>>520018
>emails
[email protected] hasn't existed for a while now.

>IRC
They usually ignore you.

>/qa/ complaints
Now that's a laugh. Anybody's free to use /qa/ to say whatever stupid shit they want and all of it gets ignored (unless you win the hiroyuki roulette and he instantly implements your idea, anyway).

>>520018
So it turns out anti-questfags have admitted to samefagging QA threads and emails for years in order to get /qst/ made.
Thank you for verifying that point.

Can you guys please stop shitposting whining threads all over /tg/? They keep getting deleted, which is nice, but they're still annoying.

>>520018
>I made it again guys xD

>>520018
>>>>/qst/60736
>>I think the solution is simple, if you want quests to stay /tg/ you just have to bug the Mods for years with emails, IRC & /qa/ complaints until they give in.

>t-they're planning to do the same shit we did, b-ban they!

>>520018
>The Quest users there are planning raids of /tg/
Nope.

>/qa/, mod emails.
How dare they submit feedback through the proper channels.

>Plus we've seen them chase down QMs that post on /qst/ and chase them back to /tg/.
One guy, in one quest, as far as I'm aware. Not proper to use pluralization there, especially since a pair of significantly larger QMs ran without issue.

>>520025

>The mods have no ability to verify IP addresses on their website
>Questfag defense force in charge of having a single functioning neuron in their brains

>>520034
see
>>520020
Sorry anon, the truth is out.

Also,
>8 IPs
>6 of them telling OP he's a retard
muh silent majority, amirite?

>>520025
>So it turns out anti-questfags have admitted to samefagging QA threads

/qa/ has LITERALLY only existed in it's current state since Hiro took charge you dumb fucking newfag.

How could you "samefag" something for years that doesn't exist for years?

>>520018
Why are they so mad?

>>520043
read the second half of the post, same-friend.

>>520037
>Some fag links this thread to /qst/ feedback where only the most autistic questfags hang out
>Turns out this is most of them
>Show up to valiantly defend their right to shitpost unrelated content on /tg/ by posting a screencap of dubious origins and claim mods can't verify IP addresses on their own website

Jesus.

>>520044
Because the joke got stale.

>>520046
Says the guy constantly posting threads that get deleted on /tg/.
Why do you guys do that, anyway?

https://desustorage.org/tg/search/text/qst/deleted/deleted/

>>520044
Because pissbabbies like op have whined for literal years about threads they don't like, then shitpost like no tomorrow when a manager decides he wants to make a new board because hey check this shit out I can make boards. It's hard to tell if it's actually because of the pissbabby whinging or not, since the manager didn't mention it at all, but the antiquestfags are certainly circlejerking like nazimod got to herd everyone into the gas chamber.

>>520049

It's almost as if there is a vast number of people who think questfags should be gassed already. Clearly enough of them that the mods have actually made a board for you.

All that's left is to lock the door behind you as you get shoved into the gas chamber and start deleting and banning people for posting quests on /tg/. Sadly, the mods seem unwilling to go that far, but given the success /qst/ is enjoying, it will hopefully come soon.

>>520051
Man, they've been whining since the first quest threads months after /tg/ got made.
I never actually figured the mods would cave to it.

>>520053
>Vast number
But never more than a dozen at a time, apparently.
Maybe they work in shifts?

>>520051
>pissbabbies

Nice, I see that questfaggotry is popular with the tumblr crowd. No surprises there, honestly, questfags have always primarily been cross siters.

>>520053
>vast
>minority of IPs in the thread
topkek
Also, if you thought that was true, you wouldn't even give a shit about questfags using the same measures to get back on the board.

>>520044
>quests are threads where one writefag writes a fanfic and takes votes on what to write next
>years ago quests got moved to /tg/
>quests take up a huge chunk of /tg/s catalog and are always on the front page
>people have wanted them gone for years
>mods always deleted complaints
>last week the Mods finally made a quest board
>The questfags are having a mental breakdown, saying that only 12 people have been complaining about quests for almost a decade and throwing a tantrum, as well as doing damage control

see: this thread

Most Quest related stuff is actually overseen by a group of offsite posters https://desustorage.org/tg/thread/46989715/
and there is a list of accepted "Quest Masters" who communicate through twitter.

Quests are basically a huge circlejerk that has nothing to do with /tg/, and they're all mad that people don't want their sekrit club to be on the board anymore.

>>520057
>minority of IPs in the thread

>Link thread to a thread full of autistic questfags
>"HAHAHA LOOK AT ALL THE AUTISTIC QUESTFAGS IN THIS THREAD NOW, WE OUTNUMBER YOU"

?

>>520056
>anyone who is sick of constant shitpost threads that are deleted immediately is a questfag
Seriously, where do you guys get off making rule 1 violations over and over?

>>520056
Oh, going straight to "people I disagree with must be alien". Normally that one is saved for later on in the argument.

>>520056
>only lounging in one ocean of piss

Check out this loser, he thinks he's so cool because he only sips 'premium' piss

>>520050
wow you sure did prove that people don't want quests on /tg/

>>520061

>Use phraseology from a different website
>Complain when people notice and point out that you must be from a different website

?

>>520059
Sure is weird how every instance where this comes up, people who don't mind quests outnumber antiquestfags.

>>520059
Did you link it there so you could use that as an excuse?

Because you were already getting negative replies before that link happened.

>>520051
>pissbabbies

Oh my god are Questfags really Tumblrites too?

>>520064
Well, they proved that shitposters don't want it on /tg/.

>>520060
Because that's the only way they can orgasm.

>>520068
>IP number has not increased
>still the same 3 antiquestfags circlejerking against 9 neutrals or questfags
topkek

>>520069

>Anyone who wants this unrelated content full of circle jerking narcissists off of their board is a shitposter!

Well when you put it like that, I guess you're right.

>>520058
>And have mechanics
>After /a/ complained when they drifted out of /tg/. Then the ones that moved all died or moved back
>8% of the total board posts over the course of a week and never more than 20 threads total, even at peak hours
>A small number of people have wanted them gone for years
>Mods always deleted off-topic meta complaints
>A mod made a quest board while also demonstrating a complete lack of subject knowledge
>The unique IP counter and small number of threads made on /q/, /tg/, and /qa/ all indicate that anti-questers are a minority, despite constant, repititous claims to the contrary
Fixed your greentext for you to better represent reality

>>520072
Sorry anon, it seems you are angered that the mods dislike your shitposting on /tg/.
Perhaps you should consider posting content, instead of circlejerking about not muh /tg/ and violating 4chan rules.

>Things I've learned today: namecalling can only be done with site-approved insults

Very educational thread, 10/10 would read again.

>>520075

Yeah, maybe I'll make a gains thread or a car thread or even a desktop thread, since apparently other board's content is quite welcome on /tg/.

>>520077
I see, you are so angry that your not-muh-board circlejerk isn't allowed that you view things that are allowed as against the rules.
Feel free to post those things. You will most likely get them deleted, and possibly banned, but being banned is little issue for your type anyway.

>>520055
>muh 12 people

are you insane

>>520077
But those are all /tg/ threads, you make it sound like you don't like wargames set in more modern or futuristic times.

>>520080
apparently only 3 people, given this thread's IP tracker.

>>520077
If it's in a /tg/ form, sure.
Gains: The boardgame would be acceptable. desktop circlejerk RPG would be acceptable. A thread about cars in /tg/ games (Or even a specific /tg/ game) would be acceptable.
As long as it's in the form of a game that is not of the vidya variety. There is no minimum rules complexity or anti-weeb rule, so go nuts.

>>520079

Show me the rule that says no gains threads on /tg/, Anon.

Checkmate :^)

>>520080
Insane to think it breaks one digit, apparently.

>>520084
I'd rather just wait for you to make the thread.

>>520083
I think it was called Car Lesbians or something?

>>520080
It's a rough number, but it pans out based on archive diving. Even current threads rarely get more than a handful of IPs in favor of getting rid of quests. Even that /qst/ thread that was getting "victory lap" posts was only getting them in short bursts that directly correlated to the previous "victory lap" posts being deleted in a perfect 1:1 ratio.

>>520089
Oh, and the majority never actually comes out either way. The most active, non-filterable metathreads on /tg/ never topped 40 unique IPs total, and that was with people shouting back and forth constantly.
Which lends further credence to the stance that most of /tg/ doesn't give a fuck either way.

>>520086
Crap now I have to find that one 40k picture.

>>520086

>B-b-b-b-b-but quest threads should be allowed even though they have their own board now! Because posting on more than one board offends me on a personal level!!!

Questfags are pathetic.

>>520085
>>520055

>Somewhere in a volcanic lair in an undisclosed location, Dr Wiley relentlessly resets the router on his hypercomputer so he can samefag hundreds of times to the moderators so he can spoof his IP and fool them into thinking more than one person wants quests off of /tg/
>This is literally what questfags believe

>>520095
>But quests! when asked why YOU shitpost
Shitposters are pathetic.

Why do you constantly post off topic metathreads that get deleted?
Why do you disagree with mod rulings?
Why do you want /tg/ related content out of /tg/?

It's my theory that anti-questfags simply want to get as far away from any actual tabletop as possible, as they publically admit to wanting to ship off quests, generals, and most things that have consistent discussion on actual play or what might be played.

>>520095
At least try to misrepresent their statements in a way that seems remotely accurate, Wily.

>>520100
Oh, and storytimes.
I forgot how often they went on about how they wanted storytimes gone.

>>520095
Except he doesn't, because he's a dumb faggot who can't even into samefagging and can't even get a unique IP count up. Because he doesn't represent most, or even some of /tg/. He only represents himself. Some other people hold a similar stance and try to pretend that their echoing comments = more voices, but they still don't samefag well and can't ever get hard numbers in their favor in any way. So they use extreme amounts of hyperbole, like saying that 5 threads is "more than half the board", or that the front page is literally the most important thing ever and any thread that isn't constantly on the front page instantly drops down to page 11 because of the mystical power of the front page threads pushing them all the way down in one masterful stroke.

>>520095
We've actually agreed that it's the Majestic 12.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majestic_12

Reptilians are trying to kill Quests! What can we do to stop them?!?!?!?!

>>520095
for EIGHT YEARS STRAIGHT doctor wiley has done this

>>520105
He's waiting for his new set of robot master AIs to finish compiling.

>>520100
>It's my theory that anti-questfags simply want to get as far away from any actual tabletop as possible

your theory is fucking stupid and has no basis in reality

furthermore

>quests
>things that have consistent discussion on actual play or what might be played.
Quests are not a Traditional Game.

>>520107
By what metric?

>>520106
Clearly. We all thought he hated Megaman, but Quests are his real target!!!

>>520107
The theory seems backed by every anti-quest poster.
Especially the ones arguing that /tg/ content isn't /tg/ content.
It seems they want anything that involves actual play or talking about actual play gone.

>>520112
QUESTS ARE NOT TRADITIONAL GAMES

THEY ARE FANFICS WITH "VOTES"

THEY ARE NARCISSISTIC CIRCLEJERKS.

THEY BELONG ON FANFICTION.NET

>>520111
I almost want to make a romhack of this now.

>>520113
Of course, this fanfic in an original setting with RPG mechanics and roleplaying.
The idea that quests aren't traditional games is laughable at this point.

>>520112
Remember. /tg/ stuff isn't /tg/ because I say it isn't /tg/.

>>520093
I wonder why? The mods fucking delete metathreads instantly

>>520100
>nobody hates quests, even though there are constant anti-quest metathreads
>furthermore, anti-quest metathreads don't count as being anti-quest, because they are metathreads and therefore off-topic

>Why do you disagree with mod rulings?
Why do YOU disagree with mods creating a quest board for you?

>>520113
Most quests aren't based on pre-existing media and have distinct game mechanics that directly affect the ongoing game. Some of them literally use commercial RPG mechanics. There was at least one that was running on Pathfinder.

>>520119
>deflecting the question
Why did you shitpost against the mod rulings for a period of eight years?
Why do you shitpost against mod rulings to this day?
Why do you complain on /qa/ when the mods don't kick quests out?
Why do you hate the mods, and playing games, so much?

>>520119
>The mods fucking delete metathreads instantly
Confirmed for not seeing any metathreads on /tg/ before /qst/ was made. Most of the time, they'd linger long enough to hit autosage and fall off of page 10.

>>520123
actually, as another guy entirely, that really depended on if you were in australia time or not.
Daytime, they got deleted pretty quick.
Nighttime, they stick until morning.

>>520113
>QUESTS ARE NOT TRADITIONAL GAMES
Says you.

>THEY ARE FANFICS WITH "VOTES"
Every campaign in a setting that the GM didn't write themselves is a fanfic. A lot of quests use original settings anyway, fail to see how they're a fanfic of anything.

>THEY ARE NARCISSISTIC CIRCLEJERKS.
In what way? Players disagree all the time.

>>520116
>Roleplaying
But it's not. The people in the threads aren't playing a role. They're voting on what the writer writes.

> this fanfic in an original setting
Like DBZ, Sailor Moon, Mortal Kombat, Kancolle, Overlord, Animu Highschool, Madoka, Pokemon, Kantai Collection, Persona, Girls und Panzer, Wrestling, Gundam, Strike Witches, Megami Tensei, Star Wars, Neptunia, Batman, Bleach, Megaman, Harem Anime, Harry Potter, "Harry Potter Nasuverse", and all those other Totally 100% /tg/ related topics that Quests are about?

Let's look at this rationally.
There's nothing that seperates a quest thread from everyone is john, other than occasionally having even more mechanics layered on top.
So the idea that quests aren't traditional games is flawed based on this.

Let's look at the next argument in this line of thought: Games shouldn't be played on /tg/, even if they are related. /tg/ should be for discussion of games, not games themselves.

I feel like I have to make this step for the anti-quest poster, because he is too slow to make it for himself.
>>520129
you're welcome anon, I helped you dig yourself out of your pit.

>>520124
>>520123
It also depended on how overt they are. ALL CAPS will get any thread deleted quick if an unfamiliar mod is glancing through the queue. A reasonable starting post will be left to mods/janitors that are more familiar with /tg/.

>>520123
Bull fucking shit you spazmatic faggt. I've made several myself. They N E V E R last longer than ten minutes.

>>520129
Players have direct input into what the character does. Most quests have write-ins, not rigid votes.

I've played RPG versions of most of those franchise you list. I don't believe that I was not really playing an RPG just because it was set in a Gundam setting.

>>520135
like people say, it depends how obvious you are about it and whether you post it during australia times when mods are asleep and shitposters come out to play.

>>520129
I guess you also want to ban the TTRPGs made either directly in or heavily based on those ideas/settings, then?

>>520139
>it depends how obvious you are about it

Oh okay, so you're trying to say "threads complaining about quests last until autosage" by counting somebody making an offhanded comment insulting quests as an anti-quest thread.

That's about the level of logic twisting I'd expect from you faggots.

>>520142
Developing a TTG != ERP

>>520143
>Some threads can sneak by if they are less obvious
>SOMEONE MAKING AN OFFHAND COMMENT INSULTING QUESTS THEN?!?

Holy shit, that amount of word twisting in a post complaining about word twisting.
You're the hypocrite of the hour, anon. That's fucking impressive.

>>520146
Doesn't matter, apparently being a dragonball TTRPG is enough for
>>520129
to want it kicked off the board.

>>520146
Stop digging yourself deeper, you're going to hit magma.

>>520157

Do you think you've somehow made a point?

>>520411
More of one than the three antiquestfags in the thread have.

>>520416
Have you somehow killed the other nine?

>>520418
The other nine did their victory laps and got bored when /qst/ was announced, I guess. There have only been three this thread.

/qst/ sticky was removed. I guess the mods are tired of giving shitposters safe harbor

>>520107
Fuck, I guess Everyone is John isn't /tg/, but Minecraft and SS13 are

>>520020
It's so strange to me now to see screenshots of posts that I know were taken from a CRT monitor (text is not anti-aliased). It speaks to the type of person who posted it. Neither good nor bad, but it informs.

>>520941
Everyone is John is a game. Quests are written-to-order fiction

>>522064
>This one thing where a group of people get together and control the actions of a fictional character is a game
>This other thing where a group of people get together and control the actions of a fictional character is written-to-order fiction

Make up your mind.

>>520018
>infest
Just because you don't like them doesn't mean that quests aren't one of the objective best content produced on this site.
Anyway, after they inevitably change the 3-day bump limiter to 1 day of no OP posting, we wait a month or two and all QMs will convert.
It's just a matter of time.

>>522084
>Anyway, after they inevitably change the 3-day bump limiter to 1 day of no OP posting
Happy waiting, they unstickied the feedback thread, and hadn't posted in it for a few days anyway.

>>522084
>Anyway, after they inevitably change the 3-day bump limiter to 1 day of no OP posting, we wait a month or two and all QMs will convert.
/tg/ will probably stop seeing the explicitly anime quests, but I doubt the /tg/ centric quests will convert.

>>522084
>>doesn't mean that quests aren't one of the objective best content produced on this site.

Yes, Mahou Shonen Butler Waifu Quest was amazing premium content.

>>523524
>double quoting

What is this shit, /v/? I knew someone who used to double quote on AIM and shit as a way of "trolling". He eventually stopped when he realized nobody was giving him any attention.

>>523533
>>counting meme arrows

>>522084
>that quests aren't one of the objective best content produced on this site.

but they arent

>>522075
Nice false equivalence, questfag. There is no agency in a quest. There is no control. It's just fiction.

>>523606
>There is no control.
Welcome to strawman quest, where everything is made up and the votes don't matter?

I don't know what shitty quests you've looked at just barely enough to justify your shitty opinion, but the whole reason it's a quest and not just a writefag thread is that the voters have agency in deciding what happens.

>>523606
>there's potential railroading, so it belongs off of /tg/
Say goodbye to literally every RPG ever made. The GM can just tell you that what you want to do doesn't matter and take control of your character, so it's not a real /tg/ game.

>>523610
But it is a writefag thread

Every thread on this subject summarized

>I don't like quests
Well I do
>Well maybe we'd both be happy if you had your own board, since you could have quests and also browse /tg/
No
>Why not?
Because no one else will come to read quests
>Well you've said before the people who like quests outnumber the people who don't like quests, so why won't they browse 2 boards?
Because they won't see them
>Well you've also mentioned repeatedly that everyone on /tg/ should use the catalog and filters, can't people who like quests take a glance through the /qst/ catalog to find quests they might like?
...

The argument from here on out devolves into a deranged conspiracy theory about anti-questfags only being 3 people who campaigned for years to have /qst/ created so... questfags could have their cake and eat it too? So quests would have a home away from anti-questfags on /tg/, wouldn't continue to draw shitposting and hate and be able to just do their quest thing in peace so every party is satisfied? I just don't get why questfags are so mad.

>>524080
Quests saw more shitposting in the week after /qst/ was made than in the two years leading up to it combined.

>>524083

And it will likely die away to almost nothing if they just moved to /qst/. Out of sight out mind.

I just can't see an argument where the creation of /qst/ doesn't serve everyone involved here.

>>524085
I'll bet you haven't even read the feedback thread while it was still up.

>>524087

I dropped in a few times. The only real argument I saw against the move, besides "we shouldn't have to" which is weird because they're literally being given a space to themselves, was something about people not seeing them. The claim was the quest's readership would go down because they had this odd impression that when you increase the visibility of a thing, fewer people want to see it. /qst/ has a place on the front page, it has a main page board link. People who want to participate in quests can all see them now, not just the people who knew about quests on /tg/. I can't count the number of times that people even on /qa/ have asked what quests even are.

So the people browsing /tg/ who like quests can check through the /qst/ catalog on a separate tab once in a while to see if a quest they want to participate in is up and also have a /tg/ tab open. Its even less difficult than filtering quests because there are those QMs who, to this day, refuse to put "quest" in the subject line out of some kind of spite.

So yes, I did look at the feedback thread. I saw only one workable argument and it was bullshit. I could have missed something amidst all the whining and conspiracy theories, and if I have please enlighten me

>>524095
You're assuming that people specifically go looking for quests and don't just stumble onto them.
This is wrong and has always been wrong. Going from a few threads on a board to a three letter combo on the ribbon is not an improvement in visibility.

>>524096
Or even assuming that the front page is relevant anymore to anybody who actually posts on 4chan.

>>524096

You're assuming people on /tg/ who don't already take part in quests suddenly start for no reason, which is equally wrong. The population of people who take part in quests remains the same, they just have to go somewhere else to do it.

What do you even mean by "stumble on them" anyway? Because when I stumble on a thread its through the the default board view, so I see the recent posts which occasionally indicate the thread is more interesting than the OP. But questfags have insisted everyone use the catalog since it came out, so all you see is the first post and title, which can easily be checked by scrolling through the /qst/ catalog quickly once in a while. I still don't see how one can't "stumble on" a quest on /qst/ the same way one stumbles on any other thread of merit.

File: listen here.jpg (5 KB, 207x249) Image search: [Google]

5 KB, 207x249

>113 replies
>1 image

you fucking cunts this is an image board, use it like one

>>524103
Every person I've ever talked about it to said that they got into quests by randomly seeing one while browsing /tg/.
The idea that people who quest are alien to the rest of /tg/ is also wrong.
You can't stumble onto a quest on /qst/ because that would require you to stumble onto /qst/ in the first place. People don't randomly go onto boards that they aren't already interested in unless they misclick. There is no outside draw to /qst/. Quests don't really exist outside of 4chan and a couple of sites that tried to break off of 4chan and .
And are you really saying that you've never gone into a thread because of the OP? Because I doubt it very much.

>>524108

>Started browsing /a/ one day out of curiosity, I liked anime but never actually used /a/, now I drop by once every couple days
>Started browsing /co/ because I saw all the /co/mblr shitposting and wanted to see how bad it was, stayed because they do storytime threads and I wasn't aware of that
>Still occasionally drop by /sci/, /g/, and /lit/ out of curiosity as to whats new and interesting
>"homeboard" is /tg/, with a bit of /v/

People do start browsing other boards with more than a misclick. 4chan is not that big. And not everyone sticks to their little clubs.

>>524108

And I'm not saying I've never gone into a thread because of the OP, I'm saying that frequently I've also gone into threads because of the recent posts, which I don't see in the catalog. I am saying, however, that I've never gone into a quest thread because of the OP. I don't really like quest threads.

>>524110
>I liked anime
And that is why you go to /a/
>>Started browsing /co/ because I saw all the /co/mblr shitposting
/co/ leaking isn't exactly a stellar example you want to be using if your platform is getting quests to stay in a containment board and you wouldn't have gone there if it wasn't leaking into other places.
>Still occasionally drop by /sci/, /g/, and /lit/
Topic boards that have real world topics.
>"homeboard" is /tg/, with a bit of /v/
Both of which are topic boards that have outside draws, such as the games that you play.

Every single one of your examples was prompted by an outside draw. Quests don't have an outside draw because they're a local derivative of RPGs that don't exist off of 4chan.

File: when the donuts are just right.png (456 KB, 1280x824) Image search: [Google]

456 KB, 1280x824

>>524107
Contributing.

>>524114

So you're saying that collaborative storytelling, interesting short fiction essentially, doesn't have an outside draw?

You're literally saying that quests can't survive on their own. You are making the claim, that the only reason that quests even exists is a parasitism with /tg/'s userbase. Even though, quests of various forms were shunted from other boards onto /tg/ mid 2013-2014.

You have even less faith in the medium than I do. And I fucking hate them.

Also
>/qst/ - quests
>Not a topic board for quests no different than /sci/ is for science
I don't follow. We could rename it "/qst/ - forum games" and make it more obvious for people to get whats going on, and take up CYOA and Risk threads and whatnot to increase traffic, but you still haven't shown that viewership would actually drop from the move. Simply that maybe it won't increase.

>>524118
>parasitism
Every time. Can't parasite yourself, jackass.
The quests that were shunted from other boards numbered less than two dozen and universally fucked off back to their home boards or died off within months.
It's not a topic board like /sci/, because science is a thing that exists outside of 4chan and its derivative sites.
The number of people who dedicatedly follow even a single quest is hilariously small (Don't take this to mean that the strawman of everyone liking quests is false, since it was never the argument being made in the first place) and the rest of a quest's players are incidental.
Quests are not big enough for their own board. Even now, /qst/ is clogged with dead quests that will never get a second thread because actually running a quest is hard and not many people want to do it more than once. I don't have faith in the medium surviving in what amounts to a vacuum and neither should you.

>>524123
Right now, the most active thread on /qst/ is a fucking off-topic risk thread. In less than two hours it has gained more posts than most of the quests that have been up for days.

>>524123
Hell, can any topic on /tg/ survive with a board dedicated to that one topic and nothing else?

>>524127
40k, D&D, and MtG miiiiiiight be able to, in a slow kind of way.
/40k/ would fill up with memes, /dnd/ would fill up with arguments over whether Pathfinder counts and /mtg/ would complain about the meta of different formats and call each other bad at the game.

>>524127
Warhammer, but that doesn't count.

>>524129
But would they be able to fill up a full 150 thread board and at least be a third as active as /tg/ before the split?

>>524133
The new board smell guarantees it for the first week or two. After that, probably not.
Endless variations on "excuse me commissar" "eldar slave wat do" and classic "HERESY!!!1!" isn't exactly what I would call worthwhile content, but it'd be there, taking up otherwise unused space on a mostly dead and pointless board.

File: Screenshot from 2016-05-08 03:32:36.png (10 KB, 477x95) Image search: [Google]

10 KB, 477x95

>>524123

>The number of people who dedicatedly follow even a single quest is hilariously small and the rest of a quest's players are incidental.
Lets neither of us pretend that we have actual figures. You don't have any more knowledge of the actual percentage of religious followers of quests or drop in viewers or anything else than I have of anti or pro questfags. I haven't brought numbers into this for a reason.

> Even now, /qst/ is clogged with dead quests
But how can a board be "clogged" with threads? All you must do is create a new one and an old one is dropped off. Isn't that the advice that anti-questfags have been given since this argument started? That quests could hardly clog a board since you just have to make threads that you like and ignore the ones you don't? Can't you follow the same advice with dead threads?

On top of this, right now you'd get about 9 more active quests if the QMs would just move over to /qst/ instead of hanging around /tg/. The QMs are, perhaps unintentionally, sabotaging the new board by not making the move. If people know where to look to get their quest fun then they'll go there. But as it stands they don't have to use /qst/ because these QMs are still active on /tg/ for some reason.

>>524135
>But how can a board be "clogged" with threads?
That's a question I ask every time I see an anti-quester saying that quests "clog" /tg/.

>>524135
>But how can a board be "clogged" with threads?
They clog it in the sense that they are dead threads that don't contribute anything.
If /qst/ hadn't been created, they would not exist. As dumb as it sounds, they're basically not "real" threads. Without /qst/, there would just be the 5-15 quests on /tg/. Creating the board hasn't done anything useful. Even if those /tg/ quests had moved, the number of actually productive (for lack of a better word) quests wouldn't increase. Again, running a quest is hard, and doing it in a place with less visibility isn't going to make it any easier or better. There's a distinct limit to how many quests can actually get off the ground and that limit is how many people are actually willing to seriously run a quest.
/qst/ has done nothing good except create more stupid arguments. Even if it had been implemented well (Which it wasn't. Took them more than 24 hours to get it into an even halfway decent state ruleswise, and then even longer to fix the technical errors), it doesn't benefit quests in any way and might actually hurt them.

>>524141
It also still doesn't fix the actual issue of blatant shitpost threads that push other threads off the board. Spoony, redeemed succubus, and the resurgence in elf slave come to mind. Hell, there were 4 spoony threads and 1 succubus thread up at the same time earlier.

>>524137

I just think they should have their own board. I don't like them its a pain in the ass to filter them. I've voiced my opinion in one or two meta threads that others started, and once emailed moot (god rest his soul) about it. I went looking on /qa/ to see if someone knew why quest threads were still on /tg/, and here I am.

I also have a feeling that quests are related to the general thread problem as well.

>>524143
The other point is that getting rid of a certain kind of thread won't actually increase the activity in any other kind of thread (Shitposting or good) because /tg/ (or any board) is not 100% efficient. There are always threads that are just lulling along or autosaging. Plenty of threads fall off from a lack of posting. So adding 10 extra "normal" threads won't actually increase the amount of good (or bad) content being posted. The number of active threads won't increase. If nobody wanted to talk about a certain topic while quests were on the board (Chess is a good example, because it never gets talked about seriously), they still aren't going to want to talk about that topic with quests gone.
Board activity is not zero sum until the entire board, all 150 threads, get used to the maximum possible amount, which is simply not going to happen.

>>524144
I filter out mtg and you don't see me calling for its removal. Don't be so selfish.

>>524141

So you make the claim that a short one shot quest isn't a "real" quest? So those people's fun isn't real fun? That you and those QMs from /tg/ have monopoly on the definition of quest? Or only a quest with multiple entries can be "good" or "real"?

/tg/ was forced to change to accommodate all sorts of threads, from quests to CYOA to civ threads to generals. And you can't change to accommodate the short one shots?

>Took them more than 24 hours to get it into an even halfway decent state ruleswise
A whole 24 hours! By jesus! Whatever will we do with that one single day that wasn't exactly perfectly to your liking! Its almost like the mods needed feedback, which a thread was created for and used for that purpose to tweak the board so as many people as possible were happy with the result!

>>524151
>So you make the claim that a short one shot quest isn't a "real" quest?
I make the claim that a single thread that gets abandoned halfway through isn't a "real" quest.
Your strawman is amusing though.
>A whole 24 hours! By jesus! Whatever will we do with that one single day that wasn't exactly perfectly to your liking! Its almost like the mods needed feedback
Too bad he only took feedback after being yelled at because he didn't actually know what he was talking about and could only cite a handful of the most well known quests from years ago after claiming to know the subject matter and all of his initial rules were entirely inappropriate for the format.

>>524148

MTG was around when I started browsing /tg/ in 2007. Quests weren't, at least not in their present form, despite the historical revisionism about them.

>>524155
So you're saying that /tg/ should only be for games that existed before 2007? Because that's an awful lot of games cut out.

>>524155
Age isn't a very useful indicator of what is or isn't /tg/. We're not talking about /tgr/ here.

>>524154

>I make the claim that a single thread that gets abandoned halfway through isn't a "real" quest.
You're still restricting the definition of quest to suit your argument. As the board rules state "collaborative storytelling" is what a quest is. Those fit that definition, as well as every quest on /tg/

>could only cite a handful of the most well known quests from years ago after claiming to know the subject matter
Oh jeese the mods are out of touch. Next you'll be telling me that water is wet. Just because the guy doesn't follow current quests or make changes the second they're proposed doesn't mean he can't respond to feedback. Its not like he said "here's your fucking board faggots now shut up and ship out" like mods of old used to.

>>524164
You're still fighting that strawman I see.
Those wouldn't exist without /qst/. They literally only exist because of the new board smell. If quests had just been left alone, there would be very few of them.
All they indicate is that a new board attracted /b/ and /s4s/ posters, which, to use your own phrase, is like saying that water is wet. The number of active and ongoing quests hasn't gone up and wouldn't have gone up if every quest was pushed off of /tg/. /qst/ has done nothing good for anyone except a certain subset of trolls who have all kinds of new bait and a few whiners who have jizzed themselves at the idea that the "not muh /tg/" threads might be going away soon. And neither of those kinds of people deserve to get what they want.

>>524160
>>524162

I'm saying that quests were a product of a small subset of /tg/'s population. This small subset has grown like a tumor and made it so small single topic discussion threads cannot exist because they don't attract any attention. In the same way questfags complain that no one will see them on the new board those single topic discussion threads were buried beneath quests back when the catalog didn't exist. And then the generals took over to fill that niche. And now that the catalog exists you can't have short single topic discussion or question threads anymore because generals took over.

I want quests to leave so we can start working on getting the generals dismantled. /tg/ is drowning in them. Generals are the biggest cancer on 4chan and /tg/ is patient 2.

>>524169

And you still have yet to show that quest's viewership would go down. Only that it might not go up. You are rejecting a shiny new board with all the bells and whistles you could ask for because you have nothing to gain, besides those shiny bells and whistles and a drop in shitposting.

If you're going to convince me that this move is bad you have to convince me that the total viewership of quests will go down. And you haven't. If the viewership stays the same you win.

>>524172
If 5-10 threads are burying small topic discussion threads, then there's more problems than just quests. Like everyone on the board being ADHD and unable to look down more than three threads from the tippy top.
But you're also completely wrong, so it's okay. I've seen plenty of small topic threads get by just fine in the past year, and many of them could have fit just fine as a single post in a general. /tg/ doesn't have swarms of "take it to the general!"fags like certain other boards.
Right now, I see about three dozen non-general non-quest threads that have over 100 replies.

>>524173
>And you still have yet to show that quest's viewership would go down. Only that it might not go up.
Actually, it's the other way around. All you have is that it might not go down. There's no way that it goes up when the vast majority of quest posters find a quest incidentally from other threads on the board.
>because you have nothing to gain
Precisely. Nothing to gain, and quite a bit to lose.
>and a drop in shitposting.
Shitposting increased exponentially because of the board. Shitposting in the 24 hours after the announcement skyrocketed to heights never seen before. Even on /qst/, shitposting in quests is higher than it ever, EVER was on /tg/.
I can't convince you because you've taken a stance that can't be directly disproved without numbers that nobody can get. You think that most questers actually go looking for quests, as if they were a completely unrelated population from the rest of /tg/, which is not true for myself or anyone else I've ever talked to, but can't actually be proved. If the viewership stays the same, then there won't be enough to sustain a board. Hell, if the viewership DOUBLES, there still won't be enough to sustain a board.

>>524174

The culture shift happened before the catalog. If we'd had the catalog a few years earlier we might have even avoided the general problem altogether.

And yes, most of the board was ADHD enough to only browse the front page. It was a pain the fucking ass to browse more than the first, second and maybe last pages. Hell around 2009 /tg/ was fast enough that you only really had to browse page one.

Hell, maybe I'm just too nostalgic and reaching for ways to bring the old days back, when /tg/ was faster and discussed more topics outside the generals. But I still don't see a reason why questfags are so mad about this move. Like I've said, you have to make the claim that quest viewership will go down, which I haven't seen satisfyingly proven. If it just stays the same you get a shiny new board with some neat tools. No reason not to be happy about that.

>>524181
>Like I've said, you have to make the claim that quest viewership will go down
It's a niche sub-topic of a niche topic that gains new players through osmosis from other, related games (Especially rpgs). Being its own board is not any guarantee of population, as seen by /i/, /po/, /news/ and a bunch of other dead boards.
Again, there's no outside draw to it. It's too niche and too small for an entire board.

>>524186
Adding on to this whole thing, there is also the fact that the board rules literally don't allow anything other than running a quest. We can't discuss shit, we can't have newfags asking if anyone would be interested in their quest idea. Run a quest or get the fuck out.

Even if people do check the place out, there's no way to form a board identity to get people to stay, because we can't live here, we can only show up for work.

>>524186
>we deserve to leech off of another board because reasons
No.
>>524177
/qst/ wasn't made to make you happy, fuckhead. It was made because you and your kind are poison to /tg/

>>524172
>generals

There is not one type of tabletop game. D&D posters and Shadowrun posters and Magic the Gathering posters and Warhammer posters have nothing in common. There is no overlap besides "that guy" threads or worldbuilding. If every game had to split the board with only threads relevant to them, the board would be unusable.

There is literally nothing wrong with generals besides muh board culture, and anyone who says otherwise needs to kill themselves.

>>524512
>It was made because you and your kind are poison to /tg/

Pretty fucking slow poison, considering that while the name hadn't been codified back then, quests were around since year 1 of /tg/.

But hey, who cares about things like logic, you are upset about a thing and therefor the entire world around you must be changed until you don't have to see it anymore. Keep fighting, you'll get your 4chan safe space yet!

>>524512
>le leech meme

>>524562
>We're not leeches
>We just need to put our content on your board because we think nobody will come to our board unless we use your audience
>This is completely different okay

>>524633
>your
>our
>different entities
Good jokes.

>>524641
>Resorting to the all /tg/ers are questfags meme
>Pretending that you aren't a cancerous cyst hanging off of /tg/'s testicles
>Pretending you don't all label your threads quest specifically so that 80% of the board can filter you and browse /tg/ in peace

ur hilarious luv

>>524642
>Resorting to the all questers aren't /tg/ers meme
>Resorting to the all /tg/ers hate quests meme
>Resorting to the "all /tg/ers love quests" strawmeme
Keep 'em coming, jokeman.

>>524642
Who said anything about all of /tg/ liking quests?
Some of /tg/ likes quests and some of /tg/ doesn't like quests. Some of /tg/ likes 40k and some of /tg/ doesn't like 40k. Some of /tg/ likes MtG and some of /tg/ doesn't like MtG. Some of /tg/ likes D&D and some of /tg/ doesn't like D&D.

>>524645

You clearly implied that you believe there is 100% overlap in >>524641

Are you going to post a coherent argument or are you going to keep memeing, leech?

>>524648
There's plenty of overlap. I myself got into quests well after being on /tg/. In fact, I first came onto /tg/ for RPGs pretty much exclusively, then got into Battletech because of a thread on /tg/, and then found a quest that I liked.
The idea that people who play quests come from some outside place is a meme, but it's the only argument you have so you're going to stick to it.

>>524649
>I myself got into quests well after being on /tg/.

No fucking shit Einstein. That's where Moot directed them.

The point is that by now they are their own subculture, and they clearly deserve their own board.

Your counterpoint appears to be that if they don't stay on /tg/, they're going to wither and die.

Putting aside the fact that I don't care and questfags should be gassed and going forward assuming that we actually value questfag's continued presence on this website, how is it not leeching off of another board to develop a subculture and then argue that you cannot exist on your own? That is the literal definition of parasitism. That is what YOU YOURSELF have defined questfags as; too weak to exist on their own without /tg/'s greater audience.

>>524651
>That's where Moot directed them.
Once in 2013.
I know that quests are your boogeyman for everything wrong with /tg/, but they simply aren't that large. No, they aren't strong enough to survive on their own board because they're not a large group. There were literally 5 quests up when the /qst/ announcement was made. They make up roughly 8% of the board's total traffic. That's not enough for an entire board by itself. Quests are not some alien invader to /tg/. They are part of /tg/ and the people who play in quests are /tg/ers.
You don't have any valid points because your stance is just "I don't like thing and want to see the badwrongfun removed from *my* board".

>>524656
And like it was said earlier in the thread, no one /tg/ topic can survive with a board dedicated to itself.

File: 106139e8ba[1].jpg (443 KB, 1090x858) Image search: [Google]

443 KB, 1090x858

>>524656
>No, they aren't strong enough to survive on their own board because they're not a large group.

You mean like they are right this very moment?

I like how you've shifted the argument now as well. You have outright conceded that they are a leech on /tg/, but now you're arguing that it's okay, which is an entirely separate argument. So I am glad to see that we agree on that front. leech.

However, it seems evident that /qst/ is more than surviving on its own, and your tears and resentment over not being wanted on /tg/ is for naught.

Hopefully the mods will see this and start moving the existing quest threads on /tg/ to their appropriate space.

>>524662
New board smell.
>You have outright conceded that they are a leech on /tg/
>Quests are not some alien invader to /tg/. They are part of /tg/ and the people who play in quests are /tg/ers.
I don't see your argument.
>However, it seems evident that /qst/ is more than surviving on its own, and your tears and resentment over not being wanted on /tg/ is for naught.
Half the threads in that screenshot are dead and the most active ones aren't even quests (Risk, the fucking general).
You've already said that you want quests to die off, so don't go acting like you're all concerned now. You don't care about how quests are doing, you just want them off of /tg/ by any means.

>>524662
>tumblr quest
>Pokemon RISK
>create a country
>/qtg/
These are all off-topic for /qst/.

File: Untitled.png (151 KB, 839x360) Image search: [Google]

151 KB, 839x360

>>524671
There's also the dice testing thread.

>>524670
>They are part of /tg/ and the people who play in quests are /tg/ers.

Because they were shoved onto it by Moot who did not care about the board because it was outside of his interests. Not because they "belong."

They're big enough to be their own thing now, Anon, which the board clearly proves.

>Muh new board smell meme

When does that wear off, exactly? I'd like a date from you, so I can hold another questfag to moving the goalposts once they're finally met. First it was archives, then it was "the ribbon," it's always something new to justify why you can't move.

Nothing will be enough for you, ever. This isn't about quests, this is about your resentment over /tg/ pushing quests away.

>Half the threads are dead

Half huh?

>Crossed: Burn Baby Burn
A little over 2 hours old at the time of this posting

>Space Mercenary
Less than an hour old

>Beleaguered Prince
Slightly over 2 hours old

>The Last Grease Monkey: Part 2
A sequel to part 1 and about 1 hour old

>Valen Quest
2 hours old

Any other dead threads you want to bring out because nyoh muh god these literally brand new threads have such low post counts?

>>524674
>Because they were shoved onto it by Moot
Quests were on /tg/ long before /a/ got pissy about its handful of quests. Leaving aside various protoquests, the first actual quest happened within a year of /tg/ being made.

>>524671

I dunno, doesn't look like they're being deleted. Seems to me like it's pretty obvious those rules have changed, Anon.

>>524678

Awesome, they didn't take up a considerable number of the threads when it was just 1 or 2 quests a season, either. How does this dispute the point?

>MUH 8% MEME

Apparently considered enough to warrant its own board in any event, Anon, and I think the mods are going to have access to way more detailed traffic data than a biased questfag will.

>>524674
>Because they were shoved onto it by Moot who did not care about the board because it was outside of his interests. Not because they "belong."
This shows a complete lack of understand of the subject matter. Quests were on /tg/ for 5 years before that happened, and that stopped happening a few months after it started. It keeps getting brought back up because it's a good argument, but it's really not, because it only ever happened once and had no lasting effects. Those quests all died off or moved back. Stop acting like they stuck around.
>They're big enough to be their own thing now, Anon, which the board clearly proves.
8% of a relatively slow board does not a new board make.
>When does that wear off, exactly?
Usually about two weeks to a month.
>Nothing will be enough for you, ever.
Going back to /tg/ is fine, thanks.
>This isn't about quests, this is about your resentment over /tg/ pushing quests away.
A mod who doesn't understand the subject matter is not /tg/. You are not /tg/.

>>524681
>A mod who doesn't understand the subject matter is not /tg/. You are not /tg/.
>THE ONLY THING THAT'S /tg/ IS WHAT SUPPORTS MY POSITION

You seem like a reasonable individual to discuss the matter with.

File: quests.png (43 KB, 955x181) Image search: [Google]

43 KB, 955x181

>>524680
Here's the numbers, as recorded by an archive that gets literally every thread on the board.
>B-but a lot of quests don't put quest in the title
Two quests do that, and are offset by a number of "request", "question" and "quest (In the "knights go on a quest" sense)" threads.
>B-but CYOAs also count
No they don't.

>>524684
>No they don't.

Yeah they do.

>>524683
Sorry, but the screaming minority on /qa/ is not representative of /tg/. They never have been. The unique IP counter never goes up after a handful of anti-quest posts. Polls never get more than a handful of votes against quests. This holds true on /tg/ and /qa/, and in threads that don't hit a quest filter. It has held true for literally years.

>>524686
The mods disagree, based on /qst/'s rules.
>b-but the mods are only right when they say things I agree with

>>524691

They should, which is what part of giving feedback is all about.

You *are* giving feedback because you want the board to succeed and not secretly hoping it fails out of some petty sense of vengeance towards the board that wants you gone, right?

>>524686
Nope. They're a completely different type of thread that runs completely differently and was explicitly excluded from /qst/ because they aren't the same.

>>524695
>the board that wants you gone, right?
It actually took quite a while for the silent, unprovable majority of quest haters to get dragged out. I'm proud of you, anon, for having the willpower to not call them in right away.

>>524696

>A thread where the OP provides options subject to public participation and narrating the results of their decisions is completely different from a thread where the OP provides options subject to public participation and narrating the results of their decisions

que

>>524695
Considering how the /qst/ feedback thread went, I'm well past caring about the board, because it was abundantly clear that the mods didn't. That sticky was up for a week, and there was all of four mod posts in it, and none of the actual major issues got addressed.

>>524701
One is a thread where the OP acts as a GM and the other posters act as players in an RPG like game, usually with write in actions that the QM might not have predicted.
The other is a thread where people post point-buy image scenarios that are designed to "played" entirely alone with no one else running the game and sometimes people post their choices and talk about why they made the decisions they did after the fact.

>>524703
>none of the actual major issues got addressed.

Well this is the feedback board, Anon. What major issue did not get addressed?

What would make you start using /qst/ instead of shoving your unrelated content on /tg/?

>>520126
>Says you.
Says administration, which is why there is a separate board dedicated to quest threads specifically. Quest threads belong on the quest board; that's why the quest board exists.

How fucking retarded are you people? It's dead simple: quest threads belong on /qst/.

>>524705

So it's the questfag difference between making your own campaign and running a prepublished module?

And this distinction is what you consider important enough to warrant a difference?

>>524711
It's a trial board that doesn't need to exist.

>>524715
No, it's the difference between reading a CYOA book and playing in an RPG.
Except the CYOAs are literally just a single page with no closure. See a scenario, pick a few options, and that's literally it. There are no results, story, or continuation beyond that.
Quests are basically just an RPG, which is ongoing and ideally ends at some point.
To put it another way, a CYOA is basically just character generation, while a quest is actually playing the game.

>>524716
But it does, therefore administrations wants people to fucking use it.

Get it? You don't get to say what ought exist or not- the fact it is that it fucking exists, that's all that matters. Deal with it, retard.

>>524715
No? They're completely different and have a completely different level of involvement. If you had a CYOA image saved, you could open it up and play it without any kind of thread, because it's just an image.
Quests are more involved than that by far.

>>524718
>playing in an RPG.

But playing in an RPG is playing in an RPG, not reading somebody's fanfiction that asks the audience wat do.

As far as I can see, there is no difference whatsoever beyond the scope and perimeters of the writefaggotry.

>>524706
>Well this is the feedback board, Anon. What major issue did not get addressed?
By the rules of the board, all threads have to be a quest.This is roughly equivalent to a theoretical /40k/ where you are only allowed to discuss the tabletop rules. There's no way to foster a community because the rules say we can't just have threads to talk in.

>What would make you start using /qst/ instead of shoving your unrelated content on /tg/?
I don't run any quests, I just follow one that a heavily /tg/ friend runs. That being said, I suspect that the best way to get a /qst/ that people would willingly use would be as follows
>scrap the current one. It was shittily designed by some Manager with literally no idea of what quests need
>have the QMs pick someone/a group to represent them
>Have the QM rep(s) sit down with the people in charge of making boards
>Hammer out some rules/board settings that actually make some sense
>???
>profit

Also, expanding the scope past purely quests to include other 4chan-spawned games/pseudogames/whatever else probably wouldn't hurt either.

>>524720
It's funny how this line of reasoning only comes out once you get what you want.
Nobody was saying "Quests don't get a board, deal with it retard" when all the crying was going on.

>>524723
>scrap the current one. It was shittily designed by some Manager with literally no idea of what quests need

So you don't actually have any feedback, but your feedback is that you don't like the guy who gave you the board and somebody smarter than you should be put in charge of giving feedback?

Well alright, at least you're honest.

>>524722
>But playing in an RPG is playing in an RPG, not reading somebody's fanfiction that asks the audience wat do.
Why are you bringing up irrelevant things like fanfiction? Are you implying that quests are fanfiction that asks the audience wat do?

>>524725
In fact, they were mostly just insulting the administration for not listening to their crying. And now that there's something that happens to coincide with their crying, the stance of the administration is suddenly ironclad and unquestionable.

>>524728
>So you don't actually have any feedback
There was 7 days worth of feedback in the feedback sticky, if the mods didn't read it then, I'm not gonna waste time writing it out again here.

>but your feedback is that you don't like the guy who gave you the board
Did you read the initial announcement thread on /tg/? That manager literally had no fucking clue what he was doing. He wanted only OPs to be able to post images.

>and somebody smarter than you should be put in charge of giving feedback?
I don't run a quest, why should I be in charge of the details?

>>524729
>Are you implying that quests are fanfiction that asks the audience wat do?

Well no, I am stating it. Unless you think that inventing written storylines and presenting options from which an audience selects from is somehow different from being exactly what I said.

>>524725
>It's funny how this line of reasoning only comes out once you get what you want.
I don't give a shit about either quests or traditional games, so fuck off with your attempt at characterisation. I care about reason, and you have no fucking ground to stand on in this case.

>Nobody was saying "Quests don't get a board, deal with it retard" when all the crying was going on.
Don't fucking care, anon. The board exists and boards exist for topics to be discussed on them. It is not a suggestion, it is a demand from staff that certain topics are to be discussed on their given boards, which is why you can't post anything you fucking like on any board unless it is on topic, aside from the two random boards which are by nature anything goes.

I don't give a shit about your emotional rant. The board exists and that is the krux here. Whether or not retards don't like the fucking idea; it is there and they either ought use it for their quests or don't create quests at all. Quests belong on the fucking quest board, just like origami belongs on the origami board. Fucking deal with it. 4chan has far too many legacy boards which are flooded with manchildren who have ruined them because they are so fucking insecure and autistic that they decide to bring everything under the fucking sun to their home board, leaving the actual fucking boards which are there to discuss said topics, to die a slow heat death.

You fucktards are killing the site. Use the appropriate fucking boards.

>>524729
>Are you implying that quests are fanfiction that asks the audience wat do?
That is exactly how a quest thread functions.

>>524735
>Well no, I am stating it.
Okay. Well, you're wrong.
>Unless you think that inventing written storylines and presenting options from which an audience selects from is somehow different from being exactly what I said.
Well, it's different from what quests actually are. If that was how quests work, you'd be right. But it's not. Most quests have write-in options, aren't pre-written because of the write-ins, and most aren't actually based on pre-existing settings at all, so they couldn't be fan-fiction anyway.

>>524737
>That is exactly how a quest thread functions.
Except it isn't. You wouldn't know that though because you don't actually know a damn thing about quests.

>>524737
Oh, so now your argument is that we shouldn't tell the administration when they're doing the wrong thing.

>>524739
>If that was how quests work, you'd be right. But it's not. Most quests have write-in options

Decided to skim /qst/, clicked 3 random threads

>>>/qst/88845

>>>/qst/94645

>>>/qst/93296

All have option selection.

Obviously, they might accept write-ins, but this is immaterial to my point.

>I-it's not fanfic b-because it's not a pre-established setting!

As usual, the questfag is merely triggered by the negative connotations of the point, much like how they argue against being leeches on /tg/ while simultaneously believing that the questing community is too weak and small to exist on its own, which is why it needs to remain firmly tethered to /tg/'s underside.

>>524748
>As usual, the questfag is merely triggered by the negative connotations of the point, much like how they argue against being leeches on /tg/ while simultaneously believing that the questing community is too weak and small to exist on its own, which is why it needs to remain firmly tethered to /tg/'s underside.
You really like your strawman, don't you.
Fan-fiction implies that you are writing fiction about something you are a fan of. Can't be a fan of a setting that you yourself made that didn't previously exist.
And your leech argument is still just a strawman. Quests leech off of /tg/ in the exact same way that literally every topic on /tg/ leeches off of /tg/. The posters are from /tg/, the threads are on /tg/. That's it. Now, before you bring out the "everyone loves quests" strawman, let me cut that off at the pass and say that no, not everyone loves quests. But they also don't all hate quests, because opinions aren't binary and there's plenty of room on the board for things that not everyone personally enjoys.

>>524752
>Quests leech off of /tg/ in the exact same way that literally every topic on /tg/ leeches off of /tg/.

Yeah, look at all those threads about roleplaying games leeching off the board about roleplaying games!

>>524748
How is them accepting write ins immaterial to your point? Your entire point is that they are pre-written and the players don't actually contribute anything, isn't it?

>>524754
Exactly my point. And actually, if you look at /tg/'s rules, RPGs fall under the "ect." category. The same one that quests fall under.

>>524755
>Your entire point is that they are pre-written and the players don't actually contribute anything, isn't it?

No? That was invented wholly by your deranged mind.

Reread >>524722 and try to stave off the triggerdom this time. Quests are not meaningfully different enough from CYAOs to warrant one being on /qst/ but not the other. This was the original statement; it was then countered with "BUT MODS SAID" which prompted me to make the point that feedback is important to ensure the new board is put to best use.

It devolved from there because questfags ruthlessly trying to protect their 8% meme.

>>524762
Like your 50% of the board meme? The front page meme? The drowning out discussion meme? The stealing posts meme?

>>524759

>etc = quests

Uh, evidently not, because they have their own board now.

>>524765

I know your intense mental instability makes this difficult, but do you think you could confront the points I have presented, and not the ones you've imagined?

>>524762
>Quests are not meaningfully different enough from CYAOs to warrant one being on /qst/ but not the other.
I've already explained why they're completely different. CYOAs are literally a single image that you pick points from and that is all that it is. There is no narrative beyond the initial wall of text, there are no consequences or results of your actions. It's literally just a more formalized wat do.
The other is an ongoing game which progresses in the same manner as an RPG.
There is literally no difference between a quest and a game of Everyone is John. The QM prompting choices is simply a way to keep things moving and is not required or strict.

>>524766
Trial board. They have not been removed from /tg/, and telling them to leave results in you being warned or 24 hour banned currently.
http://archive.4plebs.org/tg/search/text/qst/deleted/deleted/

>>524772

Oh okay, so how many weeks until it's not a "trial board" anymore?

At what point will you admit you were wrong and get out of /tg/?

>>524771

So sounds to me like expanding /qst/ to encompass forum games in general would be the perfect solution. This way, the board would get additional traffic to ensure it doesn't die like you questfags are worrying your little heads off about.

Good idea!

>>524775
>So sounds to me like expanding /qst/ to encompass forum games in general would be the perfect solution. This way, the board would get additional traffic to ensure it doesn't die like you questfags are worrying your little heads off about.

That is in fact something that got pointed out several times in the feedback sticky over the past week. But the mods didn't care enough to do more than just skim the thread for any easily tweakable board settings.

>>524711
>Says administration
Says you. Quests are still allowed on /tg/ says administration.

Reminder that /aco/ was a trial board and people were mass-banned from /d/ within seconds.

The "trial board" bullshit is a meme.

>>524771
>There is literally no difference between a quest and a game of Everyone is John

except that Everyone is John is a game, and Quests are fiction

>>524894
Care to explain the difference in a way that doesn't completely lie about what one is?

>>520018
Somebody should do something about these people