorite type of cookie to eat with tea, while the worst can be a space opera against lovecraftian, double-dealing deities that turn out to be the good guys. Because the characters matter and nothing else does.

then why i am almost exclusively watching shows that involve adventuring?

One: Because it's incredibly easy to produce.
Two: Motherfucker no one else is responsible for what you're watching on TV. Hit the power button and do something else. Jesus christ. Like it's the fault of the evil media that you're seduced into vegetating before the lowest common denominator. Get a fucking hobby.

Any particular reason you've censored the dates?

>Obligatory "Cliches are okay so long as they're well done" response

Time is not linear, user. We only perceive it that way.. Dates and times are a distraction from the infinite truths of the universe to which you avail yourself for the sake of convenience and self-gratification in the form of fitting in with a crowd that is ultimately as meaningless as any other random grouping of numbers, but which you strive to find validation through association with because you are too small minded to admit that this particular set is no closer or further from you than any other, because you are too weak to seek a truth beyond your immediate needs.

Be a man. Wear a toga.

...

>Party want to do nothing but play edgy people like Rapelord the Barbarian or Warlock McDemoncock.
>I just want to sword and board against a huge army for the sake of stopping evil and peace to all living things.
>Party think I'm being selfish when I suggest that we don't kill the bandit leader who has been evacuating refugees from the ongoing war, who honestly seems to be more like a mercenary band leader than a bandit anyway.
>Kill him and the caravan with around forty people fleeing the encroaching hordes of giant spiders, wolves and who knows what else.

>and Taft was fucking awesome presidento
>fightme

that is your response to my contradicting the claim that plot is irrelevant? obviously i care about plots that involve adventure.

And sometimes you want to rescue the dragon from the princess.

But that's the same thing in the context of Seiba

Exactly. Shit like this is how BnHA's All Might manages to be really different by being the most straightforward hero thanks to how many subversions there are.

I never want to do that and I'll heavily sigh and roll my eyes if that's the best you've got.

If you can't write a plot that makes sense then just pick a different cliche, like rescuing the dragon from an evil conglomerate that wants to exploit an endangered species.

and sometimes, you want to kill the princess and enslave the dragon

You point out that having a living GM is cliche and that it should be subverted

>I'm having fun
>What's wrong with me

>There are faggots who actually believe this
Jesus fucking Christ, do you even get out of your basement sometimes?

Do YOU get out of your basement?

Just look at how many pretentious writers try to be creative by subverting something. Curving routes became so common that straight ones are the surprising ones.

That isn't really an uncommon sentiment, or even a new one. Not capworthy.

You haven't been on this board for very long, have you?

Or ever played an RPG
Or watched a movie in the last decade
Or a TV show
Or read a book
Or played a video game

There's a good fucking reason why cliches are cliches.
They're popular, and enjoyable.

it aint wrong

its why the monomyth survived literally thousands of years, changing the flavor, but always staying true to the course

its why star wars has outlived most of its deconstructions or parodies, it played the monomyth straight, which allows it to resonate with any audience at any time, plucky underdogs fighting a menacing evil is something people in the 70s and today can understand, gives it a sense of childlike wonder and sincerity

the problems have never been cliches, it has always been the way they are used

I can not remember any deconstructions of star wars.

What?

Them not existing is an impossibility

How about the dragon kidnapping the princess is a ploy to get you to come to meet the dragon?

Space Balls.

its more of a parody
since it exists to poke fun at the logical inconsistencies, cliches used or created by star wars, replacing vader with rick moranis for comedy, and the merch of star wars

it managed to be popular in its own right, but because it was mostly light hearted jabs, and not a vicious all consuming hatred for star wars, it was very affectionate and even when you drop thr parody, it's still a heroes journey where lone starr saves the galaxy, gets the princess, and turns down a reward for honor

A bit of moral relativism is normal but certain things should hold constant, like murder and rape is bad.

the way people define murder and rape isn't even constant though

The act itself not the cultural justifications/reason/degeneracy leading to it