File: 1440222825052.gif (23.51 KB, 271x400, 271:400, Severe-Weather-Emergency-S….gif)
No.6
In case people start using this board to shelter from the spam on /tg/, here's a meta discussion thread. Discuss rules, policies, assets and other board things here.
edit: Yes, anti-spam protection is on here and there are mods on duty to delete it.
edit2: Rules page: http://8ch.net/d20/rules.html
Post last edited at
No.7
And look, it's cylical. I have the power of cycling threads. Join us.
No.9
This could potentially be a rescue board. Assuming intl continues it's faggotry, it's unlikely that all the regular /tg/ers would want to move entirely. I suppose we'll see. If the /tg/ BO does what he should, this won't need to be an issue.
also, brace for intl shitposting. What's the max threads/hour set at?
No.10
>>9
Currently 10, and threads with few posts are set to expire at page 5, of which there are 20.
No.20
I imagine this will only be a temporary board until /tg/ recovers from the current bout of shitposting.
I wonder why they went after /tg/?
No.22
>>20
Because its owner is weak and despite being in the top 15 or so of the boards it's probably the slowest and least responsive to adopting new features. It's an easy target.
No.32
>>20
Pretty much this >>22
Let's be honest /tg/ was begging to be forcedly fucked, it was the proverbial 16yo highschool girl at a frat kegger, not really asking for it but certainly inviting it. And I say that as a /tg/ user. Either way we learn a lesson and move on with our lives.
No.33
>>32
I agree.
So how can we make /d20/ better than /tg/?
No.34
>>20
>I wonder why they went after /tg/?
because the board owner couldn't enable two simple settings for some strange reason.
No.35
Did you enable the anti spam protection :^)
No.36
No.37
>>34
>>33
>>32
>>33
I think d20 will become better than /tg/ if the other board just gets demolished by shitposting and all that's left is the occasional "d20 is the new refuge board" thread.
Otherwise we should just post in here until /tg/ moderation reanimates itself.
No.71
I remember drawing this for 8/tg/ back when it first started and we were discussing what the board-tan should be. Someone suggested a girl disguised as a man in armor, so I drew this.
No.81
No.93
The /tg/ board owner really is hopeless.
People need to move over here due to the spam.
No.95
Went ahead and set the maximum number of newlines to 100. Let me know if it should be set higher (or lower).
>>81
Like what?
No.98
>lets make a ton more rules
lol
No.101
No.105
Hope you guys get your board back, fuck /intl/
No.122
I've appointed one of my old real-life friends as a temporary volunteer until I can find someone else trustworthy who'll fill in the hours I'm not here. I've instructed him to delete spam posts and nothing else. I've known him since middle school so I'm pretty sure he's not gonna wreck the board, and he'll probably only be watching it for the night.
No.123
>>122
Looking for regional mods? im AU if that helps
also we need thread IDs please.
No.125
>>123
If the BO implements thread IDs I'm out.
Fuck IDs and everyone who wants them.
No.127
No.128
>>123
If you've got a stable IP, keep posting on the board and I'll consider you. I'm in no hurry to promote volunteers; who knows if this board will even end up being adopted permanently? I've got us covered for the next 24 hours.
No.130
>>128
Im afraid thats a bit hard, Aussie internet is notoriously unreliable and at least once a month my IP changes thanks to the line crapping out.
No.132
No.134
>>130
Well, make up a disposable email to connect all your posts to then. I'll remember who you are and I'll need to email your username/password to one anyway.
Post last edited at
No.146
>>6
Have you enabled spam protection here?
No.147
>>146
Yes. Here, I'll edit it into the OP.
No.150
>>134
here you go anon
supremegentleman55@tfwno.gf
hit me up there
No.151
>>150
Not at the moment, but if the board sticks around and you keep posting on it I'll save the email so I know who you are.
No.180
>>147
Great, thanks. What's the current limit on threads per hour?
Also, suggestion. I've no idea what's it called, but it's on /v/, /a/ and a couple of other boards. It's this small banner on top of every page that advertises sister boards to them (like /ameta/, the one for devs and so on).
We could add that here. /cyoa/ for CYOAs, /qu/ for Quests, /tg/ for the main board and maybe some more. Dunno, depends on what the other anons think.
No.182
>>180
The current thread limit per hour is 10, or roughly one page. (I think.)
The banner on top is called the board announcement. I can also use it to link to a rule page instead of having an obnoxious sticky like on /tg/. It's up to you guys.
No.183
Okay OP, two questions:
>Are you same person who owns /tg/ or a different one? If you are a different one, are there any other planned differences in moderation, rules or anything else on your mind?
>Anyone has any clue what triggered /intl/ to targeting>>180
us in the first place?
On a side note, not sure if /tg/ assault is temporary or not, but here have the banners I made.
No.186
>>183
>Are you same person who owns /tg/ or a different one? If you are a different one, are there any other planned differences in moderation, rules or anything else on your mind?
No, if I were Me I'd clean up my board instead of making a new one. I only made this board because Hotwheels wouldn't respond to my requests to claim /tg/ in the face of its neglect.
>Anyone has any clue what triggered /intl/ to targeting us in the first place?
As was previously discussed, /tg/ was a low hanging fruit that was bound to be plucked eventually. It's just an easy target because the board owner hardly does anything and doesn't bother keeping up to date with 8chan's features.
Banners are currently disabled, I'll upload some when they're fixed.
No.187
>>183
Sorry it's
>Anyone has any clue what triggered /intl/ to targeting
Not
>Anyone has any clue what triggered /intl/ to targeting>>180
That's just a typo. Polite sage for multiposting.
No.189
Also, here's the banners I've made for /tg/ in the past. Don't know if any of them actually got added.
No.191
And of course the banner I made that I used to make the thread on /tg/ that started this.
No.193
>>183
>Anyone has any clue what triggered /intl/ to targeting us in the first place?
Some /intl/ guy went on /v/, and started bitching in a "realistic armor" thread. Anyone who disagreed with him was a "shi/tg/uy". Of course, everyone laughed at him.
Then he ran back to /intl/, called for spam, and he got it.
No.195
>>190
The Whizzard's GM was totally added, haven't seen the other ones, though.
>>193
Fuck, /intl/ is absolute cancer. Shouldn't their time be coming to an end, though? Summer is almost over.
No.196
>>195
>The Whizzard's GM was totally added, haven't seen the other ones, though.
Neat. I also made it into an avatar.
No.205
>>195
Oh god. I hope it ends with summer.
Just came here because I'm a bit tired of the damn spam.
What is /Intl/ about anyway? trying to be /b/ or something?
No.215
>>205
They're /int/ but driven insane by their own shitposting and overreactions. They not only love funposting, they want everything to become funposting.
No.216
>>215
They literally just want to watch the world burn.
No.217
>>215
>>216
And they love scat for some reason.
I hope they get bored soon and leave us alone. Just have to pass it like some sort of literal shit storm inside our homes and then wait the firemen to hoose clean all the buildings.
No.218
>>217
We'll come out of it stronger, more united, more prepared. Hopefully.
No.220
>>217
>>215
>>216
if they want tokill 8ch, all they need to do is spam CP and report it to cloudfire again
No.222
>>217
>>216
Have you watched the video they spammed.
I find it ironic they claim they're fighting for truly creative and organically developing 8chan and against hugboxes when all they do is stick to their own hugbox and their own unfunny memes. Hell, they haven't evolved any further from 4/int/, how can they claim any form of superiority when they can't even stop shitposting?
No.225
Alright, I'm going to sleep. The board is in the hands of a capable volunteer who should be able to hold down the fort for the next eight hours or so. They can only make 80 threads in that time anyway.
I'll see you guys here and on /tg/ when I wake up.
No.229
Are you aware of obvious trolling, bad design apologists, circlejerking, parroting, and bandwagoning that goes on in tabletop discussion?
Also, are you willing to ban, warn, or delete the posts of people who post such relentless faggotry?
No.232
>>229
If he bans people for using emoticons, I'd say he's a pretty big guy.
No.241
>>229
>are you willing to ban anything I don't like?
No.245
>>221
>Kekec
Nice try, /intl/.
No.249
So, /intl/'s shit has stopped now. Shall everyone go back to /tg/? All we need is for the catalog to be cleaned.
No.250
>>249
>All we need is for the catalog to be cleaned.
Why? It's no different if bottom of the catalog is shit threads no one will post in.
No.252
>>249
It can be done again if the board owner doesn't enable anti spam or have vols.
No.255
>>249
>>250
>>252
I think we should stay here until we get a new board owner on /tg/ or the spam problem is fixed for good. Why start posting there again only to come back here?
No.260
This board is nice and all but we should really be called /d8/
you fucked up
No.261
>>6
>>7
This thread doesn't need to be cyclic. Very few do, and unless you know the kind that do, you're threatening to delete people's posts. New threads for generals work fine in normal situations, and this thread isn't even going to need that.
No.262
>>255
No need to pester /tg/, that's unproductive, all I want is the board owner of /tg/ to set up a descent max hourly thread limit, maybe 20 or so, and probably IDs, just in case. Oh and some volunteers but that's optional.
No.263
>>186
This board can never replace /tg/, because /tg/ is a "legacy board": a board with the same name as a board on 4chan. That means it will always be the first port of call for newcomers, as 4chan is the major gateway to 8chan.
The only way a legacy board won't monopolize all members of a 4chan community is when the board gets claimed and used for something else, such as /vp/ here being Video Game Porn, forcing the topic of Pokemon (/vp/ on 4chan) to make the alternative /poke/.
Sad but inevitable. But have an IP.
>I only made this board because Hotwheels wouldn't respond to my requests to claim /tg/ in the face of its neglect.
Maybe he's just busy…
No.264
>>263
/tg/ is being neglected? I thought board owner must login in at least once in a while or board gets terminated…
No.266
>>249
^implying
<implying
vimplying
>implying
We can start again any time, kid
No.267
>>260
I claimed /d8/ also but /d20/ is what caught on.
>>>/d8/
>>261
I was just demonstrating that I can make threads cylical, which the board owner on /tg/ never did.
>>263
Busy for over a month? I've emailed him over a long period of time, no response.
No.268
>>260
Yeah, I'm not thrilled about the name. I mean I get it, it doesn't quite seem inclusive enough.
While I'm still suspicious, have a post anyway.
No.269
>>268
It was what was suggested in the thread. I claimed /d8/ and /trg/ as well but people started using /d20/.
No.272
No.289
>no IDs
You're basically inviting SJW shills to ruin discussion here.
No.296
>>289
I can see IPs. No one's going to shill on this board.
No.297
>>296
I don't give a single fuck if you can distinguish people, so could /tg/'s mod and that did fuckall to help our regular confirmations remain samefag-free. Make it publicly visible so the rest of us can too and instantly see when someone is samefagging.
No.298
>>297
No thank you. If samefagging became a problem I'd consider it, but right now the board doesn't need IDs.
Also as you can see /tg/'s mod was never around. I'm here for you.
No.299
>>298
>No thank you.
Fuck it, gonna try >>>/grognard/ then.
No.316
IDs are on for the time being by majority request.
No.320
>>267
>Busy for over a month? I've emailed him over a long period of time, no response.
Either the board owner is not dead (he has logged in in recent times not long enough for the board to be considered abandoned) or he just doesn't do shit) or Hotwheels may be wary of giving people new boards because of /intl/ mass claiming old boards for them.
I"d e-mail him again and try contacting him on IRC.
No.321
>>320
I'll try him on IRC.
No.334
>>263
>This board can never replace /tg/, because /tg/ is a "legacy board": a board with the same name as a board on 4chan.
see /tech/ and /g/
doesn't really work out like that.
No.339
>>316
I'm not seeing any IDs
No.340
>>339
Turned them back off since people just kept right on arguing in the thread.
No.341
>>334
in the beginning, /g/ was /g/ay bar, so people went to /tech/ instead
No.344
>>340
Doesn't that defeat the purpose and give in to the sort of fear mongering that /intl/ shitposters were so keen on enforcing?
No.345
>>344
Doesn't what do that? I think the arguments for IDs are fear mongering.
No.347
>>345
IDs don't hurt genuine posters, but they do inconvenience, if not completely discourage the usual shitposting subterfuge.
No.350
Hey congrats guys we made it into the top 50
We'll save /tg/ yet.
No.352
I'm sick of this. Save me /d20/.
No.353
>>350
Godspeed, fellows.
Adding 1 to your user count. :^)
No.354
>>352
Okay.
Start posting about traditional games.
No.356
No.363
Adding a uip to you
godspeed
No.364
I feel like they're trying to split us. I mean, if they didn't, wouldn't they be attacking /d20/ as well?
No.366
>>364
If they attacked /d20/, then /d20/ would look more legitimate in the eyes of /tg/ users, which would lead to more of them sheltering here, since /d20/ is fully capable of handling the spam.
No.371
Can someone tell me what happened with /tg/? I went to sleep and came back with /intl/ shitposting all over it. Did something happen in between?
No.374
>>371
About 26 hours ago /intl/ or someone who blamed it on them started spamming /tg/ and nuking all the threads off the board. I made /d20/ as a place for fa/tg/uys to post until something could be done about /tg/. Today /intl/ decided to join in on the spamming officially. So we're bunkering down here.
No.437
>>264
That stopped being a thing a long time ago. One of hotwheels more poor decisions since it means 8chan is increasingly clogged with boards that contain nothing but brownpills.
No.446
Thanks for the shelter, owner.
I hope that /tg/'s mod gets an aussie/nightowl friend so they can cover the times he's not awake.
No.448
Also board mod what shall be your primarch name? It's only traditional.
No.450
>>437
No, they still have to log in once every two weeks.
They just don't have to do anything.
>>446
No problem. Like I said, I'm hoping running this board will prove my trustworthiness as a candidate for BO for /tg/.
>>448
I generally go by Crit Fail, but I prefer to be anonymous. BO is fine.
No.451
There is literally nothing wrong with /tg/
No.452
>>450
>BO is fine.
Stinky it is.
No.454
File: 1440313118353.png (155.79 KB, 1497x761, 1497:761, Screenshot 2015-08-23 02.5….png)
>>451
>There is literally nothing wrong with /tg/
Retard.
No.463
BO please avoid the temptation to cuck up, as much fun as it'd be to cycle boards until we find one that's not compromised we'd rather just discuss things like normal.
No.465
No.466
Oh god. This is not going to end, right?
I thought we had some peace when suddenly the fucking spam stopped. Can't Hotwheels act in some way?
No.467
>>466
Hotwheels can't act until /tg/'s BO has been MIA for 2 weeks (right now he hasn't logged in in 2 days, so 12 more days of spam). Then he's said he will hand the board over to /d20/'s BO. Those are the rules. That's why /d20/ is necessary; we've got upwards of 12 days to wait this storm out. If the BO ever logs in, that counter is reset.
No.471
>>467
Well, I'll see if we can at least have a few good discussions before we get trolled again.
This would be prevented if it had a good moderation, right? I don't say people should funpost time to time, mostly because I enjoyed the futa slaanesh threads from 4/tg/ a few years ago, but put an stop to this kind of crap.
No.474
>>471
Yes, all we needed was an active BO to turn the anti-spam measures on and delete the few threads that got through. This board is currently a model of what /tg/ would be like with those features; enjoy.
I enjoyed /tg/'s funposting as well.
No.508
>>215
It's just halfchan /int/ trying to ruin 8chan, so we can all go back to suck moderator cock like they do.
No.520
What do you think about CYOA and Quest threads BO?
No.522
>>520
I disliked how many quest threads there were on 4/tg/ but ultimately that kind of ruling is up to the users. I have no problem maintaining the current "no quests" rule if that's what is desired. I personally think a nice compromise would be allowing a single cyclical "Quest General" that could link to off-board quests, so that we get the traffic of questers without the thread spam.
No.525
Also BO I hope you have nothing against other media like anime, videogames, films or tv series when they are tg/d20 related.
>>522
You mean like linking to >>>/qu/
No.526
>>525
I allowed >>420, didn't I? (Blaze it.) Any traditional games-related posts are welcome. I personally believe in moderation by report: if people don't report it, I won't even consider acting on it.
It could link to threads on /qu/, sure, or anywhere else people host quests. My problem isn't really with the idea of quests (though many of them are shit) so much as how they filled the board up with threads. Having a board for "quest threads" and then discussing and advertising those threads in a single thread on /tg/ seems like an acceptable arrangement to me.
No.536
>>526
But CYOAs are okay, right?
No.537
>>536
Fuck off. You have your own board.
>>>/cyoa/
No.539
>>536
I don't see a tangible difference between CYOAs and quests.
No.540
>>537
Dead board
>>539
CYOAs are contained in one thread.
No.541
>>540
Well then, I guess it depends on how /tg/ at large feels about it.
No.546
No.548
>>540
>Dead board
Then go there and post.
No.549
No.567
How likely is it that the local board owner is just an /intl/ plant?
Spamming /tg/ to death solely to goad the userbase to another board seems awfully pointless to me.
No.568
File: 1440341849100.png (216.89 KB, 1444x1996, 361:499, tueuef Maerli this is what….png)
>>99
YES. Since this one of the most shilled communities on the site, it would help a lot if people can't samefag that easily anymore.
>>215
>>508
I am the guy behind the archive dumps behind /cow/, so I can explain. /intl/ is a mixture of asshurt wizards, people from halfchan/int/, a few goons and mainly 4/jp/ teenbros (/jp/'s equivalent of a summerfag). With the Janitor logs leaked, Warosu underwent a decline so hard, that they had to shut down ghostposting. Most users went 8/jp/, the rest to /int/ because a user from there had the splendid idea of inviting Warosu to shitpost Anime avatars to get rid of animu on /int/ entirely. With these newfags, Desubong/Oman-kun appeared and made people raid /pol/.
After a while some guy behind a swiss proxy made up a cruddy board faction guide that became later /intl/'s IRC conspiracy theory.
I think they are doing this to justify their shit NEET life.
This video is pretty related:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkYKGHBHadw
>>567
Not very likely. The counterraid by /tg/ may be behind the spike. Other than that, its pretty pointless, because the Board Owner actually moderates their spam. /intl/ Astroturf boards are usually more awful than the original.
No.619
So, BO. Are you the owner of /a/? Why is it that lamiawife became a vol?
No.626
>>619
No, I do not own /a/. Both the volunteers are long-time friends unrelated to 8chan I pulled in so they could watch the board while I sleep. "Lamiawife" is because their Steam handle has 'Wife' in it and they used to play a lamia in several campaigns.
No.627
BO what are you going to if /tg/ becomes normal again?
No.629
>>627
You mean if Me comes back and fixes things? I guess I'll go back to what I was doing before, roleplaying and rollplaying.
No.631
>>619
/intl/ is full of bullshit, don't take what they post at face value.
No.634
>>456
We going up in this world, fam.
No.636
>>634
Like I say in /tg/'s sticky I post in 4chan /tg/, 8chan /tg/ and now 8chan /d20/. I just don't get why people are so butthurt about creating another board.
No.637
>>636
Well, people are inherently mistrustful of anonymous strangers, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Making a new board gives you a lot of power over the old board's userbase. You should be wary of something like that. I just think it's ridiculous how long they've continued to mistrust the board; it's less caution and more paranoia.
No.640
>>637
HW wanted to give /tg/ to the d20 guy so he could clean up the spam but he didn't because the anti 8chan crowd will try to make a meme out of it and suck in people that don't know what's really going on.
No.643
>>640
And they made a meme out of it anyway. Well memed, anti 8chan crowd.
No.645
>>640
They say that this is a HW conspiracy to get his friends the board owner position or something like that.
No.647
/intl/ thread has gotten 4 reports now, so I'm gonna autosage it.
No.666
Claiming devil trips. Sage for off-topic.
No.692
CYOA don't belong on /tg/. We had already decided that on the meta thread before /intl/'s raid.
No.693
Remove CYOA
they are the quest fag filth
No.694
What exactly is un-/tg/ about CYOAs? Quests were annoying on /tg/ because they were everywhere and for people who didn't want to participate in them they were basically spam. If you don't like the CYOAs you can just hide them.
No.698
>>694
CYOA is just a fancy name for quests
No.700
>>694
CYOA and quests are pretty much the same thing. They're annoying as fuck because questfags don't have limits and we end up with half the board being hidden quest threads.
I don't think they should be banned but I agree with the idea that they should kept contained to one thread - run your shit at >>>/cyoa/ and advertise/keep reminders on a single CYOA thread here.
No.703
>>698
>>700
Well, we're in agreement there, then. All in favor of a single CYOA/quest discussion thread?
No.704
I think they should be banned. Put something that advertises boards like /qu/ and /cyoa/, so that people who want that stuff go there.
No.706
>>704
How about a cyclical thread for discussing/advertising individual quests/CYOAs on /qu/ and /cyoa/? Actual quests are banned, advertising and talking about them (in that one thread) is not.
No.710
How many pages does this board have?
No.712
>>706
How many pages does this board have?
No.714
>>712
20, and threads are set to expire past page 5 if they have no posts in them.
No.717
>>714
Is it that minimum 10 posts thing? I'm runeanon so I'm just asking cause I wanna keep my thread alive.
No.720
>>717
Yes, that's correct, but don't worry; we don't even have a page 5 yet.
No.721
No.722
>>703
no
>>706
how about no
if people want quests, they will go to those boards
No.723
>>722
Quests are /tg/ and frankly both boards could use the cross-traffic. Simply linking the board in the announcement isn't as effective as allowing communication between them. Allowing a discussion thread would be beneficial for both communities. One thread isn't going to clog your arteries.
No.724
>>723
Quests are not /tg/.
No.725
No.726
>>723
quests are not /tg/ and they were the reason halftg went to shit
no
>allowing a discussion thread would be beneficial
uhu
No.727
>>724
Yes they are. It's a Game Master/group of players dynamic. Many of them involve dice rolling. Just because they're shit doesn't mean they're not /tg/.
>>726
>uhu
Wow great argument fagtron
No.728
No fucking quests. If you want quests go back to halfchan.
All that's left there are a hundred quest threads, an MTG general and a dnd next thread.
No.731
>>727
Almost as good as your initial argument
>it's a GM / player dynamic
No it's not. It's one faggot writing shitty fanfiction without coming up with ideas himself.
Quests are fucking cancer. /tg/ didn't have them. Neither should /d20/.
No.736
Again, quests and cyoa are one of the reasons we left halfchan.
They shouldn't be allowed here.
No.737
Halfchan /tg/'s swamped with quests. I came here to escape that.
No.738
>>728
>>736
>>737
No one wants quests. We all remember >>524
What's being suggested is a single, unobtrusive discussion thread so that quests, which are /tg/, can be discussed on /tg/ without ruining the board. Quest threads would remain on /qu/, but both boards would receive more traffic from the collaboration. It's win-win.
>>731
There are OC quests, just because faggots are lazy and write fanfiction quests doesn't make quests fanfiction. It absolutely is a GM/players dynamic, I'd love to see you try and give actual reasoning as to why it's not. There's a guy who masters the game and there's players who play it. The only difference is they play one character together.
No.748
>unobtrusive
maybe at first.
>quests, which are /tg/
everyone here disagrees with you you cockgobbler
>quest threads would remain on /qu/
why not just have a meta general on /qu/ then
>I'd love to see you try and give actual reasoning as to why it's not
if I make a thread asking wether I should have toast or cereal for breakfast, is that /tg/?
Because that's exactly what quests are.
No.754
>>748
>maybe at first.
How would they become obtrusive? It's one, cyclical thread you can hide and if any more get made they'll be deleted.
>everyone here disagrees with you you cockgobbler
What is this, a democracy? It doesn't matter who disagrees with me, it matters whose argument is best.
>why not just have a meta general on /qu/ then
One, because quests are /tg/, two, to siphon traffic from /qu/ instead of schisming the two communities. People got their panties in a twist over coming to /d20/ because they were so worried about splitting the userbase, but we're perfectly fine with exiling any fa/tg/uy who likes quests? Retarded, pure vendetta.
>if I make a thread asking wether I should have toast or cereal for breakfast, is that /tg/?
>Because that's exactly what quests are.
Well, besides the fact that that's obviously not the case, since quests incorporate a game and story element, /tg/ has a long history of turning shitposts into content. If you went on to describe your breakfast journey and entertained the anons who posted in your thread I'd say there's no reason that should be banned. That's the kind of thing 4/tg/'s mods did, removing shit they didn't like or felt wasn't "/tg/" enough.
No.758
>>754
quests
are
not
/tg/
nobody wants this shitty perpetual quest / cyoa discussion thread here no matter how much you shill for it. if you want quests either go to one of the quest boards or back to halfchan
get it in your fucking head
No.762
>>758
You can insist on that all you want but you have no argument to back it up. I give literally zero shits about quests or CYOAs, I don't participate in them, I just think you're wrong.
No.763
>>754
>"it only matters whose argument is best"
>QUESTS ARE TG GUISE THAT'S WHY WE SHOULD HAVE THIS SINGULAR QUEST DISCUSSION THREAD BUT NO QUESTS
BRAVO
B
R
A
V
O
No.764
>>762
>you have no argument to back it up
no one wants any quest related stuff here but you, that should be enough
you're the one who has no argument :)
No.765
>>763
It's called a compromise. Quests are /tg/ but allowing them to spread freely on /tg/ crowds out other legitimate discussion. This is an observable problem. A solution: Have a separate board for the actual quests, but keep the quest discussion on /tg/ rather than exiling users entirely.
Also you fucked up your meme.
No.766
>>765
Even better solution - keep quests out of tg entirely, because no one fucking wants them
No.767
>>764
Do you think that just because you say things makes them true?
Also, this just in: This tabletop system is no longer /tg/, according to random faggot anon, since it's the exact same thing as a quest and could be easily run as one online.
Seriously, cool your fucking autism. Your kneejerk reaction is not helpful or constructive. Take a breather and consider actually discussing the issue.
No.768
>>765
>have a separate board for quests
>but keep meta discussion of threads in /tg/
No.769
>>754
Yeah, but now 4/tg/ is overrun by quests.
>How would they become obtrusive? It's one, cyclical thread you can hide and if any more get made they'll be deleted.
Oh, at first, yes. But soon more and more people will like it, and they'll realize that they don't get enough traffic in /qu/. The cyclical thread won't be enough for them. They'll start trying to make more and more quest threads and when they get shut down they'll start whining on the meta thread. And once they start doing that, they won't stop, mark my words.
Maybe you'll say:
>But hey! Doesn't /v/ have a single discussion for GG, and GG has a containment board?
Yet it's purely discussion. You might say that it's going to be like that as well on this thread, but you can't be on top of it all the time. There's going to be one day in which you won't be observing the thread, and they'll start a quest. And then they'll want more.
Of course you can just dismiss it and say:
>If we moderate it won't happen.
But it will still be a possibility, one day.
The reason /tg/ here was great, was because the BO didn't have to intervene all the time.
If you allow quests, that won't be the case here.
Call me paranoid, but you've seen 4/tg/.
No.770
>>769
Anyways, that's just like, my opinion. 8/tg/ was doing fine without the quest thread.
No.771
>>767
Quests:
>guys should I write a b c or d
John:
>several players take control of a character and do stuff, each with their own objectives, while DM describes the world's reaction to their shenanigans
Now fuck off and stop shilling your shitty quests
No.774
>>769
>Oh, at first, yes. But soon more and more people will like it, and they'll realize that they don't get enough traffic in /qu/. The cyclical thread won't be enough for them. They'll start trying to make more and more quest threads and when they get shut down they'll start whining on the meta thread. And once they start doing that, they won't stop, mark my words.
That's kind of ridiculous. Let's assume for a second we're all reasonable people here. A single thread should be more than enough for any quester, since it allows them to get on the front page of /tg/. No /tg/ poster would take that breach lying down. And there's no way the BO would cave to their retarded demands.
I'm glad you brought up /v/ because that's a perfect example of it working. The GGers on /v/ know the rules and they abide by them and they're happy with the arrangement.
The BO has to intervene regardless of whether there's a single quest thread or no quest threads allowed at all, because either way he has to delete any quest threads that pop up.
So what really is the difference?
>>771
Quests:
>several players take control of a character and do stuff, each with their own objectives, while DM describes the world's reaction to their shenanigans
Literally no difference except that EiJ comes standard with mechanics on who decides what the character does, and in quests the DM arbitrarily picks that.
No.776
>>774
>literally no difference
>except this very big difference
No.779
>>776
It's not a big difference at all, memeposter. Especially since, if the DM chose, they could institute a system for choosing what actions the character performs similar to EiJ's. Are you seriously fucking implying that quests not having strict enough mechanics universally makes them not /tg/? Are rules-lite games not /tg/ now? Is freeform RP no longer /tg/? Should I go tell that guy in the gnoll thread to fuck off since he's not /tg/? Where does it end?
No.782
>>779
>is rules light not /tg/?
Yes it is. It's has rules, unlike quests
>is freeform not /tg/?
Not a game. Not traditional. No system. Nope.
>are kobolds not /tg/
now you're just shitposting
>where does it end?
at the point you realize NOBODY WANTS ANY FUCKING QUEST RELATED CONTENT ON THIS FUCKING BOARD
No.785
>>774
Maybe the BO won't cave to their retarded demands, but there are still many ways they could try to spam the board.
The reason why it works on /v/ is because GG is only discussion. They don't need individual threads for anything they want to do. Assuming that questers will feel happy to discuss quests here and won't try to bring them back is a risk.
>>774
>>779
No difference between this:
>DM: You're John. You wake up in X place. What do you do?
And this?
>Questguy: Hey guys, should I do a, b, c, or d?
No.786
>>782
>Yes it is. It's has rules, unlike quests
Some quests have rules. The DM decides whether a quest has mechanics or not. As I said before, many of them involve rolling. It's simply not true that quests don't have rules. They don't have to, but neither do tabletop games.
>Not a game. Not traditional. No system. Nope.
Then writefagging isn't /tg/ either.
There's a guy in the gnoll thread who was freeform RPing about fucking a minotaur and getting filled with its bull seed. Should I tell him he's not /tg/ and needs to be remove?
>>785
The A/B/C/D format thing is an optional convenience on some quests. I've seen quests that don't use it and almost all of them have some kind of write-in option.
>Questguy: You're John. You wake up in X place. Would you like to do a, b, c, or d, or something else?
No different than a DM suggesting things for the party to do when they first start a campaign.
No.789
>>786
>asking one guy what he wants to do in EIJ is no different than asking everyone what the mc should do next in a quest then picking the most voted option
ps: monsters are /tg/ culture, quests were too before they turned to shit so keep them out of here
No.790
>>786
>writefagging isn't /tg/ either
You're finally starting to get it. Congratulations.
No.791
>>790
Yeah, I think I am. You're an elitist faggot who wants to keep everything that you don't like out of /tg/ because you're too autistic to just ignore it. You're probably one of those people who spammed threads he didn't like on 4/tg/ instead of ignoring them or turning them into something positive. Stop trying to kill /tg/'s OC.
>>789
What do you mean, quests were?
No.792
>>790
>writefagging isn't /tg/ either
Now, I'm against quests, but writefagging is an important part of the board culture.
No.794
>>791
>Implying I'm the only one here who doesn't want quests
>Ad hominem instead of actual arguments
See guys, this is the kind of people quests attract. Do we really want this here?
No.795
>>794
Ignoring the ad hominem you've been slinging at me for several posts now, calling me shill, etc. No, seriously, go on, you're finally starting to justify your opinions with argument instead of just trolling. What do you mean quests were /tg/?
No.796
>>795
They destroyed 4/tg/. Is that not enough for you?
No.797
>>796
Uh, no. Shitty moderation destroyed 4/tg/. Quests were merely a symptom of that cancer. It's like when someone dies in a house and you don't notice until their shrubbery gets overgrown and blocks the sidewalk.
If quests were /tg/, then what makes them not /tg/ anymore? The fact that there were too many individual threads on 4/tg/? I'm proposing a solution to that problem. Why are your knickers in a twist about it?
No.800
>>790
Worldbuilding is no longer /tg/. Can't discuss the culture of various races or the consequences of their intermingling.
Storytime is no longer /tg/, depending on the system - Some systems don't have rules (Nobilis).
Character art threads? Nope, not /tg/.
Literally any vidya ever, including dorf fortress? Not /tg/.
In your vision, only PDF dumps, rule questions, and about half of all homebrew is allowed.
No.801
>>797
No, you're not proposing a solution.
The solution is already there - it's called /qu/.
What you're suggesting is a way for quest cancer to creep into this board, which is something nobody but you wants, because this place might end up like 4tg because of it.
No.804
>>800
>helping a DM flesh out his setting / practicing worldbuilding isn't /tg/
>/tg/ related stories isn't /tg/
>part of character creation isn't /tg/
>muh dorf fort
>why is this slope so slippery
No.805
>>801
There can be more than one solution to a problem, anon. I think this is a better solution than /qu/. /qu/ is basically a death sentence, and it splits the community unnecessarily.
Quests are not inherently bad and they are /tg/. They should be allowed on the board in small doses. If they fuck up, fine, back to the gulag with them. Not everything has to be black or white.
No.806
>>801
>The solution is already there - it's called /qu/.
You mean summary execution and exile. At least provide a link in the frontpage, for god's sake. /qu/ is entirely, completely, and totally dead, because it has no traffic. Roughly half the questing community doesn't know it exists, even if they visit 8chan, because it's not a top board, like /tg/, nor linked from one, like /d20/.
Provide a link, at least I will be happy. Otherwise, you're only showing what 8chan /tg/ did - that this was merely "Blackjack and Hookers /tg/", made to run away from things you didn't like and exclude them.
No.807
>>804
>why is this slope so slippery
I don't know, why don't you tell us? You're the one pushing us down it.
No.808
>>804
>helping a DM flesh out his setting / practicing worldbuilding isn't /tg/
Not unless it's directly tied to mechanics of a system. As soon as it leaves that place, it's not /tg/ anymore.
>/tg/ related stories isn't /tg/
Not all of them! After all, some of them are not married to a system, and some of the most notorious /tg/ stories are in fact *gasp* based on freeform! Which is, apparently, not /tg/.
>part of character creation isn't /tg/
I have literally never seen a system mentioned in a character creation thread, nor have mechanics ever been a concern in character art. Not /tg/.
No.809
>>808
My bad - Character art thread.
No.810
>>806
>it's not a top board, like /tg/, nor linked from one, like /d20/.
/d20/ is closing in on the top 25.
USA! USA! USA!
No.812
>>810
Hey, congratulations.
No, seriously. I want more traditional gaming at the top.
No.814
>>812
I still don't think /d20/ should replace /tg/, but it's good to have it gaining attention so that people can post /tg/ in it while /tg/ is under siege. I'm enjoying the refuge from the spam while we wait to see what happens to /tg/.
No.815
>>805
>I think this is a better solution
I disagree
>it splits the community unnecessarily
Keeping quests out of tg is necessary
>quests are not inherently bad
hah!
>and they are /tg/
they're also cancer
>they should be allowed on the board in small doses
I disagree. /tg/ was 100% fine without them.
>>806
>qu is entirely, completely, and totally dead
Because nobody likes quests anon, why can't you accept this
>Provide a link
No
>Otherwise, you're only showing what 8chan /tg/ did - that this was merely "Blackjack and Hookers /tg/", made to run away from things you didn't like and exclude them.
That's the fucking point you dingus. People that like quests can just make their own board.
>>807
>nou!
Simply epic anon.
>>808
>shitposting this hard
No.820
On second thought, a link to /qu/ might be okay, as long as no questfaggotry seeps into this board
No.821
>>815
>Because nobody likes quests anon, why can't you accept this
Hold on.
If no one likes quests, then allowing them isn't an issue. Because no one will post them, and they won't get bumped.
So... what again, are you scared of? Allowing something no one will post? Being overrun by... nothing? You're contradicting yourself directly, anon!
Also, poor form to call refutation shitposting. For shame.
No.822
>>820
If the link is there, you can always direct people to it in a sticky and in bans, and most would consider that fair.
Including me.
No.824
>>815
>I disagree
Provide reasoning.
>Keeping quests out of tg is necessary
I disagree, because I believe there is a workable solution wherein /tg/ has posters who like quests without those posters fucking up the board.
>hah!
RubyQuest ran on /tg/ just fine, everyone loved it, it produced shittons of OC, it wasn't fanfiction. Quests are not inherently bad.
>they're also cancer
No they aren't. Quests are not inherently bad.
>I disagree. /tg/ was 100% fine without them.
And it will be 100% fine with them.
>Because nobody likes quests anon, why can't you accept this
You're wrong.
>Simply epic anon.
You clearly don't understand what >>804 meant. That anon was making fun of your "writefagging isn't /tg/" stance. It's your slippery slope.
Stop dismissing argument as shitposting. You're shitposting the hardest here out of anybody.
No.829
Motion to make a link for /qu/ and nothing else. Objections?
No.830
>>822
The problem is that simply linking people to /qu/ won't help much. People will just go there, see that it's dead, and leave. In order for /qu/ to actually work there has to be multiple people there at the same time. That's why a cyclical thread where people can advertise their quests is best; they'll get people straight from /tg/ to come post in their quest at the same time they're running it, and that way they'll be satisfied with staying on /qu/.
>>829
Objection, see above.
No.831
File: 1440384695935.png (299.73 KB, 1080x1920, 9:16, Screenshot_2015-08-24-03-4….png)
>>824
No, you provide reasoning. One half decent quests does not excuse the million shit ones. Quests may not be inherently bad, but they go to shit real fast
>you clearly don't understand what >>804 meant. That anon was making fun of your "writefagging isn't /tg/ stance"
I'm pretty sure he wasn't. In fact, I'm pretty sure he was making fun of your "WELL IF THIS ISN'T /TG/ THEN NOTHING ELSE IS" stance :^)
>>822
Yes, this might be the best solution. /d20/ stays quest free, but people know where to find quests and /qu/ doesn't die as a result. Just keep a link in a / the sticky.
No.835
>>831
I've been providing reasoning this whole time. If you don't back up your arguments you can't expect anyone to take them seriously.
As for >>804, no, he was definitely making fun of you, hence his sarcastic response in >>808
No.837
>>835
Sorry, I mean >>800 not >>804
No.843
File: 1440385173427.png (225.03 KB, 1080x1920, 9:16, Screenshot_2015-08-24-03-5….png)
>>837
Nigger I am >>804 how do I need to spell it to you
I've also provided plenty reasoning as to why threads should be kept out of /tg/. All you've done is go "B-BUT THEY'RE TG! MUH RUBY QUEST" and "qu is dead", and the second one is solventable with a link on a sticky
No.844
>>830
>The problem is that simply linking people to /qu/ won't help much.
It's important to pick the battles you can win, anon. Even if you see that more is right.
/tg/ didn't even give us this, even with direct and reasonable emails to "Me".
Take what you can get. Wait for another chance. Contribute to /d20/ as they allow.
(You know, even if they are scared of a bogeyman even they think doesn't exist)
No.845
>>843
Do I need to spell it out to you that I linked the wrong post? >>800 is what I was referring to, I know you're >>804. >>800 was making fun of your "writefagging isn't /tg/" stance. It's your slippery slope.
>>844
Me isn't running this board. If I can get this guy to see my side of things there's some hope this could work out beneficially for everyone.
No.846
>>845
>quests
>beneficial
Didn't you learn anything from halfchan
No.847
>>846
Yeah, I learned that having UIPs on our board is good. Nobody's fucking arguing that we should have unlimited quests all the time spamming up the catalog. There's a middle ground between letting them run rampant and Nazifag-exiling them from the board.
No.851
>>847
And what is that middle ground? Having only 10 quests up at a time? 5? 3? That's fucking stupid.
Link on a sticky is not intrusive and will maybe breathe some life into qu. An eternal quest general will eventually become nothing more than people shilling their quests.
No.853
>>851
You know perfectly fucking well what that middle ground is. Zero quest threads, one quest general. A link will not breathe life into /qu/ because /qu/ is dead as dicks. There needs to be a game finder for quests so that people can run them, and since quests are /tg/ it might as well be here.
>An eternal quest general will eventually become nothing more than people shilling their quests.
So what? If that keeps them on /qu/ I'm all for it. You're just going to hide it anyway, what do you care if they shill in there?
No.854
>>853
>you're going to hide it anyway, why do you care what they shill in there
>you're going to hide quest threads anyway, what do you care if they're there
That's exactly the kind of thinking that got 4tg to its current state.
First it'll be a general. Then it'll be "D&D quest" and "MTG CYOA", and questfags will argue they're "tg related". I'd rather spare the board that shit.
No.856
I feel that it's a matter of people being interested. Hell, even /evol/ seems to have more activity than /qu/, and that's literally a niche board of a niche board.
No.857
>>854
No it won't. It will be one thread for all quest and CYOA discussion. If it ever gets to be more than that, burn it down.
Arguing that threads shouldn't exist whether you hide them or not is fine and dandy. Complaining about the content of the thread you should be hiding is bullshit. You still haven't explained why you care if they shill in there.
No.858
>>857
I have, several times in fact. Thing is you keep ignoring it while saying QUESTS ARE TG (even when they were banned on full/tg/)
No.859
>>856
/qu/ wasn't always dead, some questers came over with the rest of /tg/ last year. You can easily see that by how many threads it has in the catalog But when they were banned from /tg/ entirely they couldn't self-sustain. So one by one they stopped posting, which made it harder and harder for the board to continue. Now it's an empty husk. If it's rebuilt they will probably return.
No.861
>>858
What a joke of an argument. They were banned on 8/tg/ because of faggots like you. That's like if the /d20/ BO decided to bow to your bitching and ban them and you turned around and said "SEE! QUESTS ARE BANNED FROM /d20/! THEY'RE NOT /tg/!"
All I've seen from you is bitching about how quests aren't /tg/ because, uhhh, I don't want them, and also they're stinky. You haven't explained why you would care what went on inside a quest general, since you don't care about quests.
No.862
>>859
/evol/ made a thread, and it was deleted. But they're doing fine.
No.863
>>862
They have 5 active users, and one of those is probably you. That's... not 'fine.'
No.865
>>863
Not at all. None of them is me. But hey, at least they post.
Anyways, the reason quests were banned was because they were fucking cancer.
Before all of the quest shit happened, there used to be a couple of quest threads that were actually good because there were drawfaggots and shit.
btw, are you BO?
No.866
>>861
Look buddy, it's pretty fucking simple.
By creating that general, you're giving quests a "second home" in this board.
And when /qu/ inevitably disappears (because quests are shit and nobody likes them) all the questfags will start popping up here whining that quests are /tg/ because injecting themselves into an active board is easier than making a new board. And then /d20/ will be one step closer to 4tg.
No.867
>>863
Oh, and by the way. They're fine. In fact, they're the perfect example.
Even though there's 5 people, they're actually doing stuff and posting shit.
You see? It doesn't matter how niche the board is, it doesn't matter the number of people there are. As long as someone is interested, there will be activity.
No.870
>>866
>when /qu/ inevitably disappears
It can't, boards aren't deleted anymore.
>because quests are shit and nobody likes them
Then how are there questfags at all?
>And then /d20/ will be one step closer to 4tg.
So all this is going to happen within 11 days? /d20/ won't be around after that.
Questfags have their quests on /qu/. They're not going to leave for the same reason we're not going to leave /tg/. All our shit is there.
Fucking get a grip, man. 8/tg/ will never be 4/tg/. That's the whole reason we came to 8chan, because this is a place where that could never happen again. The circumstances are simply too different.
No.871
>>870
I don't know about you, but I left halfchan mainly because of the cancerous quest threads.
No.872
Ok, well, here's my ruling for the night:
It seems to be fairly evenly split in this argument. I personally think the idea of a /qu/ thread is fine, but it's not about my vision of /tg/ but rather what the users want. Here's my action: The current CYOA thread will be bumplocked and a link to /qu/ will be added to the announcement, along with some rules. Any further CYOA/quest threads that are created will be deleted.
If /tg/ gets a new board owner, we can re-open this discussion then. If it doesn't, the discussion is ultimately meaningless. Either way, let's table it for now and move on to other meta matters.
No.875
>>872
Thanks, BO. You're a pretty reasonable guy.
No.876
>>872
Better than nothing, I guess.
At least you listen, at the very least.
No.878
>>865
>btw, are you BO?
No, he isn't. And I consider myself an anonymous user just like you, the only time I will claim responsibility for posts is if I put the owner capcode on them. I have no desire to link my presence on the board with my actions as a hotpocket. I just want to talk about traditional games.
No.879
>>878
Yeah, sorry about that. Got abit confused for a second.
No.880
Any other meta stuff that needs discussion?
No.881
>>880
Board IDs were discussed, Quests and cyoa as well...
I don't think so.
No.883
Well, you can discuss whether or not we should have a sticky. Right now I've decided to forego one and use the announcement field instead, to allow for more threads on the first page. I think page-one space is valuable.
No.884
>>883
What about fancy text?
No.885
>>884
You mean like $$ and stuff?
No.886
>>885
Yeah. I know most people know how to use it but...
Whatever. I'm just nitpicking now.
No.887
A sticky can hold more information than an announcement field.
It's also visible on mobile.
No.890
>>887
The announcement field links to pages which can contain more information than a sticky. All browsers display the announcement, if whatever mobile client you're using doesn't show them you should take it up with the developer.
No.894
How about forced anonymity? Do we need namefags here?
No.895
>>894
>namefags
Too useful when they're used correctly
Too easy to filter out when they're bad
It's a flexible compromise over forced IDs
>>883
>I think page-one space is valuable
does nobody just use the catalog by default?
No.896
>>895
/tg/ is notoriously bad at ignoring tripfags, though.
No.916
excuse me LT BO
why is it called d20? I mean moot made tg for 40k, and d20 is probably the most ragged on system of any by fatguys.
why not /3d6/ or /d100/?
No.917
>>916
It was suggested by another fa/tg/uy. Other alternatives were /d8/ and /trg/. This is just the one people started using. Plus, it's a better name than /3d6/ or /d100/. Just rolls off the tongue better. And D20 is sort of the grandfather of modern tabletop gaming.
No.918
>>916
Please stop using a terrible meme I made a year ago. Also call the Inquisition, I will accept whatever punishment they mete out for me.
No.919
What're the thoughts on thread IDs, Stinky?
No.922
>>776
That's a manticore from MGE, not a fox.
No.924
>>917
>>916
Brand recognition too.
Casuals think tabletop stuff they think of d20's.
No.926
can we get some banners going?
and can we make this the permanent traditional games board? legacy board names need to go
No.931
>>926
Banners are currently disabled.
No.935
>>894
I'd prefer no name fields and thread IDs.
No.949
>>931
Seems the banners are back on! I'm seing the default "web's top slime pit". Why were they gone in the first place, technical issues?
No.951
Is /tg/ going to get well guys :(?
No.953
>>951
Not with that attitude
No.955
>>951
Eventually.
If not we'll move to d20.
If d20 is shit we can just make another board
No.961
>>955
You know,d20 is gonna move to tg,so you won't have a choice.
No.965
/d20/ is a temporary board, there's no reason to stay here longer than 10 days. If Me comes back then we can all go back to /tg/, if not then there'll be a new board owner on /tg/ (possibly the same one as /d20/, possibly not), and we can all go back to /tg/.
No.976
>>975
Started from the bottom now we here at the top
Top 25
No.978
>>975
>>976
We're /tg/ so yeah of course why'd you be surprised
No.981
It seems that /tg/ is normal now.
No.983
No.984
>>983
At least the faggot with the script is gone.
No.985
No.986
>>985
The BO of /tg/ hasn't posted yet.
No.1011
>>983
>this is what /intl/ actually believes
No.1016
>>961
Unless tg BO comes back and does nothing?
No.1043
>>985
Yeah, he's just got school this week. He'll come back and spam us some more once he's finished his homework.
No.1050
>>965
I don't get why people are so intent on sticking with a board just due to letters.
No.1063
No.1074
>>1063
There's nothing wrong with legacy pride, after all if anyone comes from halfchan, they'll check on boards with same names they are used to (I pity the prudish pokemon fans coming from halfchan). Although even that's not necessary considering we have a catalogue tagging system, but oh well, legacy is legacy!
No.1076
>>1043
Well, looks like the spam is back on now.
No.1077
Great, do people on /tg/ realize that, with such willing spammers, absent moderation won't do good, and divided, shrunken boards are more easily targetable by mass spam and shitposting?
I don't see why there's need to distrust /d20/ owner anymore now that the board can be spammed into oblivion without a sweat!
No.1079
BO, when the situation is fixed you should delete this board.
Just sayin', there's bound to be people who'll try to leave and split the userbase.
No.1088
>>1079
I planned on setting it to redirect to /tg/ automatically.
No.1098
>>268
Doesn't seem inclusive enough?
What the hell bro?
No.1196
Come on, BO, start earning your hot pockets.
No.1248
No.1250
No.1262
Just want to remind everyone here that when /tg/ elects a new BO, and there is no longer any danger of spam, /d20/ will be shut down, so wrap up your conversations and take anything you want to keep over to /tg/.
No.1266
>>1098
I think he means that /d20/ implies that only d20 system discussion is welcome.
No.1273
>>1262
>Implying the original BO isn't just logging in to keep his seat warm, and preventing a election.
No.1293
Well, the board election is goin' and it's a lot more complicated than last time. If you enjoyed your time on this board, feel free to go to >>>/tg/173772 and vote for #28 (me).
No.1300
So when are you shutting down /d20/? Chrow's elected.
No.1302
>>1300
I've tried making it redirect to /tg/ but I'm not really sure how. And I can't delete the board or anything. So as soon as I figure out how, I guess.