/tg/, I am playing a male human bard in a D&D game and have been told to stop roleplaying.
We play in a FLGS, and I have been playing my bard properly - quick tongued, charismatic and dextrous. Apparently though flirting with barmaid and noble alike, charming purses and legs wide open with a saucy song or cunning jape, and suggesting we lay, not slay, foes is a sign of being a "weirdo".
I thought everyone knew bards were all about picking up ladies? Sex is natural and the fact I am being told I am weird for playing a sexually confident male suggests the rest of the group are probably kissless virgins.
tldr; my group are flustered by bards acting like bards
>>47871517
start hitting on menstart hitting on the players, and no I don't mean their characters
Yeah, you should quit it, the "bards = sex" thing is a stupid-ass meme
I really hate this forced "bards are sluts" meme idiots are trying to press.
>>47871553
>>47871558
>>47871517
because while sex is natural not everyone is into borderline ERP like sessions. We're here to roll dice and kill monster, not watch you try to roleplay out your sexual fantasies in front of us.
you seem like a fuckin loser
>>47871669
In other words. That's like going into an ERP and forcing the other person to go around slaying goblins for you.
>>47871669
this should be obvious
Just because /tg/ tells you all their stories about bards fucking everything doesn't mean you should go do that in real life. Everything you read on /tg/ is made up by people who don't actually play games.
>>47871769
Don't judge /tg/ by the worst of us.
Play a bard who's in love with his instrument and art
>>47871517
My bard is a stringent academic. His rigid recitation of poetry and ancient histories is enough to dry up any woman in the room.
He also tends to stay away from female company, as a lifetime reading through the canon has shown that women are more often than not a corrupting influence.
>>47871517
First off, way to pull off probably the least interesting and most overused bard trope possible.
If your party didn't discuss what kind of characters and themes you're all cool with before the game, all of you are fucking stupid, and unless somebody directly informs you that you're making them way too uncomfortable you're technically in the clear. That said, there is sort of a general level of curtesy you should show in public unless you're with a close colloquial circle. It doubds like your group aren't exactly friends with you like that, so while you're okay for now, from the outside that sort of behavior doesn't come off as you being comfortable or confident with that shit, so much as looking overly-compensatory in the same way an old man on a loud harley or a ritch boy in revving daddy's car does.
Long story short: you sound really uncreative and socially unaware. You might be That Guy.
>>47871790
He isn't, he is judging us by the majority here.
>>47871517
>bards acting like bards
You fell into the meme trap OP, just because you play an instrument doesn't mean you should turn into a That Guy faget and fuck everything in sight. But regardless of your faggotry it doesn't sound like you are the only one at fault. The rest of your group sounds like they just want to play an MMORPG or some shit with nothing but level progression and loot being their sole purpose for playing which is even worse imo.
The only option would be to leave if you are actually trying to rp a character in groups like this as your thought out plans and intentional fuck-ups at times due to backstory/faults will be met with "Fuck it, I'll just hit the guy lol" or other table-talk out-of-character garbage. Even if you made your character into a walking cliche there would more have likely been times where, in a group that gives half a shit, you would be able to flesh them out a bit more other than "the bard that sleeps with everything" or what your current group seems to be going with, the buff slut.
>>47874246
>he is judging us by the majority here.
That's still the worst, anon.
>>47871517
Whether or not you want your bard to be seductive, A: you should fade to black rather than going into details and B: if you're in public, you keep it in your pants.
>>47874246
That's an exaggeration. Stop putting undo weight behind loud trolls.
>>47874275
We can't ALL be the worst, anon.
>>47874508
Seriously, enough. The larger /tg/ community is hardly as bad as you're trying to make it out to be, and it's likely just you hoping that there's more people as dumb as you are to help you feel more comfortable acting like an idiot.
Quit it.
Daily reminder /tg/ doesn't play games.
>>47874642
Does DMing a game on Roll20 every Friday for the last four months count as playing?Barring two weeks when I was without a computer due to a dead HDD and one week I was too sick to sit upright.
>>47874772YesIt's mostly a stick about people who IF they've played have only played in games that lasted like a session and a half.
>>47871517
Nothing you can do but find a new game or change, OP. Everyone here in this thread is being a retarded little white knight, but the fact of the matter is that games are collaborative, and if the other players don't like something you're doing you gotta stop if you want to keep playing.
>>47874642
>Three random posts
>Nobody on /tg/ plays games
Stop drinking gasoline anon
>>47871684
Nothing gets me harder then a good goblin slaying.
>>47874834
Spent 20 minutes trying to figure out how to post this. Thanks, anon.
>>47871517
Rule 1 of playing with other people? Don't make the rest of your group uncomfortable.
If you do find you make your group uncomfortable either stop or, if you can't do that because of your "artistic integrity", find a new group that is comfortable with your playing style.
tldr; leave your magical realm at home if the other players aren't ok with it.
>>47871517
If it makes your group very uncomfortable find a different group or don't do it
And frankly you're in public so stop being openly weirdly sexual
>womanizer bard
What, were "generic brown-haired male fighter", "slutty female rogue in corset", and "wise half-elven druid" already taken?
>>47871517
>tldr; my group are flustered by bards acting like bards
In your little fantasy world, maybe.
Bardslut is, was and will only ever be a /tg/ meme
Why couldn't you just play a fun boastful bard who doesn't make people uncomfortable? Just because you're an underwear moistening wordsmith doesn't entitle you to wag your sullied tongue at any comely lass. You can lie and pretend you're the most heroic person in the party in front of NPCs, but acting like a womanizer is like rolling a lulrandumb chaotic evil rouge.
>>47875464
>Being a womanizer is trait on the same level as indiscriminate murder
Where do you get your moral system from?
>>47875492
It's the same level of disruptive and annoying bullshit, not the question of which one is more or less evil.
But, you already knew that, and you're just hoping to pad up this dumb thread.
>>47875492
It's just childish and disruptive. In context, clearly the murderhobo is worse. In the meta, you're both giant douches I wouldn't want to table top with.
>>47875608
>>47875629
I got you the first time.
It's only disruptive if the party isn't fine with it. It's not inherently immoral and wrong to play a womanizer. You can have your opinions on this style of play, but don't pretend they extend to everyone.
>it's a MAYMAY
If you think a bard, or pretty much any high charisma character hitting on people makes them a wierdo you are a sexually stunted puritan and possibly retarded.
No one is asking to describe sex in detail here.
>>47875694
>It's not inherently immoral and wrong to play a womanizer
I would argue that it is, because being a womanizer implies manipulating women to get what you want without caring while dehumanizing said women into objects.
Now, ethical theory aside, if you're play group's fine with it, that's fine, but the vast majority of people will not be fine if it's something that's consistent and distracting. Why should we all have to sit through your awkward word-groping when I just want to hit things with my axe and go on an adventure?
>>47871517
>>47875694
>inherently
True. But, you're hoping for a bit too much subjectivity to excuse what's generally considered poor play. It may not be inherently wrong, but it's still wrong.
It all comes down to the golden rule. You might enjoy playing a womanizer, but imagine how much fun it is for the rest of the group.
I can only imagine one scenario where a womanizer character would be welcomed by the group, and that's when they're low charisma, rather than high, and played for the handful of laughs that come out of their frequent failures.
>>47875811
>I would argue that it is
You would argue playing a fictional character that doesn't ascribe to your absolute real life morality is immoral?
>Dehumanizing women into objects
>For hitting on them
Knew you were a feminist. Sucks that your kind has infested this board.
>The vast majority of people...
Do not know you exist let alone wish for you to speak for them.
>>47875942
>generally
No. You don't like it. That's all it is. You cannot speak for everyone else and make statements like this.
>It's still wrong
Because you don't like it. Making an objective moral statement is not within your authority.
>Imagine how much fun it is for the rest of the group.
This is something that will vary from group to group. Your statements cannot apply to all groups.
>>47876051
>You would argue playing a fictional character that doesn't ascribe to your absolute real life morality is immoral?
Yup I would. You can do immoral actions, but being a womanizer is immoral, strictly speaking. Having a pragmatic and utilitarian view of people in general can be construed as immoral, on the basis that you're denying an individual or group the dignity they deserve as sentient agents capable of their own actions. In fact, it's a mutually expected dignity in order to have a successfully functioning society. If you're Lance Thundercock, you can probably get away with being a womanizer on the basis that self-gratification is more important than constructed societal processes, but it's still immoral because as Lance Thundercock you want people to respect your dignity in turn. By acting out as a womanizer, you're basically jerking yourself off in front of a group of people, otherwise you'd act like that in real life and apply a different label to yourself. Or, treat others the way you would want to be treated and how you think they would want to be treated, otherwise what you're doing is probably wrong.
>Knew you were a feminist. Sucks that your kind has infested this board.
I'm not a "feminist", I'm a meritocratic egalitarian, which means I recognize each individual as a capable rational actor equivalent to myself, until they prove otherwise. Just because I think people deserve mutual respect doesn't mean I'm some hipster, I just have a clear understanding of what's right and what's wrong, relative to my experiences. Just because you can tell moral from immoral doesn't mean you have to always act morally or immorally, sometimes acting pragmatically requires a little bloodshed.
On the other hand, being a douchecannoe with a group of people who are clearly uncomfortable by your flamboyant dickitry means that you shouldn't play with those people because they don't share your interests or world view.
>>47874591
No. It's fucked.
What used to be the best board is now overrun with blue-haired pronoun police, spergs, /pol/niggers and /d/eviants.
>>47871517
While /tg/ appears to be going through a phase lately, OP, don't let it worry you. As long as you tactfully fade to black any sexual encounters and don't bring any fetishes in the discussion, you're doing absolutely nothing wrong. A stereotyped bard is just that, stereotype bard, neither good nor bad. If you're roleplaying him as well as you say, it's a fine character to do.
However, the fact remains that you're not playing D&D by yourself for yourself. Either find a better group, or conform to the standards of the other players.
>>47874642
>12 year old goth loli satyr.
I can't tell if he was lying to us or just himself.
>>47876686
Why, I play in a group that des that kind of shit all the time.As much as /tg/ will get #triggered about it.
>>47876547
>Yup I would.
Then you're incapable of separating fiction from reality and you don't belong on the internet, let alone in the play pretend board. And because of that, there's really nothing more to debate. You are insane, and thus incapable of being convinced, because to you this is a defense of real people and real actions, not of a character in a fictional game.
>>47876644
>/tg/ appears to be going through a phase lately
All of fucking society is. Our only hope is that it dies out like the hippies did.
>>47876728
>this meta-level shitpost after being BTFO
I was trying to have a passive aggressive discussion with you about ethics, then you decided to go "a bloo bloo you're crazy" instead of contributing anything meaningful, or explaining why I was incorrect.
>>47876711
We get het up about it because so often, it's the local /d/tards putting on a show. If you don't want to be lumped in with those jackoffs, don't act like one. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes, asshat.
>>47876820
You made the declaration that it is immoral for someone to create a fictional character that you would consider immoral. That's not something a sane person would say.
>>47871517
>le bards fuck everything meem
DnD was a mistake
>>47876847
>Play stupid games, win stupid prizes, asshat.
I'll play whatever games me and my group want to, you literally cannot stop us senpai.
>>47874996
Generic is nowhere near the same thing as bad, though. Not every Drow has to be a fucking CG rebel trying to throw away his kin's reputation, not every Paladin has to be an alcoholic jerk Knight in Sour Armor, and most of the "imaginative" race/class combos you can think are one-trick ponies or plain dysfunctional as characters.
Don't knock stereotypes- they exist for a reason.
>>47875811
>I would argue that being a womanizer implies manipulating women to get what you want without caring while dehumanizing said women into objects
And I would argue that your argument holds less water than a volcanic rock in the middle of the Sahara desert on a midsummer noon. Strictly "being a womaniser' implies none of these things.
>>47876051
Who are you?
What makes you think that your bizarre, minority opinions are anything beyond bizarre, minority opinions?
You're right in that there are some minority groups that would tolerate such a player, but that's not something that's immediately known, and even then it takes quite some time for people to get comfortable enough around each other to allow someone to act like that.
That makes it terrible to advise people that it's a generally good conduct. If you already know your group is comfortable with that sort of thing and won't hate you for it, you probably are not going to be going around asking for advice on whether or not it's a good idea.
>>47876848
What? I have a logical process for ethical thought, why wouldn't a fictional character that does immoral things be immoral? Are you retarded? Sure, you can still do it and have fun, but living out power escapist power fantasies contrary to your own moral system is either an exercise in applied ethics, or something some douche on the internet does to try and seem smart for strangers. If you're implying that I think it's immoral for people to do whatever they want, did you read any of my rant? I don't care whether it's morally correct or not outside of arbitrary signification for personal benefit. What I care about is that I respect people's capacity to make informed decisions and do whatever they want. If someone wants to do heroin, sure, let them if it makes them happy. That's their business. If someone's heroin addiction is impacting me, then it's my business and I can apply all the moral faggotry to them that I want. If someone's heroin addiction is impacting lots of people, it may be more prudent to tell them to stop doing heroin. The whole point is that it's semi-relativistic felicity calculus for practical self-maximization in a group setting, without objectively looking like a dick.
>>47877030
From the first result on google
"Womaniser" (n):
a man who behaves selfishly in his sexual relationships with women. masher, skirt chaser, wolf, woman chaser. a man who is aggressive in making amorous advances to women. Type of: debauchee, libertine, rounder. a dissolute person; usually a man who is morally unrestrained.
That's pretty negative. I didn't say anything about ladies behavior that may or may not justify males behavior, but the general descriptor of the word is distinctly negative, and describing yourself as such is equally negative. "Stud" accomplishes the same thing without referencing manipulation or devious intent.
>>47877110
>minority
Where's your information backing up who is and is not in the minority?
>>47877123
It's status as a positive or negative characteristic (which is subjective anyway) is not in discussion here, just the fact that it has nothing to do with manipulation, dehumanization or objectification of women. More accurately, it has absolutely nothing to do with one's treatment of women at all, merely one's own reaction to them.
>>47877123
You didn't read what >>47876848 said. You declared the person PLAYING the character as immoral, which, if not outright insanity, does indicate that have a problem separating what happens in the game with what happens outside it. The player of the mass-murdering Blackguard is no more or less immoral than his cousin who plays the self-sacrificing Paladin.
>>47877123
>of
Tbh if the ladies give themselves up they're just as much in th fault as Lance Thundercock. I doubt they're searching for a lifetime partner to make and grow kids with when they get fucked by him. Most likely they're looking for instant gratification via sex just like Mr Thundercock.
>>47871517
Where did this trope come from anyway? Can we blame big hair rock stars? I love blaming problems on them.
>>47871517
I don't know why everyone is being sensitive little sissies today. If you're right, and all you're doing is flirting, and making a few(pretty bad) one liners, then it's not a big deal. I'm guessing your group is a typical murderhobo party?
>>47875827
It's decided. I'm playing bard. It will be glorious.it's what /tg/ deserves
>>47877557
Report results.
>>47877128
I have played with over a thousand people in hundreds of games, from a wide diversity of backgrounds that would constitute a fair sample size.
That, and I've stepped outside in the last twenty years. I recommend that you try it.
>>47877557
You know the deal, faggot. If you really do it, take pics and post'em.
>>47877615
>Over a thousand people in hundreds of games
You know, I personally don't care if you lie to people on the internet, but you should at least have the dignity to make something up that sounds like it has maybe a 1% chance of being true.
>>47877640
>>47877583
I'll do it for you.
>>47871790
Not all /tg/
>>47871553
>>47871558
39 seconds apart. Interesting.
>>47874642
Never understood this meme. Or >>47871769 "All stories on /tg/ are made up."
>>47874990
>openly weirdly sexual
This makes me sad.
>>47875181
It's an established trope outside of /tg/ as well. Maybe if you browsed anything other than 4chan you'd know this? And I don't mean reddit or tumblr.
>>47876547
>Being pragmatic is immoral
uwot¿
Also, by your logic, I am completely moral. You see, I treat people like garbage but I don't expect any better treatment in return.
>>47876746
Please let this happen. I am very tired of society of victims.
>>47877123
You getting enough oxygen inbetween smelling your own farts, buddy? You literally contradicted yourself right at the beginning of this post. Twice.
Also being "aggressive" is not inherently bad, unless you follow feminazi theology.
>>47877615
Have you ever even READ a rulebook?
>>47877802
>ACTUALLY BEING that guy who replies to every post in the thread
>>47878057
>replying to that guy who replies to everything in that thread with nothing more than a bitch
>posts consider the following meme without actually making a point
Someone send the paramedics, I'm having an allergic reaction to all this summer.
>>47871517
>>47877802
>Never understood this meme.
It's hardly a meme. Take /biz/ for example. If anyone on /biz/ were actually involved in business, they would be doing business instead of posting on an anonymous imageboard about business. People on /lit/ don't actually read or write books because if they did they would be doing those things or talking to their friends who also do those things about those things instead of posting about doing them on an anonymous imageboard.
I have seen anons on /tg/ post "no game>game." I'd imagine most fa/tg/uys like playing RPGs or any traditional games at all the same way Roald Dahl liked children: in theory, with every parameter exactly as dictated by their ideals and expectations to the extent that nothing in reality could ever measure up.
>>47878173
>in theory, with every parameter exactly as dictated by their ideals and expectations to the extent that nothing in reality could ever measure up.
This is the part that drives me up the wall so much.
>>47877678
You'd be surprised what playing for 20+ years can do. Hell, it's not even that amazing if you frequent conventions.
>>47871517
So keep the quick tongued, charismatic, dextrous part and just sleep around less. They're not asking you to stop roleplaying, they're asking you to cut out one annoying trait which is not as vital to the bard's identity as you seem to imagine.
>>47876547
>>47877123
>>47876932
I'm the head imam of Saudi Arabia. Prepare yourself for the jihad, infidel.
>Playing NE bard
>uses spells to trap people in a hypnotic dance and enchants them to do his bidding when he performs
>gives them memory loss afterwards so there is no loose ends
No one knows my secret
>>47878642
Good luck faggot I live in the depths of central Australia in an abandoned opal mine.
>>47878173
That is pretty retarded. You act like 4chan requires a huge expenditure of time or something. Just because you spend your life on /tg/ doesn't mean I do. "If you like doing a thing you would do that thing all the time!" What the fuck even. I have a game every Monday night and Saturday afternoon. Plenty of time to do other shit in the meantime, whether it be /tg/ or not.
I have also seen those people who say the best way to enjoy ttrpgs is through making shit up on /tg/ and every time they get shot down. That opinion is very much a minority.
>>47871553
This so hard. My bard is a manipulative bitch basically.... For the greater good of course.
>>47871517
It's super likely that while you think your lines are clever you're actually just a cringe-lord who wont stop ERPing with people who don't want it to happen.
Honestly, you should kill yourself.
>>47874260
Party getting killed and you're a bard? Throw your shield into the fray this activating the carefully prepared chain of Oh shit spells enscribed as runes on it.
Thank god for glyph of warding.
>>47878173
How horrendously retarded do you have to be to think that 4chan works as a gigantic time sink and that people can't just go on it for short periods of time?
>>47876686
Probably lying, though if it was over the internet where no one knew him it wouldn't matter much.
I wouldnt play with someone who wanted to run something like that though.
>>47876991
This.
You know, in my 25 years of gaming, I've never started at a tavern, never rescued a princess from a dragon, dealt with the overarching pc stereotypes as they are presented on /tg/.
I haven't because people are so fucking hung up on "not being a stereotype" that they forget that they can make for an engaging and pleasant game, and so skip over things that could be done out of fear when they themselves have never seen or done it.
>>47879529
Other than saving a princess from a dragon I've seen most of the tropes come into play.
I've literally never been in a game where a princess existed in anything more than passing.
>>47877369
And this is... wrong, for some reason?
Maybe I am just a little less eager to scream via text, but I both accept and expect women to seek out sex on their terms and for their pleasure as much as any guy is apt to.
We are all humans, and the difference isn't that grand.
>>47879529
I started in a tavern but not many of the other tropes. Which is a shame because taking a normal village and turning it into a defendable position against a horde of orcs sounds like fun.
>>47879580
Sluts are bad regardless of sex.
>>47871684
I put on my robe and wizard hat.
>>47879577
>>47879672
As a GM, I started the game at taverns (The Purple Wyrm), I had a "horde attacks the city" scenario, I did all the classic shit no one does because of the belief everyone does it when really, no one does, and save for the one faggot who refuses to take the bait and go to the fucking tavern because they need to be different, the party always had fun.
>>47879694
Alright, explain this.
If the people involved aren't spreading disease or creating progeny (whether accidentally or on purpose for underhanded purposes), what is wrong with enjoying sex with someone you are attracted to?
>>47880095
He was told so from a young age. Anything else he says will just be confirmation he stumbled on over the years. Pretty sure mo one has ever grown up with casual sex being great and then realized when they were older all the evils.
>>47880095
Not him, but studies have shown that the more sexual partners you have the worse you'll fare once you actually get married.
>>47879580
If being a womanizer is bad, then is accepting said womanizers advances.
>>47880398
That study was done by a Mormon from a university with very stringent policies, and it's unknown who participated, and ultimately didn't reveal as big a difference as the media made it out to be.
>>47880398
Studies can say whatever you want them to.
>>47880427
There is a difference between being a "womanizer" and seeking out mutually interested company, anon, and you know it.
>>47880655
>Studies can say whatever you want them to.
But oxytocin and vasopressin can't.
>>47871517
HEY EVERYONE I'M THAT GUY AND YOU CAN TOO.
The only thing more pathetic than sitting around pretending to kill monsters is sitting around pretending to sleep with women. It doesn't help when your balding friend Rob has to play the woman either.
>>47880910
Why are you here?
>>47880095
>>47880204
^This, and everyone I've met who is slutty has worse lives in pretty much every aspect then people who are not. So while I'm aware it's anecdotal it's been pretty valid.
>>47880923
He's not wrong, you know.
>>47880938
>So while I'm aware it's anecdotal it's been pretty valid.
So the successful businessman/musician/et al who trips over women has a worse life in every aspect, or did you mean to say "women" when you said "slutty"?
>>47880991
No, he is, actually, because at that point, you can put that question to the whole hobby.
It's all pretend, and we who do it ALREADY KNOW IT'S PRETEND. So no, you aren't smart because you can post in a thread about pretend shit and scream "YOU ARE PRETENDING HURR".
>>47871517
way a play a trope you stupid cunt
>>47871517
>tldr; my group are flustered by bards acting like bards
I'm not going to read any of this thread (except that one post with the Magical Girl Academy or whatever gif that one is so cash) but it's important to note that THERE IS NO SUCH THING AND A DUNGEON AND DRAGON BARD. NONE.
THE LOOSE BASIS OF VAGUELY BRONZE/SILVER AGE EUROPE-ISH AREA (with a generous helping of 100% grade A American bullshit) DOES NOT MAKE IT A REAL THING. BARDS HAVE BEEN PLAYED ~LOTS~ OF WAYS BY LOTS OF PEOPLE AND LOTS OF AUTHORS. IF YOU'VE ONLY SEEN ONE WAY TO PLAY A BARD CONSIDER THAT YOU HAVE SEEN VERY FEW AUTHORS AND ARE THUS, IN YOUR IGNORANCE, PERHAPS NOT A ~REAL~ RP GAMER. OF THE VAST LIBRARY OF PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED STYLES AND TROPES AT YOUR DISPOSAL TO REFERENCE AND THE VIRTUALLY INFINITE SUPPLY OF NEW IDEAS AFFORDED TO YOU BY THE POWER OF IMAGINATION, CONSIDERING THE PRIMARY PURPOSE YOU SHOULD BE SELECTING YOUR STYLE FOR IS YOUR GROUP DYNAMIC, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSE FOR YOU TO PICK A TROPE YOU KNOW MAKES YOUR CO-PLAYERS UNCOMFORTABLE, UNLESS YOU YOURSELF REALLY, REALLY, REALLY WANT TO PLAY THIS KIND OF CHARACTER FOR SOME REASON, IN WHICH CASE, MORE POWER TO 'YA IF YOU WANT IT THAT BAD TO OPEN A CAN OF WORMS YOU DO THAT I GUESS, BUT DO NOT HIDE BEHIND "REALISM" FOR YOUR JUSTIFICATION.
>>47881043
Meant people I've met.
All the slutty people are into drugs and have shit jobs etc.
>>47881106
I read this post in Linkara's voice.
Then I vomited.
>>47881141
>All the slutty people are into drugs
Oh heavens, not the maryhuana! How sinful!
>>47881170
Real drugs, heroin and shit.
>>47881170
Can you stop whining about the other anon's morals?
>>47881219
>Stop harassing the moralfag!
Ah, the sweet smell of summer.
>>47881205
Those people who are down and out, using sex as a means to fuel their self destructive habits are NOT what >>47880095 is talking about, mang.
Yeah, it really is about what kind of group you're with OP.
Hell, I had a 4 session campaign that cheered the only two human characters to ship eachother.
At the end of the last session, while the town was getting rampaged by a tribe of gnolls lead by a nihlistic wizard gnoll serving the god of entropy, we we're the only two that were not dying or dead, I was on a boat about to head down stream, and then the kiss happened.
I'll romance anyone with any character. It doesn't matter to me. And hell, if I see anyone doing the same thing I'll cheer them on! In fact, in my current party (not the same people), the war-forged barbarian is kind of a cutie...
>>47881253
Well hey, if you're just here to harass him at least he knows not to engage you now.
>>47871517
The problem is that you're not nearly as charming as you think you are.
>>47881141
Now, is it all the sluts are into drugs or all the druggies are into lots of casual sex?
>>47880095
I think most people's objections are based on decency morality.
Most of the time being a slut doesn't harm others, but to many people it just feel wrong at some level.
This is the same level of morality that operates when you think sex with animals or with family is wrong. If both parties are consenting and protection is used, there is no harm in either fucking an animal of someone in you family. Yet I think most of us can agree that both those acts are not something you should do.
Now being a slut is of course not as extreme as the other two examples, but I can imagine that for some people it would fall in the same category of moral indecency.
>>47882249
Bestiality is animal abuse, because they cannot consent. Same with the underage.
>>47876746
Hahahaha grampa you don't get to call people oriental anymore.
You're on the wrong side of history here, Adolph. It is your strain of white male privilege that is on the way out.
>>47882297
It was just an example, but you get the idea.
The incest one still works though.
Also, my intention was not really to focus on these examples, since that seems to imply that being a slut and bestiality/incest are on the same level.
All I was trying to say is that not all types of morality are based on harm avoidance.
>>47882249
BECAUSE SOMEONE TOLD ME SO!
>>47882426
That sort of morality is based on religious tradition. You are just saying "it's wrong because people say it's wrong." That's a bullshit argument made by dummies.
Try harder.
>>47882418
1. That "rebuttal" made no sense.
2. Either white men are the cause of all problems and auper powerful, or they areon thir way out and thus can't be the root of all evil. Can't have it be both ways.
>>47882297
I always felt that was kind of stupid. They don't consent to being eaten either, but we're ok with that.
>>47882582
Because we're omnivores that naturally have to eat meat.
>>47882418
1. I'm not white.
2. I'm not straight.
3. I'm not Christian.
What now? You sit there whining about me having 'white privilege' when I'm the opposite of those poor people you hate so much. Aren't you honor bound to commit suicide now for mislabeling me or something?
>>47882426
>It was just an example
It was such a bad example that I have no idea what kind of point you were trying to make. Fucking animals is never "without harm". But good luck explaining to your vet all the blood in your dog's vagina cause by a dick four times bigger than would ever fit.
>>47882657
I think human dicks are smaller than horse dicks. Also pretty sure that the human is in more danger then as well. So if all the risk and harm is on the human, why is it wrong?
You're also assuming that its a human male on an animal. How does a male dog get hurt from humping a human? Is the male dog mounting a human not a form of consent?
Other than "because it's wrong" no one has ever explained how a human woman getting it on with animals is wrong.
inb4 ad hominem on me
>>47882532
>>47882501
I think most non-religious people would also agree on incest and bestiality being wrong. But that might also be due to the path dependency of most religious institutions and the effect that those institutions have on a culture, even after they're gone.
Personally I think it's mostly biological. We might have invented condoms and stuff to prevent negative effects of certain acts, but our brains are still wired through evolution to think badly of things like incest.
Decency morality is basically pic related.
>>47882582
>>47882643
Don't feed the trolls.
>>47871517
> quick tongued, charismatic and dextrous.
OK.
>Apparently though flirting with barmaid and noble alike, charming purses
Yeah, that's fine.
>and legs wide open
Could be too far, depending when you fade to black or how explicit you are about it.
>and suggesting we lay, not slay, foes is a sign of being a "weirdo".
Yes you sick fuck.
Dirty jokes depend on the company. If the store has kids shopping in it, or worse, MOTHERS of kids, then you can whip out the dirty jokes.
And all that's assuming you're actually funny. I could see it being something more like:
"Ok guys, there's orcs ahead with archers up on the ridge"
"They look like pigs... We should fuck'em"
> Sex is natural and the fact I am being told I am weird for playing a sexually confident male
oh god, keep it in your pants dude.
>>47882657
>I have no idea what kind of point you were trying to make
I know, it shows.
It looks like you just want to talk about animal sex
>>47882889
>then you can whip out the dirty jokes.
I have a feeling you don't know what "whip out" means.
>>47871684
Bruh you have no idea how hard that gets me. When the GM tells me we gotta kill goblins I can't help but lift the table a few inches.
>>47882788
We don't let humans do unnecessary shit that hurts themselves either if we can help it. Not to mention that most of you horsefuckers are assaulting someone elses property.
>>47883078
Cigarettes.
>>47883342
>If we can help it
Fighting against decades of culture and momentum isn't easy, but they're restricting it as much as they can.
>>47882934
HOLY SHIT! A sexual innuendo? OH NOES! I'll just have to censor everything I say to avoid all possible sexual innuendos in the future...
That'll do it.
>>47883683
Yes, you definitely don't know what it means. Because in context, it makes that sentence clause say the opposite of what the two preceding it imply. Unless you think that the mothers of small children like it when people talk about sex around their kids.
>>47883734
>Yes, you definitely don't know what it means
Seriously?
Dicks. You whip out your dick. Because it's long and lasso like. Do you really think no one here has watched blazing saddles?
It's a fucking metaphor you nimrod. I'm not suggesting he literally use his dick to launch his dirty jokes as some sort of verbal/physical sex-a-pult.
Just what the fuck are you.... smoke....
...
>then you can ----'t----- whip out the dirty jokes.
ah. Yes. There we go.
Carry on.
>>47883969
Yes, a dick is a thing you can whip out. Nobody contested that. Although personally my dick, while long, is also thick and sturdy, more like a tree trunk than a lasso. I'd also like to highlight the fact that to "whip out" is a fairly common phrase, commonly applied to pretty much anything regardless of whip-like or dick-like attributes, and is therefore an idiom rather than a metaphor.
It seems I may have misdiagnosed the error. Regardless, we are now in agreement about the proper construction of this sentence and an incredibly important problem has been solved amicably. The UN should hire us.
>>47883364
Nah, man. Stopping someone from hurting themself isn't what people try to do. That's not a motivator for legislation. Greed or religion(greed) is what gets it done. We don't stop people from fucking horses because a spasm can pinch a man's dick off or because a horse dick can literally impale a woman, we do it because when we were young we were told fucking animals is bad, m'kay?
>>47885333
I'm fairly certain nobody told me fucking animals was bad when I was young, probably because they never HAD to. Fucking animals is not something that the majority of humans have any urge to do, biological or otherwise. As a matter of fact, it's an anomaly, entirely contrary to our base animal urges (mate with members of the species, leave offspring), which is why both religion and common societal mores frown upon it (with very few exceptions).
>>47876636
>implying /tg/ was ever good
>implying it was ever not a containment board for 40Kids
>>47888025
>all of /tg/ is 40k
Wow, kill yourself anytime.
>>47888043
>he says when 40k pics and memes get posted in non-40k threads all the time
>he says when 40k threads take up more of the board on a regular basis than quests, generals, and Magic combined ever did at their peak
>>47888173
>I'm new
>>47885333
Late to the party here, but since animals are possessions (and the owner can charge for their services) wouldn't greed dictate you make animal fucking legal. There's definitely money that can be made in the animal fucking business - money that can then be taxed.
Same with regular prostitution (which is illegal in many places) and slavery. Greed is clearly not the only motivator.
>>47874197
Pretty much this.
>>47888173
>I post 40k pics while I browse /pol/ and /b/
>I feel insecure because D&D was always and will always be bigger than 40k
You 40kids are adorable, yet sad.
>>47888276
I said greed and religion.
>>47887576
There is a lot of stuff that no one explicitly tells you is good or bad, but you know it anyway. There's a term for subconsciously learning stuff from society but hell if I can remember what it is. Anyway that's how morality works. So, yes, you probably have never had anyone say to you explicitly "don't fuck animals, it's wrong," but you picked it up anyway. Not having an urge to do something and not doing it because it's wrong are different things.
>>47871517
If they ask you to stop then you either stop or you find a new group. It's as simple as that. Whether you are the ultimate shitlord for playing the stupid sexy bard trope is irrelevant.
>>47871517
You lack self awareness. The other players clearly don't want to RP the other side of that with you.
>>47871517
>w-why doesn't my group want to ERP with me ;_;
Not everyone wants to listen to you discuss your disgusting neckbeard fantasies, faggot. Keep it in your pants and keep the magical realms on /tg/
Youuuu are the oooocean's grey waaaaves~
>>47896342
Bard done well.
>>47881303
