Quote from: IMLegend;372543So by that logic rape-porn and Romeo & Juliet are mostly the same because they both contain sex of some kind? Saturday morning cartoons and tentacle-porn are mostly the same because they both involve animation? C'mon man, I give you credit for being smarter than Pundit.

Jesus fuck, has everyone on this fucking forum just forgotten how to fucking read?  That is literally the opposite of my fucking point, you stupid motherfucker.  

Also, I think you need to go back and re-read Romeo & Juliet, because there's no sex scene in that play.  

Jadeclaw is furry because it's designed by, and created for, people who identify themselves as furry.  It's a pretty uncontroversial statement to make.

I'm continuously amazed at how crusty my walrus suit gets after just one weekend's use.
Do you guys use a dry cleaner?

Quote from: J Arcane;372556Jesus fuck, has everyone on this fucking forum just forgotten how to fucking read?  That is literally the opposite of my fucking point, you stupid motherfucker.

Whoops, my bad, I misinterpreted your poorly worded sentence. Fucking wow.

QuoteAlso, I think you need to go back and re-read Romeo & Juliet, because there's no sex scene in that play.

A poor example on my part. They spend the night together at one point, but it doesn't describe the goings-on. Many interpret that night as including sex. As I said, I could have chosen better.

QuoteJadeclaw is furry because it's designed by, and created for, people who identify themselves as furry.  It's a pretty uncontroversial statement to make.

I'm not familiar with Jadeclaw nor the company that makes it. WHICH WAS WHY I ASKED THE FUCKING QUESTION YOU STUPID MOTHERFUCKER. Look back at my post. I said right there I wasn't familiar with them. Apparently you need to brush up on your own reading skills fuckbag.

Quote from: Aos;372572I'm continuously amazed at how crusty my walrus suit gets after just one weekend's use.

Oh.  You are the walrus.  So, who was the eggman?

There are some things walrus was not meant to know.

I don't want to know where the eggman is. Not right this minute.

Quote from: IMLegend;372540Ummm, I'm just curious here. If Jadeclaw doesn't have anything in it about perverted furry-sex, then why is the company that makes it "clearly" a furry-run company? I'm not really familiar with any of their products so I don't know.

If a company is best known for making three furry-themed games, they're probably a furry-run company, wouldn't you say? Though I guess you could claim they're just clever and amoral businessmen who are selling to a Furry market, but the end result is the same.

QuoteOn a somewhat seperate note, I fail to see how calling you on your bullshit statistics constitutes "excusing away degenerates". Ignoring your idiotic, imaginary "statistics" has nothing to do with "excusing" theoretical deviant behavior. So 90% of people who play Usagi Yojimbo are automatically furry scum because you proclaim it so? Wow, that's just mindblowingly full of shit. I hate to break it to ya but there are "degenerates" of all sorts, all around you, at all times, whether you know it or not. Do you avoid all TV programs because I claim that 90% of TV writers and actors are deviant child rapers? My claim doesn't make it so. And if you allow that bogus claim to deny you whatever pleasure might be gained from watching said programs that just makes you, well, pathetic I guess. So you deny yourself the chance to play a game, in a setting you profess to enjoy greatly, because you can't bear the thought that somewhere, sometime, someone else played this game in an unsavory manor, or committed other deviant behaviour outside of the game? Whatever, man. That is beyond pathetic.

Would you feel better if it was 60%? Do you really think it'd be less than 50%?  Even if it was 30%, and one in three people who got into Jadeclaw were hardcore furries, that would still mean that one in three people who play that game are people with odious personal fetishes that I wouldn't want in my group.

QuoteI suppose I don't have much room to talk on the topic. I don't play Amber because I don't like to be around pretentious, sycophantic, storytelling dipshits enthralled by the ramblings of a fantasy hack. (shrug) Whatever.

Aw, off-topic ad hominem attacks. The last refuge of the hopelessly inept.

RPGPundit

Quote from: J Arcane;372556Jadeclaw is furry because it's designed by, and created for, people who identify themselves as furry.  It's a pretty uncontroversial statement to make.

Apparently the exception is if I make it. Then the Pundit-haters will try to warp time and space till they can bend reality backward in an effort to argue that a game where you play furry anthropomorphic animal-humanoids couldn't possibly have a single furry player.

RPGPundit

Ok, so Pundit's point is granted, the people who made Jadeclaw/Ironclaw decided to focus on anthropomorphic rpg's and they did so in an era after the yiff taint had infected the furry movement.

However, seeing as how the games themselves are devoid of yiff elements, isn't it possible that they just said "Yeah the yiff guys are ruining furry fandom, but fuck it, we like Usagi and TMNT and are making a game"?

Quote from: RPGPundit;372503Really? Please show exactly where in those two blocks of text there is a contradiction.

Quote from: Previous Pundit StatementThe only difference between the two games now is that TMNT was published by Palladium, which is clearly not a furry-run company, and the new Usagi Yojimbo is published by the people who did Jadeclaw, which are very clearly furries

Quote from: Previous Pundit Statmenthaven't read the latest edition of the Usagi Yojimbo RPG; I have read Jadeclaw, and at least from my cursory read it had nothing visibly in the system itself about perverted furry-sex.

If a company is "clearly run by furries" and then the game has nothing to do with furry pervent sex in any way, shape, or form. I would say it is pretty contradictory. Because how can a company be "run by furries" when the game has by your own admission nothing to do with creepy furry crap? Except the characters are anthropomorphic animals.
 

Quote from: RPG PunditNope.

I dont know what to tell you it seems pretty plain.

Quote from: RPG PunditAw, now you're trying to use the Geek Social Fallacies to excuse away degenerates. Do you really think we fall for that "you have to be tolerant of everyone because you got wedgied in high school" shit here?

That has nothing to do with it. Thats a bad attempt to redirect and avoid the clear topic. It has every thing to do with you making up statistics to make your case.

Quote from: RPG Pundityou might remember that nine-tenths of the people who do play this game, including maybe some of the very people at your table (was someone there REALLY eager to play this particular game? Maybe someone has a favorite animal-type that he seems to be really getting into?) are people who get off on cannibalistic hermaphrodite dog-people urinating on zebra "cubs".

What do you base this off? What hard data do you have to support this? You literally used conjecture, bias, and personal opinion (to quote myself). Then portray that as fact. It has nothing to do with "Geek Fallacies". I was making a point that any one can make up statistics to back up their point. It doesnt make them right. As to the wegied thing. Nice personal attack in lieu of an actual point or argument. But that sort of thing never happened to me. Do I perhaps sense a little of your background experiences?

Quote from: RPG PunditReally? They're associated with D&D? Heavy-metal faux satanists, maybe. And I must admit I don't actually know what an "emo vampire weasel" is, exactly, but it sure as hell sounds like they'd be shitting all over D&D and playing Vampire.

Doent know what an emo vampire weasel is? Spend some time stateside or in canada at a comic and/or game shop you'll meet one and know exactly what I mean. Their easy to spot. Oh, and yes they play D&D. (Vampire is so 90's dont you know?)

Quote from: RPG PunditOh, but one of the absolutely concrete merits or flaws of a game is the people who play it. One of the reasons I don't play Vampire is to not have to have my gaming tarnished by being around a bunch of pretentious pseudo-artiste goths.

Why would you put yourself in the position to play with people like that? You can play Vampire without playing with "pseudo-artiste goths". The game (Vampire) I ran back in the day certainly had none of those types of people playing. I suppose the hardcore vampire people would say we played it wrong. But we played it our way and had fun. We didnt let the preconceived notions of other people ruin our enjoyment. Why do you?

Quote from: RPG PuniditOne of the reasons I don't play Dogs In the Vinyard, besides the fact that its not a real RPG, is that I don't want to be playing around gang of moronic pseudo-intellectuals who imagine themselves radical beat poets.

Well cant cant totally disagree with that. As I really dislike that game. But it because of the ruleset and the way it affects play. Not because of the people who play it, reguardless I wouldnt play with people like that. (gang of moronic pseudo-intellectuals who imagine themselves radical beat poets, that is)

Quote from: RPG PunditAnd one of the reasons I don't play Jadeclaw is because I don't want to be around a bunch of diaper-wearing furry-fetishists who get off on masturbating to pictures of unspeakably degenerate shit being portrayed in anthropomorphic form.

Yet you would, and do play Rifts. By your thinking, comments, and judgement its just as bad. As it contains mutant/anthropomorphic animals, dragons, and etc. You assume that everyone who plays it (Usagi, TNMT, Rifts, Jadeclaw, or insert current target of hate here) is a furry douchebag. When they (furries) are the minority of an already small minority of people know as RPG gamers. When the majority of these games players are normal gamers just like you and I.

Quote from: RPGPundit;372654Apparently the exception is if I make it. Then the Pundit-haters will try to warp time and space till they can bend reality backward in an effort to argue that a game where you play furry anthropomorphic animal-humanoids couldn't possibly have a single furry player.

RPGPundit

Umm it has nothing to do with you. News flash the earth does not revolve around you. Oh and if your theory is correct who is the furry is your Rifts game? Being that Rifts is a game that you could play a "furry anthropomorphic animal-humanoid". Did no one take that choice? Does that mean that a pontential furry game game can be played with out it being tainted by furries? Did your SFD 1 crew ever fight against dogboys? Does, or would that make you a furry sicko for introducing them into a game?

I liked this thread better when we were talking about the Usagi Yojimbo games.

Pundit, stop derailing the thread with your imaginary bullshit. Even if what you said were true, I wouldn't care, when I played UY I played it with my friends.

All I was getting at originally is that with a property like this, in the hands of a company like Sanguine, I would be concerned it would be overly focused on the characters being animal people, as opposed to them being Japanese people who look like animals.

For example, I'm not convinced that making them into statted races makes any sense for the setting.  I think one should just make a character, and decide what animal makes the most sense for what they have in mind.  I can only think of one character that possessed any peculiar abilities that might warrant additional rules coverage, and that's because he was a snake with no arms.

Maybe I'd be better off just getting Sengoku or one of the other historic Japan games, and just adding on the animal thing myself as flavor text.

Quote from: Ronin;372723If a company is "clearly run by furries" and then the game has nothing to do with furry pervent sex in any way, shape, or form. I would say it is pretty contradictory. Because how can a company be "run by furries" when the game has by your own admission nothing to do with creepy furry crap? Except the characters are anthropomorphic animals.

I didn't say that it has nothing to do with creepy furry crap; I said it has no visible system elements that overtly present deviant furry sex. This in no way contradicts the fact that the people who are behind Jadeclaw, Ironclaw, and the current Usagi Yojimbo game are obviously furries.
And by virtue of being a game about furries designed after the late 1980s, its patently got SOMETHING to do with perverted furry crap, because ALL furry stuff has to do with it, because that's all that furries are about anymore, because they let the Lawncrappers come in and hopelessly taint their hobby to the point that anything furry is poisoned by the knowledge of what the average furry is into.
 

QuoteWhat do you base this off? What hard data do you have to support this?

Are you attacking the veracity of my claim or the lack of cited sources for my claim? Because those are two totally different things.
If you're doing the latter, then I really don't give a twopenny fuck about your argument, because you're trying to get off on a technicality; if you actually believe that what I've said is true and you're only trying to question whether I have some kind of peer-reviewed bullshit as though that's needed to somehow legitimize what is already true, you're a fucking twat.
On the other hand, if you are really trying to say that my claim is not true, and that you actually think that the majority of people who are into Jadeclaw are NOT furries, then you had best try to make your argument about that very central issue, instead of jerking off over the question of said technicalities.
And of course, my response would be: Seriously? You seriously want to claim that Jadeclaw is NOT an RPG made by furries, for furries?

QuoteYou literally used conjecture, bias, and personal opinion (to quote myself). Then portray that as fact. It has nothing to do with "Geek Fallacies". I was making a point that any one can make up statistics to back up their point. It doesnt make them right.

And on the other hand, if I am right, then I don't need a statistic to be right.

QuoteAs to the wegied thing. Nice personal attack in lieu of an actual point or argument. But that sort of thing never happened to me. Do I perhaps sense a little of your background experiences?

No, I'm just addressing your pathetic appeal to emotion at suggesting that I'm the mean bad man who is trying to keep the people who like to shit in their front lawns from our neighbourhood just because I'm Intolerant and that's bad always so I must be wrong to be so mean to the Jadeclaw Furries.

QuoteDoent know what an emo vampire weasel is? Spend some time stateside or in canada at a comic and/or game shop you'll meet one and know exactly what I mean. Their easy to spot. Oh, and yes they play D&D. (Vampire is so 90's dont you know?)

Well, given that I still don't have a clue what you specifically mean by "emo vampire weasel", and barring anyone else coming forward and actually defining the term (since you clearly don't seem inclined to do so yourself), I'm just going to have to go ahead and assume that you're full of shit.

QuoteYet you would, and do play Rifts. By your thinking, comments, and judgement its just as bad. As it contains mutant/anthropomorphic animals, dragons, and etc. You assume that everyone who plays it (Usagi, TNMT, Rifts, Jadeclaw, or insert current target of hate here) is a furry douchebag. When they (furries) are the minority of an already small minority of people know as RPG gamers. When the majority of these games players are normal gamers just like you and I.

Again, RIFTS is a game published by a gaming company not particularly known as a "furry company", whereas Jadeclaw is. I've never heard of furries talking about how awesome it is to have a game like RIFTS around, whereas the same cannot be said of Iron/Jadeclaw. To really point at RIFTS and say "Dog boy" (or Traveller and say "Aslan!" or RC D&D and say "Rakasta") and claim that this one element somehow overrides the entire rest of the (non-furry themed) elements of the game and transforms it into a "furry game" is just stupid.

In RIFTS you can play a headhunter, a cyborg, a glitter boy, a dog boy, a dragon, a shifter, a cyber-doc, or twenty thousand other things (almost literally; I mean have you seen how many fucking classes they are?) and you fight everything from techno-nazis to dark sorcerers to alien entities to dinosaurs and much more.

In Jadeclaw, you play a fur. You can choose among various kinds of furs. You fight against furs.

One of these things is in no way like the other. What you did is like claiming that FATAL and D&D are exactly the same because in FATAL you spend inordinate amounts of time focused on mechanics about violent rape and penis diameter, and in D&D there is an item called the Girdle of Femininity/Masculinity.

RPGPundit

Quote from: J Arcane;372774All I was getting at originally is that with a property like this, in the hands of a company like Sanguine, I would be concerned it would be overly focused on the characters being animal people, as opposed to them being Japanese people who look like animals.

For example, I'm not convinced that making them into statted races makes any sense for the setting.  I think one should just make a character, and decide what animal makes the most sense for what they have in mind.  I can only think of one character that possessed any peculiar abilities that might warrant additional rules coverage, and that's because he was a snake with no arms.

Maybe I'd be better off just getting Sengoku or one of the other historic Japan games, and just adding on the animal thing myself as flavor text.

A pretty concrete example about how making it about Furry-ness changes things at a fundamental level.

RPGPundit