Game Finder Thread

File: Small magic scroll.jpg (41KB, 330x351px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 330x351px

bump

File: dirtyjimtherebel.png (1MB, 1440x810px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1440x810px

>GM or Player
Yes

>System(s)
Both.

>Time availability
Only once.

>Text or Voice
Have been known to.

>Contact Information
By moonlight only.

>Additional Information
N/A

File: 1429120776720.jpg (86KB, 445x467px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 445x467px

>GM or Player
GM
>System(s)
Marvel Heroic Roleplaying
>Time availability
Sundays 10AM - 2PM CDT
>Text or Voice
roll20 with Skype for voice
>Contact Information
[email protected]
>Additional Information
Using an original setting where our heroes are investigating a bizarre explosion that led to a swathe of mutations in a slum neighborhood.

Rulebooks and cheatsheet available upon request.

Game already in progress but we're looking to pick up another player to round out the group.

File: Walled city windows.jpg (341KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

341KB, 1024x683px

>GM or Player
>System(s)
Homebrew, based roughly on Into the Odd and other OSR style games.
>Time availability
Most of the afternoon and night on the West Coast USA. Sunday is the intended game day, though we could talk more about it.
>Text or Voice
Voice.
>Contact Information
Skype- RuRuRuRufus

>Additional Information
The game is going to be played in a homebrew setting of my own design. It features a city in another realm, an alien dimension where it is always night time. The pulse of life there is slow and steady. Guns and cars made of scrap metal and junk are very common, due to their dirtiness guns are called Chimneys and those who tinker with them are called Sweeps. Psychics, magic and other strangeness exist here as well, along with the diversity of the races in the city.

Your player characters will be Gardeners- adventurers in the city going to the dead and hidden places and extracting treasure and power from them. Skirt around street gangs, explore the mystic underground and grab your guns.

>>48921838
email sent, lets hookup baby

>>48921000
Question, what do I need to include to allow people to add me as a friend on Discord? I don't think just my username will be enough.

>GM or Player
Either
>System(s)
Shadowrun 5e
>Time Availability
Sun-Thurs, 1900 to 0100 EST
>Text or Voice
Ideally text only, but voice will do if needed.
>Contact Information
[email protected]
>Additional Information
Kind of new player, looking for a semi-forgiving enviroment.

File: goblin-slayer1.jpg (89KB, 750x380px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 750x380px

>GM or Player
Player
>System(s)
Most experienced with 3.5e and WH40kRP (Black Crusade in particular) but am fine with trying anything.
>Time availability
Anytime from 3pm onward (UTC-7)
>Text or Voice
Prefer text, but fine with both
>Contact Information
Skype: Sub-Scorpio/Skirmishfrogs
>Additional Information
In the mood for something along the lines of low fantasy/grimdark fantasy, but fine with playing anything.

File: sfrgwgwrg.png (6KB, 119x45px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 119x45px

>GM or Player
GM
>System
Pathfinder
>Time availability
Current time is Sunday Evening EST; can change to Friday or Saturday Evening
>Text or Voice
Skype Text
>Contact Information
https://discord.gg/PHcUr
>Additional Information
Homebrew campaign set in homebrew setting.
Intentionally small and basic setting, norse influences.
Level 4.
Newbies accepted.
PoW permitted
Accepting up to two players.

>GM or Player
Judge
>System(s)
DCC
>Time availability
figuring it out soon
>Text or Voice
either
>Contact Information
harvey.vdarski
>Additional Information

LOOKING
FOR
PLAYERS

>>48925638
Funnel or starting at level? Setting?

>>48925980

chained coffin, funnel.

>GM or Player
Seeking Players (may find a co gm)
>System(s)
Star Wars FFG: Edge of the Empire, Force and Destiny (maybe Age of Rebellion also)
>Time availability
Saturday 7pm Eastern Time to usually 11ish (some occasional time fluctuation)
>Text or Voice
Text on Skype
>Contact Information
Levi_Will (Skype)
>Additional Information
Game is primarily set in the edge of the empire setting consideration with many uses of Force and Destiny (option to later on join the rebellion, but not required)

>>48927458
You are aware that there is a power disparity between the books, yes? I'd recommend running content out of one particular book, rather than trying to run all of them.

Anyone doing any ERP?

>>48927458
If only I knew the system ;_;

>>48928058
Yes.

>>48928172
Got a Skype or something?

>>48927458
Not to make it a whole thing, but why Skype, of all places?
Roll20 or Google Hangouts have handy dice macros so that everything is easy and handy and fudge-proof.

>>48928236
oem.kfoll

>>48928072
It's easy as balls. Just go for it.

>>48928058
I'd run a solo game for someone interested, especially if they're a dom

>>48928293
>oem.kfoll
Sorry, not really a dom myself.

>>48928337
whoops, didn't mean to include that greentext bit.

>>48921000
Fuck it
>GM
>5e, Apocalypse World
>evenings and weekends, not Sunday
>you better be able to talk, anon
>[email protected]
I have some rough ideas, but I always like to hear what players want to do.
Would not recommend as a first D&D game.

>>48928256
Sent you a request.

>>48925160
>Text or Voice
>Skype
>Contact
>Discord
???

>>48928293

I'm a dom. Let's talk. Gibe skype please.

>>48928431
discord for vetting/application.

>>48928293
>>48928563
I'm not a dom but if you'd like to DM for 2 players I'd be interested. If not then no worries though.

File: battledress.jpg (193KB, 760x596px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 760x596px

who'd be interested in some PF ERP based on pic related?

File: 1447375864534.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Since a few people are discusing it now might as well

>GM or Player
Player
>System(s)
D&D 5e or PDF related (looking for ERP)
>Time availability
Pretty flexible on time really.
>Text or Voice
Text
>Contact Information
Just reply to this if you're interested. No need to put my contact info up if no one wants to reply.
>Additional Information

>>48928362
>Would not recommend as a first D&D game.

Why's that?

>>48928022
Is there? Nominally they are meant to be compatible eg Jedi start with a force point but have 2 less class skills

File: this fucking thread.png (67KB, 321x236px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 321x236px

>>48928293

Cocktease.

>>48928677
Then why use Skype at all?
Discord is just better!skype anyway.

>>48925638

Sent a request on skype

>>48929164
You're right tho.
Anon is mixing 'Jedi all have strong melee skills' with 'power disparity'
He forgets that in the movies, there are times when Jedi have to painstakingly try and cut through a thick door because none of them have any skill in slicing, and it costs them the mission.

Being able to sword real good isn't everything. Even in Star Wars.

File: 1471271928883.jpg (203KB, 1000x728px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1000x728px

>>48921000
Who the fuck is in Colorado near Denver? I've got a game with four ppl (2 girls 2 guys) that are personable, roleplay decent and shower regularly. Any one here fit that and wanna join in a game?

File: Снимок.png (4KB, 115x55px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 115x55px

>>48923530
dis digits

bemp

>>48921000
Posting two for two different people, you can take one of us or both.

Anon #1
>GM or Player
Player
>System(s)
I'm pretty flexible, and willing to look at and probably anything really. I have experience with Shadowrun 5th Edition, and D&D 4th Edition as well as D&D 5th Edition.
>Time availability
Fridays and Sundays are ideal, and Saturdays can be swung depending on hours. If you want more specifics hit me up and we'll work something out.
>Text or Voice
General preference for voice, willing to give text a shot though. Fine with using Discord, Skype, and I have a bit of experience with roll20 and can learn anything else if that turns you on.
>Contact information
Email is [email protected] and you can use that to hit me up on anything
>Additional Information
I'm not really intrested in ERP. I have a fair bit of experience with GM'ing so if you want a little bit of help with prep work and world building I'm fine with contributing what I can, but I don't want to actually run shit right now.

Anon #2
>GM or Player
Player
>System(s)
They want to run something space themed if at all possible, but otherwise the same on all counts and the same experience set.
>Time availability
Currently completley free to run at any and all hours
>Text or Voice
Voice only. Same as above, knows Discord, Skype, and roll20 but is willing to learn
>Contact Information
Skype at rikkaarashi or just bug Anon #1 about it and I'll hook you up
>Additional Information
They kind of have their heart set on playing a psychic character, if the setting doesn't have that then they said that it has to be a high-tech setting of some sort. They would prefer something with both but either is fine. Generally prefers that the setting isn't completley insane whatever that means.

Also, try to be clear about why you're trying to contact. If you're afraid you're reaching the wrong person for whatever reason just mention something about bananas.

>>48929161
Not him, but that usually means that the campaign is lethal and poorly built characters and characters that don't know what they are doing will die.

>GM/Player
Player
>System Preferred
DnD 4&5E, 40k games, Fantasy Craft, Savage Worlds and number of others.
>Times Available (WITH timezone!)
Looking to fill out my Saturdays, According to http://www.thetimezoneconverter.com/ I am in CEST/UTC+2. I can play starting from about 2 pm to 4 pm, I may have to quit mid game for about 30 mins at about 8 pm or above [8:30 etc.]. I also have most of my weekdays free.
>Method of Play (Skype, IRC, roll20, discord, etc)
R20, I can use maptools if needed though. I am up for both voice and text games, slight preference towards text but it's nothing big.
>Contact Info
Bob#8904 on discord, ragehawk1 on skype, discord preferred.
>Additional Notes
I am up for fantasy to apocalypse to multitude of other settings, just hit me up. I mean, what else can I say here. Had a few games, I am not complete retard when it comes to roleplaying. I may require some help with making a character/understanding rules, but I was told that I am not too overly dense.

>>48930765
Could also mean "We're using generic fantasyworld politics a lot and that's gonna need some doing."

>>48931180
I would say that the latter often implies the former and vice versa.

>>48921000
>GM or Player
GM with currently 4 validated players.

>System(s)
Mostly LotFP those last years, BoL now, HQRPG someday, we do OSR and rules-light games.

>Time availability
We use Doodle to schedule a game each week.

>Text or Voice
Voice.

>Contact Information
[spoilers]skype : liquidocelot99[/spoilers]
[spoilers]t-that's an old account[/spoilers]

>Additional Information
We're french. We speak french, we play in french. Any french here? When people are invited, we put them in the Pool. During their time in the pool, they get the occasion to play with the other potential recruits and at least one of our three admins. Then you play normally, and we see if we want to play with you. When all three admins have given their approval, you're in. If one or more admins are in doubt, you get extra sessions, but most of the time that means there's an issue or a redflag somewhere, so that's that.

Things that are instant redflags : shameless yiff, being an SJW, using Tumblr for anything else than porn, browsing /pol/ for serious purposes, being overtly or subtly racist, islamophobic, or hating on gays, trans and other sissies, which are all fine in our book. If you're a trans or other things like that, we still will judge you if you're being a dick, a huge pussy or annoying, but that's on its own merit, not particularly because of who you are. The only prejudiced people on this group are SJW which are now a no-go after having one of them around for far too long.

>>48931745
Psst, français maître de jeu, it's easier to use ctrl+s for spoilers than it is to type them.

>>48931840
merci

>>48931745
Damn, them's a lot of rules.

>>48932275
You haven't seen what I've seen man. Now everything's great. The few people we rejected turned out to be pretty bad elements for the people who took them in. Our old group was ripped apart by sjw faggotry and overall tryhard cringiness.

>>48931745
>99
>French
You must be 18 or older to post here. Surrender and get out, frog.

File: TME_characters.jpg (89KB, 496x322px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 496x322px

>GM/Player
Player
>System Preferred
The Mutant Epoch
>Contact Info
Skype: jaso111111/Jason Kordelis
>Additional Notes
Im trying to get a group together to try out The Mutant Epoch. Obviously i tried GMing myself but it din't go so well. However i have all the books needed and can provide them, and im willing to help anyone learn the system.

>>48928293
>>48928563
>>48928744
Sorry, wound up throwing that up, and completely forgetting about it. My bad. If anyone is interested, I'll be hanging out on IRC, Server Rizon, room #ERPthing. I'll get a skype going as well, didn't have one made before this. I will post that in a bit.

>>48929415
I am. I'd be down for IRL game. Got something I can contact you by?

>>48929161
What I mean is not necessarily what anon here >>48930765
and here >>48931180
are saying (though it may, depending on the desires of the players), it's more that I'm not really looking to sit down and teach people online how to play. I like having experienced players, makes things run more efficiently.

>>48933777
>>48929244
>>48928744
>>48928563
And, Skype is Rose Ary, avatar is a rose.

>>48928845
do you mean ERP as in RP with E elements or just pure murderfucking everything all the time?

>>48934026
Based on the picture, I'd assume the latter.

>>48922137
Why are you using Skype for voice?

>>48934006
Okay, I'm just gonna make this a proper post I guess, since those guys are apparently long gone.

>GM or Player
Willing to GM, though definitely not adverse to playing if anyone wants to run
>System(s)
Have a massive library of systems, what is used depends on game
>Time availability
Varies, but I have a lot of free time, so should be easy to squeeze in
>Text or Voice
Definitely text
>Contact Information
Rose Ary on Skype, avatar is a rose. Email the account is signed up with is [email protected]
>Additional Information
Looking to get together a small 2 or 3 person ERP game. Not a full blown fuckfest, just a semi-serious game, that isn't afraid to detour into lewd stuff. I'm mostly a sub, and while I don't mind doing Dom stuff, don't go into this expecting much of that from me.

>>48931745
Dude what
You say 'no SJWs' but then have a bunch of SJW-type restrictions.
How are you going to blame someone for being a bit scared of Islam when there are places that are basically under assault by Islam itself?
That's victim blaming.

>>48934400
I don't know what to expect but added.

>>48935502
>when there are places that are basically under assault by Islam itself
Including France.

They might not want to admit how bad it is in their own country.

Which is fair enough. Looking outside to see the truth of how bad things really are is a horrifying concept.

>>48936446
I didn't want to say it.

>>48934400
>Rose Ary on Skype, avatar is a rose. Email the account is signed up with is [email protected]

I'd like to add you but there are like, a hundred Rose Ary's on Skype and none of them have an avatar, much less an avatar of a rose.

>>48937331
Then what is your skype? Let me add you.

>>48937378
Not him but if youre not full, add apocalypsebacon

File: giphy.gif (423KB, 500x254px) Image search: [Google]

423KB, 500x254px

>>48933860
email me at mdpuentes@g mail.com?

>>48933860
And pleeeease tell me you fit those three things here >>48929415?

Also: Tell me a little about your self in your email?

>>48937786
Well I'm a transwomyn, is that okay?

>>48937378

My Skype is a_zombie_goast, I've got a friend that would be deeply interested in joining this campaign too, depending on what the system and rules are.

>>48937786
Sent. Let me know if you have any questions.

>>48938173
>ERPG
>I've got a friend that would like to join.

I love you /tg/.

>>48938198
>>48938173
Trashy as all hell.

File: Frozen Rivers.jpg (711KB, 2288x1920px) Image search: [Google]

711KB, 2288x1920px

>>48934400
If you've still got space I'd be up sierrawho

>>48938275
>>48938173
Sent, make sure you double check.

>>48938198
>>48938209

They're an online contact, obviously.

Anyone in here doing old school D&D for their games?

>>48939283
Run properly with minor house rules, 5e D&D feels really oldschool without the annoyance of tables tables tables or the problem of some characters being worthless for the first four to five levels.

>>48934039
Because roll20's voice chat isn't my favorite and we all had Skype.

>>48939838
A-are you running a game? I just want some old school fantasy fun, man.

>>48934031
>>48934026
actually I figured we could do both. murderfucking and night-rest erp/non-combat challenge erp

>>48940624
Yeah the part i have the problem with is the murderfucking.
More specifically the "murder" part connected to the fucking.
It's alright to have erotic combat but if you're actually going to kill things and in the same encounter fuck things.... that's a bit shit.

otherwise i'd be interested.

>>48927458
Full, apologies.

>>48940920
i'd actually interpret murderfuckimg differently. rather than doing both simultaneously, it means solving all problems by either murder or fucking.

>>48941327
Yeah but i'm largely a pacifist.
Soooo... diplomacyfucking?

Fuckomacy?

>>48941352
you fuckin' pervert. murderfucking too good for the likes of tou?

>>48941413
I just don't like murder and grimdark things.
Might be the reason why i'm so out of games that i'm even interested in ERPG.

>>48935502
I think what he means is it's one thing to say "IS is a huge problem, it sucks that Donald Trump's proposed measures might affect peaceful Muslims as well but it's necessary to stop the dangerous ones", but another to say "FUCK THE SANDNIGGERS RACE WAR NOW WHITE POWER"

File: Monsters and Other Childish Things - Quick-Play_Guide_(8921741).pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>48941438
>I just don't like murder and grimdark things.
I got a mostly non-grimdark-murdery game looking for players. System called Monsters & Other Childish Things. The characters are average, ordinary kids who just so happen to be best friends with monsters who may or may not be eldritch abominations. PCs go around trying to live the lives of ordinary kids and get through growing up with the added difficulties of fighting wizards, mad scientists, aliens, shady government agencies who want to kidnap your monsters, and, of course, kids you don't like with monsters you like even less. The game happens on Fridays at 6pm GMT, contact shmeeb#5712 on Discord for more information.

>>48942121
You're going to do a murderfucking ERP... with Monsters and Other Childish Things? Playing as kids? Do I have that right?

>>48943201

I think he was responding to the guys dislike of murder/killing in TTRPGs

>>48940236
I really wish I could, but my schedule is so tight I wouldn't have the time to do it properly.
Some day, Anon.
Some day.

File: white power.jpg (22KB, 317x240px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 317x240px

>>48941838
WHITE POWER RANGER
I don't think I've ever met an actual racist to be honest.

>>48925160

was interested until I saw XP speed: milestone on one of your players sheets, that's a massive turn off.

>>48931745
>islamophic
Doesn't exist. Phobias are irrational fears. They don't apply to things that are legitimately dangerous. That's why the phobia of adult tigers doesn't exist.

>>48945547
Careful.
You're about 30 seconds away from an intersectional SJW feminist telling you all about their special new definition for 'phobia'.

>>48945713

umm, excuse me, phobias are fear+privilege shitlord

>>48945778
The actual SJW answer is that a 'phobia' also includes 'hatred'.
They never actually explain how hatred = phobia, they just insist that it does somehow and that any dissent from their opinions is hatred and bigotry.

>>48945547

I get what you're saying, but your argument is retarded. Guess Acrophobia(heights), Aquaphobia(water) and Mysophobia(germs) aren't phobias now. Phobias aren't "fear of things that aren't dangerous" they're a fear of things that goes beyond rationality- IE being afraid of all water on sight, or without a surrounding context, being so afraid of germs that you have to wash your hands every thirty seconds, or being so paralyzed by heights it puts you at risk of falling. Thus while some level of "fear of islam/islamists" can be considered justified, there can also come a point at which it becomes excessive, IE if your first reaction on seeing a woman in a Burka or a man with an ugly beard is to check for a bomb vest, you've probably got a problem.

File: hatefacts - muslim terrorist rates_1.png (369KB, 1544x3100px) Image search: [Google]

369KB, 1544x3100px

>>48945879
>IE if your first reaction on seeing a woman in a Burka or a man with an ugly beard is to check for a bomb vest, you've probably got a problem.

I didn't invent the statistics, fampai.

>>48945914

... well, let's start with the fact that in the last several months most terror attacks haven't included suicide bombings, and follow up with the fact that most muslims don't commit terror attacks, and even with the ones who do, most encounters with them don't END in terror attacks, and I'm gonna go ahead and say that looking for a bomb vest IMMEDIATELY before any other warning signs even show themselves probably marks a problem, and makes you look twitchy and paranoid as fuck. I'm not arguing that you're not right about islam being dangerous- I'm making a point that what was said doesn't make any fucking sense. Here, let's go even more extreme- if someone were, say, sitting at home in a bunker with a shotgun clutched in their hands muttering about those dumb muzzies, would you not agree that they had a problem? Can you not agree that there's probably atleast one person out there whose extreme and absurd fear of muslim people is negatively affecting their life because of how utterly irrational and constant it is? I'm responding to a dumb argument, not to the ideas behind it.

File: image.jpg (100KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 600x450px

>>48946094
>looking for a bomb vest IMMEDIATELY before any other warning signs even show themselves probably marks a problem, and makes you look twitchy and paranoid as fuck.
Nobody actually does that.

File: hatefacts - syrian refugees_1.png (4MB, 647x9057px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 647x9057px

>>48946094
>... well, let's start with the fact that in the last several months most terror attacks haven't included suicide bombings, and follow up with the fact that most muslims don't commit terror attacks, and even with the ones who do, most encounters with them don't END in terror attacks, and I'm gonna go ahead and say that looking for a bomb vest IMMEDIATELY before any other warning signs even show themselves probably marks a problem, and makes you look twitchy and paranoid as fuck.

>Implying you weren't speaking in euphemisms to imply that it's totally wrong to suspect islam adherents of radicalism

>Can you not agree that there's probably atleast one person out there whose extreme and absurd fear of muslim people is negatively affecting their life because of how utterly irrational and constant it is?

No, I in fact will deny your strawman until you show me that he exists.

>>48946206

What are: people who don't understand an exageration to make a point. Besides, there's already a dipshit in this thread defending doing exactly that, so...

>>48946224

>refusing to accept that something has the potential to exist in a hypothetical in a discussion about how something can exist
>ignoring what someone has actually said and making assumptions to suit your narative

jesus fucking christ, horseshoe theory IS real

File: frog incredulous_2.png (26KB, 193x194px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 193x194px

>>48946320

>I ran out of arguments, because my only recourse was to appeal to you to let my hypothetical be true so I could even begin to have a leg to stand on, so I'm going to start meming now.

Follow your heart, fampai.

>>48946286
Okay, I'll concede to you that someone who lives their life in a constant state of fear and agitation because of hypothetical Muslim bombers is an Islamophobe. Therefore the term is technically legitimate. I just don't think the mainstream definition that's used 99.99% of the time (including, I suspect, the Frenchman's) is valid.

>>48946368

My argument was literally "your statement is wrong, it's entirely possible for this to happen" and you aren't accepting that events that are possible are possible.

I mean, hell, you don't even have to go as far as "can't function from fear" for it to start having a negative affect on your life. It could be, say, a TSA agent who repeatedly "randomly" checks Muslims in such a way that his superiors notice his clear prejudice and fire him. The point isn't "this exact event has happened" the point is "someone could be retarded enough for the definition to be valid"

>>48946422

well yeah- like someone already said, "phobia" is about fear, and they always use it as hatred for some dumb fucking reason. I assume they all ate lead paint chips as children.

>>48946456
>It could be, say, a TSA agent who repeatedly "randomly" checks Muslims in such a way that his superiors notice his clear prejudice and fire him.

If the TSA can only check a fraction of their passengers they should statistically always check Muslims first. That's not Islamophobia that's just efficiently using resources.

>>48946422

actually I'd be willing to bet it's never been used accurately, because there's no way one of the fucking hivemind chucklefucks has managed to come across someone that demented and not managed to put it on the internet. I assume anyone that bad is so thoroughly isolated by bigotry and remoteness from the nearest source of outside ideas that they've never encountered a dissenting opinion in their lives.

>>48946422

Why are you making the mistake of even indulging him in his infantile fantasy?

It is pure sophistry. Nobody in the media uses that word to try to talk about whatever non-existent thousandth of a percentage point of people in the world actually think like that. It is not an issue. It isn't a *thing*. It is the caricature people bring to mind in a blatant attempt to undermine reasonable suspicion and due caution.

No other religion murders people today like Islam does. Plain and simple.

>>48946456
>My argument was literally "your statement is wrong, it's entirely possible for this to happen" and you aren't accepting that events that are possible are possible.

I am not going to allow you to conjure some metaphysical boogyman and make the conversation about him instead of facts and things that actually exist in the world.

You are arguing that islamophobia is a legitimate term because it's meant to describe this ethereal redneck who ostensibly beats his wife in between his racist rants about how mudslimes deserve to die. I am arguing that trying to legitimizing a term by appealing to something you, yes YOU, will never find me an example of, is sophistry. You are defending a term designed around a caricature that simply does not in any meaningful form actually EXIST.

Notice now how even your own example, you blatantly ignore the tremendous statistical tendency among muslims to commit acts of terrorism. If Group A and Group B exist in a nation, yet Group B performs 80% of the crime in that nation, how is it wrong for law enforcers to prioritize members of Group B?

You are blind to facts and prefer to argue hypotheticals to justify demonization of the cautious. You are a fool.

>>48946547

Except that it's an easy route to getting all your funding taken away to do that. Not that it matters- the TSA don't find SHIT. something like 95% of drugs and weapons hidden to test them made it through.

Also- with the current climate, I have absolutely no doubt that the terrorists would see that, look at their white recruits and go "I have an idea". I mean, fuck, apparently the largest recruitment base for ISIS out of britain(other than people who are ethnically muslim) is gingers, presumably in the vain hope it'll somehow earn them a soul, so it's not like they're lacking in options.

>>48946606
You may get fired or the TSA may get its funding cut but that doesn't change the fact that acting in such a manner would statistically save the most lives. It's certainly not Islamophobic.

You're right about the TSA being a fucking joke though.

>>48946596

Jesus christ dipshit, I'm on your side here- I'm arguing that making arguments that actually hold up is better than just making arguments. If you say "phobias are fears of things that aren't dangerous blah blah blah" all you'll accomplish is to get laughed at by anyone who knows what they're talking about and called an islamaphobe by the rest. Not only is it not a good argument, it's not even an EFFECTIVE one. It's basically a gotcha that won't do anything to anyone who isn't already on your side. Actually go through your statistics- and have the studies rather than just the raw numbers, some people prefer to see the methodology and such- and discuss them rationally and calmly, along with their implications and meanings, instead of just childishly pulling out your trump card and smugly walking away.

Besides, I've repeatedly said- it's never really used accurately, but that doesn't change that the initial argument was dumb as a fucking stump. A better argument for islamaphobia being a nonsense word would be to focus on the phobia=fear not anger thing, or to just talk about how labelling people you disagree with racist/sexist/homophobic/whatever is the death of discourse.

>>48946683

Of course the TSA is a fucking joke- they're basically a band-aid solution to a problem that's already fucking infected. All you're doing is convincing yourself you're helping. What they should be doing is actually paying attention to what's going on at the fucking mosques and arresting people who use them as platforms to advocate violence, but NOOOO, that'd be *islamophobic*

>GM or Player
Player
>System(s)
FFG Star Wars RPG
>Time availability
So far very open, Saturdays after 8 Pacific
>Text or Voice
either
>Contact Information
skype: mastergastly
>Additional Information
Already DM the system, nobody local to dm and roll20 for this system is laughable

>>48946683
NO MORE TSA DISCUSSION. WE'RE A GAMEFINDER THREAD!

>>48946756
Not anymore we're not.

>>48946721

You appear to be talking about a conversation I never engaged in and an argument I never made.

Aside from your clear confusion over who is who in this conversation, you appear to essentially agree with me, despite your odious attempts to minimize publicly viewable and sourced statistics because I guess raw numbers don't matter as long as you really don't want them to. So, cool.

>>48946785

I wasn't minimizing them- I was saying that they don't mean every muslim person is a potential threat, and that you probably shouldn't let yourself reach the point where you're constantly on the lookout for them so you can check for a bomb vest. There's a difference between "reasonable fear" and "absurd overreaction". Hell, the most important statistic is that most terror attacks occur in third world Islamic hellholes or Europe(soon-to-be third world islamic hellhole unless they get their shit together). Terror attacks in north america are fairly few and far between, comparatively speaking. Now, if you were in Germany, it might be more reasonable, but in the US... you're probably fine.

>>48946855
>Terror attacks in north america are fairly few and far between, comparatively speaking. Now, if you were in Germany, it might be more reasonable, but in the US... you're probably fine.

>San Bernardino shooting
>Orlando shooting

Again, I refuse to indulge your infantile appeal to hypothetical extremes, and redirect your attention to things that actually happen outside of my mind.

>B-b-but I s-said comparatively speaking!

What if, and just stay with me here a minute...

What if we shot for *zero* terrorist attacks instead of settling for "only" 3 massacres every other month?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7TAAw3oQvg

There comes a point where you have to stop pretending that suspicion cannot possibly be justified.

>>48947014
>2 shootings months apart in a country of 300+ million

>>48947057
That's a lot of people. Totally a decent price for the freedom for civilians to own guns imo.

File: gun control argument flowchart_1.jpg (58KB, 960x524px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 960x524px

>>48947057

Since you're a fan of comparative speaking, would you like to compare those shootings to those done by Christians, Jews, Buddhists, or any other religion of your preference?

At what point do you accept that, when Group B is attacking people at rates far exceeding Groups A, C, D, E, and F, that perhaps extra precautions ought to be taken against Group B? What rate would you accept as "reasonable" before "racism" or "islamophobia" turns into "sensible measures"?

>>48947117

Nobody's talking to you, eurocuck.

>>48947144
I was being sincere, I'm a real American.

>>48947144

well, that's someone other than me, to start with, but I meant comparatively because that's two shootings in several months, as opposed to the like five terror attacks in a week france had a while ago. Europe is kind of fucked. Meanwhile, at the current rate it'll probably only be half a year at most before there starts to be a conversation about whether isis or BLM is more dangerous in the US.

>>48947117

that's retarded. You're an idiot. I'm the one arguing with this guy and I agree with him- you gun control idiots need to get the fuck out. Most crimes are committed with illegal guns, so aside from making it harder for people already prohibited from having guns to get them, there's no point in expanding gun control. dipshit.

>>48947253
I'm not a gun control proponent. I'm not being sarcastic.

>>48947294
We were talking about Islam and terrorism not gun control. Your statement about 2 shootings in a few months being a decent price to pay for freedom is retarded because there are gangland shootings and firearm murders every day. I don't even disagree with you, I'm a member of the NRA.

File: 1447448501876.png (265KB, 500x417px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 500x417px

>>48947144
That is the stupidest chart I've seen in my entire life. The chart, using any shred of logic, leads to that's the job of police. Because the job of police is to protect the citizens. Further more, the reason they have the responsibility to protect your life is because that's what they're trained to do. You don't expect the average citizen to wire their own house, you hire a fucking electrician. Unless you're in the states, in which case the police training is "Here's how to shoot a gun, now go out and protect the people."

File: pol - gun control facts_1.jpg (1MB, 1029x4529px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1029x4529px

>>48947690

>Eurocuck mentality

This is why you're being taken over by Islam, fampai.

>>48947690
>Because the job of police is to protect the citizens
The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that police officers at all levels of the government have no duty to protect citizens. It is the job of police officers to investigate crimes and arrest criminals. You couldn't be more wrong.

>>48947690
But that's not true.
The job of police is to enforce the law.
In the U.S. specifically, it's actually not the police's job to defend you. They are well within their rights to stand by and let you get punched in the face as long as they then arrest the guy who did it.
In other countries the police might technically actually have the job of protecting you, but nobody can protect you like you can protect yourself.
Take a firearm safety course, and practice with a firearm. As long as you strictly follow the basic rules you learn in the safety course, you will never have an accident with a firearm, and having one around will help if--heavens forbid--you ever need it.
and desu the safety rules are all really simple common sense, like 'keep your finger off the fucking trigger stupid' and 'don't point a gun at people unless you are about to shoot them dumbass'

>>48947808
This, ironically enough the only people with any duty to protect people are the courts and then only within the letter of the law which thankfully tends to place individual rights over individual safety in most cases

>>48947767
>>48947690

There is nothing wrong with responsible, reasonable and valid gun ownership for people who have a legitimate reason to own a gun.

'Bad people might hurt me!' is not a legitimate reason to own a gun.

>>48948081
Uhh... but that is an entirely valid reason to own a gun, man.
If you think someone might want to hurt you is the PERFECT time to arm up.

But the nice thing is that you really don't need an excuse to be armed to defend yourself.
That's the joy of inalienable rights that shall not be infringed, y'know.

File: 1452109834827.jpg (105KB, 840x657px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 840x657px

>>48948081

>I shouldn't be able to defend myself because cucks guffaw at the notion of self-defense

I would complain about all this being completley off topic, but it keeps the thread bumped

>>48948081
What about bears? Do you have bears where you live? Or wild dogs? Deer? Boars? Anything that could fuck you up if you couldn't kill if it decided to charge you?

Call the police, they can't un-maul you.

>>48948136
underrated post

>>48948120
>>48948101

You chucklefucks could trip over at any time and fucking brain yourselves, but I don't see you wearing a fucking helmet.

You're more likely to fuck yourself up with a gun than anyone else.

If you really want to defend yourself, learn a fucking martial art you lazy shits.

A gun is a tool you use to kill. That's all it does. There is never a valid reason to intentionally arm yourself with the intent to kill in self defense.

Unless you guys only want rubber bullets and bean bag rounds? Which, whilst still dangerous, is at least LESS-lethal.

Or are you both the crazy kind of fucks who say "YOU'RE ON MY PROPERTY, THAT MEANS I CAN LEGALLY KILL YOU."

>>48948101
>That's the joy of inalienable rights that shall not be infringed, y'know.
>What is an 'Amendment'?

>>48948146
>What about bears? Do you have bears where you live? Or wild dogs? Deer? Boars? Anything that could fuck you up if you couldn't kill if it decided to charge you?
>Call the police, they can't un-maul you.

Are you dumb or just trying to be ironic?

>There is nothing wrong with responsible, reasonable and valid gun ownership for people who have a legitimate reason to own a gun.

Having wild animals threaten your property is a perfectly valid reason to own a weapon, if you use it responsibly.

>>48948255
>learn a martial art
>guy breaks into my house
>points a gun at me
>do a sick maneuver and tumble past his attack of opportunity
>stunning palm

Yeah no.

File: 1464537026476.png (393KB, 650x441px) Image search: [Google]

393KB, 650x441px

>>48948255
>Or are you both the crazy kind of fucks who say "YOU'RE ON MY PROPERTY, THAT MEANS I CAN LEGALLY KILL YOU."

Don't you have a daughter to introduce to some Somalian immigrants, eurocuck? You wouldn't want to be branded as racist for not providing her with cultural enrichment.

>>48948267
The constitution itself was understood to be an incomplete document that was to be amended as soon as possible, the fact that the right to bear arms was the second one shows how important it was to them. Amendments are arguable as valid as the constitution itself when it comes to proving rights as they are effectively ad hoc portions of the constitution.

That's why they're called amendments. You know, because they were amended to the constitution? Or did that go over your head.

That being said you could repeal any amendment or make a new one to modify it, so you can make the argument that the right to bear arms is as unimaginable and unalienable as the right to free expression, but that would be a pointless argument if you're in favor of removing it.

>>48948289
If you didn't live in a shitstain of a nation where everyone owned three pistols and a rifle, maybe the risk of someone breaking into your house with a gun wouldn't be so huge?

And why is your first thought for self-defense to get a gun, rather than - say - a better fucking set of locks on your house?

Prevention is better than reaction, anon. If you keep going the whole 'But they've got guns!' then you're just going to get yourself shot.

File: Consider the following Hajime.png (363KB, 838x574px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 838x574px

>>48948255
Right, well... I have trained in four martial arts and have a high level of training in three of them. I'm a security professional in my day job. I have been trained to deal with people who may be armed, and trust me, you can't kung-fu a bullet.

There's also a real problem here with reductive logic, as well.
If you are in a situation where you might hit your head, you DO wear a helmet.
If you are in a situation where you might need to defend yourself, you go armed.
It just happens that there's never a bad time to be ready to defend yourself, really, so...

>>48948302

You understand there is such a thing as Reasonable Force, right?

And there is a big difference between what your dog does compared to you with a gun.

>>48948325

You should be a perfect example for why guns aren't necessary. You don't solve a self-defense situation by escalating it. If a guy pulls a gun on you, you don't try to pull your gun out and start a gun fight.

File: gunkata.gif (3MB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 400x225px

>>48948267
Except that would never pass in an actual constitutional convention.
That's why the anti-gun politicians always have to try and take these things by degrees--because they're a tiny minority that is willing to undermine the Constitution to get what they want.

File: 1464642227439.png (268KB, 515x1082px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 515x1082px

>>48948346
>And there is a big difference between what your dog does compared to you with a gun.

I mean, *I'm* not the one posing the argument that literal criminals who pose an unknown threat to your life are the priority over law abiding citizens, here.

>>48948323
Because... you do realize locks only work if people care about the integrity of the door, right?
A crowbar literally costs like $4.
A heavy kick is free.

>>48948361
Actually, if I see a guy reach for a gun, I'll tackle him if I'm close to subdue him, or shoot him if I can't reach him.
I will NEVER risk an unknown party possibly turning a weapon on a bystander when I am around.
If he draws, he gets shot. People who have guns and make like they're going to use them are not the ones I am there to protect. My job is to protect first the lives and safety of clients, and then the property of clients, and then the dignity of clients, in that order.

A confirmed threat doesn't even make the list. I would be shooting center mass.

>>48948378

You don't beat a problem by sinking to the same level.

>Criminals have guns!
>GIVE EVERYONE GUNS!
>EVERYONE SHOOTS EVERYONE!
>BABIES SHOOT PARENTS
>STUDENTS SHOOT TEACHERS
>SOLUTION!

>>48948385
And how many home invasions have you suffered? At that stage, that sounds like someone is determined to get in and do harm to you, and do you really think that they'd care if you had a gun?

At this stage you're argument isn't "I need a gun to defend myself" it's "I need a gun to do as much damage to the other guy as I can".

>>48948385
Also, as it turns out, windows are pretty easy to break...

How do faggots here not realize how fucking easy it is to break into anything? Have they not played anything but sword and board or cleric for their entire lives or something?

File: I'm surrounded by retards in this thread.jpg (93KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 800x450px

>>48948416
>Criminals have guns
>Let me intentionally choose not to have one
>Surely the criminal will not hurt me if I put my hands up and say "Don't worry, I'm not armed!"

File: 1464642767559.png (1005KB, 666x2327px) Image search: [Google]

1005KB, 666x2327px

>>48948361

>A eurocuck who has likely never even held a firearm let alone fired one trying to lecture anyone on threat assessment and situation diffusal

"Bending over" is beneath men with pride, fampai. This is why are you are a cuck.

>>48948416

I understand you are allergic to facts, but you brought up some issues that directly relate to some of them, so you'll just have to take your pills and bear with me here.

>Criminals have guns!
>GIVE EVERYONE GUNS!
>EVERYONE SHOOTS EVERYONE!
>BABIES SHOOT PARENTS
>STUDENTS SHOOT TEACHERS
>SOLUTION!

Considering that crime rates are in fact lowest in areas where gun ownership is prolific, this is quite literally the solution. To say nothing of your obvious obfuscation of the issue by implying anarchy is the result of prolific gun ownership.

>do you really think that they'd care if you had a gun?

3/5 polled felons say they'd care quite a bit, actually.

See >>48947767 for further details.

File: Shooting.gif (714KB, 424x240px) Image search: [Google]

714KB, 424x240px

>>48948416
Fun fact: If someone breaks into your house, they clearly have bad intentions, period.
If it's possible to defend yourself without killing them, obviously that's the moral option. Nobody is disputing that.
But if you're not sure--if you have even a TINY bit of doubt--you do not prioritize the life of a potential threat over your own life or the life of your family.

If someone's trying to kick down my door, they get one shouted warning that they aren't welcome inside.
If they choose to enter after that, they're clearly a threat and every option is on the table.

>>48948410
>I will NEVER risk an unknown party possibly turning a weapon on a bystander when I am around.

That's fair enough, and very commendable of you. But how is it then logical to allow everyone to own a gun?

Your job puts you directly in danger, so naturally you've been trained in how to react to that danger and how to handle yourself and your armament correctly.

Now, you could reasonably be expected to react competently in a situation where you needed to draw your weapon for self defense.

But what about everyone else there who might have a gun?

I don't mean the initial threat, I mean people REACTING to that initial threat. The people with the mentality 'Bad people have guns! I have to defend myself!'.

Do you expect them to instantly be able to appraise the situation and recognize who the real culprit is?

How do you justify the staggering numbers of mass shootings that nations like America has when compared to places like Australia or Switzerland?

If your logic is that having more guns in more hands should save lives, what's going wrong with America?

Australia goes the opposite route - less guns. As a result, there are less shootings.

Switzerland went a middle route - extreme training and ensuring that everyone is competent in the realities of owning and using a firearm, and they have both a high gun ownership and a staggeringly low incident of shooting.

The reason removing guns from the hands of Americans is seen as the logical choice is because it is a simpler solution than trying to conscript and train the entire American populace.

Anyone playing in post-op type of games?

>>48948428
>>Surely the criminal will not hurt me if I put my hands up and say "Don't worry, I'm not armed!"

Well, yeah. I mean, you're shit out of luck if they are there to kill you, but then having a gun wouldn't help your ass either.

If they have a gun and you don't do something stupid, what reason do they have to turn an armed robbery into a murder?

File: illustrate guide to gun control_1.png (275KB, 745x3141px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 745x3141px

>>48948459
>Australia

I should've known only a kangaroo fucking Melburnian liberal arts major could shit post this long.

I'm out, boys.

File: trolline3.jpg (119KB, 512x636px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 512x636px

>this entire thread

>>48948434
>Considering that crime rates are in fact lowest in areas where gun ownership is prolific, this is quite literally the solution. To say nothing of your obvious obfuscation of the issue by implying anarchy is the result of prolific gun ownership.

I'm not saying anarchy is the result of prolific gun ownership.

I'm saying prolific gun accidents and accidental deaths are the result of prolific gun ownership.

>Considering that crime rates are in fact lowest in areas where gun ownership is prolific, this is quite literally the solution. To say nothing of your obvious obfuscation of the issue by implying anarchy is the result of prolific gun ownership.

Then why are crime rates lower in nations with stricter gun laws?

---

You know what, fuck it.

This isn't my fight. I'm not the guy who has to live in a country where getting shot is a legitimate daily threat on the same level as places like Uruguay and the Philippines.

>>48948459
The US has a substantial black population.

If you exclude this population from the statistics, the US homicide rate falls in line with the civilized world.

>>48948470
>Well, yeah. I mean, you're shit out of luck if they are there to kill you, but then having a gun wouldn't help your ass either.
You're retarded if you think a gun won't help you against a killer.

>If they have a gun and you don't do something stupid, what reason do they have to turn an armed robbery into a murder?
People panic but that's not important. When an armed intruder enters your house you don't know what he wants. He may just steal your tv or he could rape your wife and kill your children. You just don't know. Don't break into houses into houses if you don't want to get shot.

>>48948500

>Then why are crime rates lower in nations with stricter gun laws?

They aren't in UK, for one.

>I'm saying prolific gun accidents and accidental deaths are the results of prolific gun ownership.

They aren't.

Read >>48947767 you stupid fuck.

>>48948508
http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting

File: Dis nigga serious.png (409KB, 459x450px) Image search: [Google]

409KB, 459x450px

>>48948459
>Do you expect them to instantly be able to appraise the situation and recognize who the real culprit is?
Actually, yes. Yes, I do. No doubt.

>How do you justify the staggering numbers of mass shootings that nations like America has when compared to places like Australia or Switzerland?
How many of those were in legally mandated gun-free zones?
Spoiler alert: It's basically all of them. These people intentionally go to places where they know armed people won't be, for a reason.

>>48948470
You must be joking.

Okay, let's do a thought experiment.
You're sitting in the frontmost room of your house and suddenly the door gets kicked in by a man with a gun. You have just enough time to get out of the room and you know he saw you.
Do you A: put your hands up and surrender
B: end the threat so you can escape with your family?
Realistically, you can't just run. Running gets you shot in the back.

Would you honestly tell me that in that situation, you would choose to give up and let that person decide what happens to you next?

>>48948533

>"M-muh mass shootings!"

And yet both my statements remain true.

Read >>48947767 you stupid fuck.

>>48948541
>48541▶
>Spoiler alert: It's basically all of them. These people intentionally go to places where they know armed people won't be, for a reason.

Uh dude, Australia has had maybe 5 mass shootings in the last decade or so. America has had that many in the last 72 hours.

>You're sitting in the frontmost room of your house and suddenly the door gets kicked in by a man with a gun. You have just enough time to get out of the room and you know he saw you.

I get out of the house and call the fucking cops, what are you insane?

>>48948533
>mass-shooting
Literally sensationalist media.
Mass shootings are a TINY portion of the actual violent crimes in any given country.
Mind you, that doesn't make it okay--obviously it's not okay--but I'd rather just have everyone be trained and armed so that when some asshat decides he wants to rampage, he goes down before anyone gets killed.

Here, have this:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/03/do-civilians-with-guns-ever-stop-mass-shootings/

A bunch of examples of that exact thing happening at least a few times, with the main restriction on it being this:
>Even in states which allow concealed carry, there often aren’t people near a shooting who have a gun on them at the time.
>Many mass shootings happen in supposedly “gun-free” zones (such as schools, universities, bars, or private property posted with a no-guns sign), in which gun carrying isn’t allowed in many states.

So... y'know. "Good guy with gun" actually does work. More often than you think, in fact--there is a reason anti-gun politicians have armed guards in spite of what they say.

File: 1140-image-1418601039[1].jpg (11KB, 280x300px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 280x300px

I remember...

I remember the days when /pol/ wasn't here.

But those days are now long gone. Forgotten and cast away by people... People who think that their arguments matter on a Hong Kongian Meth Lab site..

>>48948562

Dude, I'm all for responsible gun ownership, but if you're response to the argument that "Hey, other places deal with gun violence better by limiting guns" is "YEAH, WELL LOOK AT ALL THE FUCKING STABBINGS THE UK HAS", then you're kind of ignoring the point.

Just because a nation has worse problems than yours doesn't mean you shouldn't try to improve the situation you're in.

On another note, who are you voting for - Trump or Hilary?

>>48948578
Not having a gun makes it harder to shoot people, yes.
Didn't help in France--or did you miss the recent news where a lunatic ran over a whole bunch of innocent people?

It's an old phrase, but a good phrase. "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

>>48948605
>On another note, who are you voting for - Trump or Hilary?
How is that relevant?
Is this just some sort of bait?

>>48948599
To be fair, it was an explicitly anti-/pol/ anti-Islamophobia post that started this all.

>>48948605
>Just because a nation has worse problems than yours doesn't mean you shouldn't try to improve the situation you're in.

Demonstrating that violence occurs regardless of gun legalization, and often occurs in greater frequency where they are *illegal*, is directly related to the discussion on whether or not gun legalization is ultimately beneficial to society.

Fuck off with your misdirection. "Banning guns" is not improving anyone's situation except for those who want a monopoly on violence.

I've never been to /pol/ and I have only ever looked at /k/ once.
I just like my right to bear arms and I hate when Yuro peons act smug even while their whole region is going to shit because their women aren't allowed to defend themselves against rapists and their police refuse to do anything to stop the crimes of migrants that their politicians keep letting in even though nobody wants them.

Remember when game finder threads were about finding games? CAUSE I SURE FUCKING DON'T

>>48948607

This is true.

But did you miss the part where this was a huge thing because it practically never happens?

Or could you not hear that bit over the sound of gunshots outside?

Do shootings even still get reported in the news over there, or is it just sort of blaise by this stage?

>>48948612

What? No, I'm genuinely curious. Expat in NZ over here, I've heard from a lot of friends that they're all planning to vote Hilary, I'm just curious if that's the trend or if it's the minority.

>>48948605
>>48948637
Let's dig into this even more, actually.
So Anon, you think nobody needs a gun, right? Nobody?
Well, except police you might say--police can have guns!
What's the average response time for police? Do you know?
I'll tell you: It's about 11 to 14 minutes.
That's 11 to 14 minutes in which you're getting murdered, and that's assuming you managed to call the police early on.

But let's assume that somehow your police manage to actually protect people more or less, right?
What do you do if you've got a problem with how your government behaves?
See, this is the thing that people always forget--Americans have a right to bear arms so that if our government ever goes really really wrong, we have the means to clean that shit up for ourselves.
Look at the EU trying to form an army answerable only to the Commission.
Once the EU has a central army that it can swing around, it's basically one step from being a sovereign state that owns all of Europe with none of that pesky 'democracy' or 'representation' nonsense.
What then?

>>48948723
>I'll tell you: It's about 11 to 14 minutes.
>That's 11 to 14 minutes in which you're getting murdered, and that's assuming you managed to call the police early on.

Shit, seriously? That's a terrible response time. Are the police underfunded in your state or something?

>See, this is the thing that people always forget--Americans have a right to bear arms so that if our government ever goes really really wrong, we have the means to clean that shit up for ourselves.

Your government has tanks.
And drones.
And missile launchers.

What the fuck are you thinking there? Like, are you saying that armed citizens could beat the military? Or are you saying that the citizens should be able to get their vigilante schtick on if they don't like how the government is behaving?

>>48948666
>hurr muh full of guns
>such gunshot
You've never been to America, and you don't even know what a real report sounds like. Just stop, man, you're embarrassing yourself by pretending you know what you're talking about when you obviously don't.

>>48948679
Honestly?
Clinton has a small but fanatical base that covers that nasty spectrum of Social Justice Warriors, smug leftist elitists, the captive minority voting bloc with a horrific case of stockholm syndrome, and the terribly uninformed who think "the media company says that Trump guy is raycis so he bad!"

Trump has a huge support base and it's insane how obvious it is on the ground in most places.
The difference in enthusiasm is extreme.

There are basically only two ways that this election goes to Clinton.
If she somehow manages to galvanize all the indifferent people who don't vote into voting for her using her incredible charisma (Not likely, since she has the charisma of a gigantic roach wearing the skin of a dead lesbian, which she might just be)
or she tries to rig the election, which... she probably will try, since we've already got factual proof that her circles have no problem rigging the primaries for her party and she's got plenty of powerful, powerful friends and huge foreign interests backing her.
Frankly, Clinton is so cartoonishly corrupt that it's insane that anyone takes her seriously.
It takes a lot to make Donald Trump seem to be the straight man in the comedy show because, let's be fair, as much as I have grown to like his position on many issues, he's a blustery and clownish man. It's fun and funny and all, but he's still a silly character.
But, by god, somehow Clinton has managed to make him the real candidate by being so moustache-twirlingly evil that to vote for her is basically proof of ignorance or malice.

>>48948723
>Look at the EU trying to form an army answerable only to the Commission.
>Once the EU has a central army that it can swing around, it's basically one step from being a sovereign state that owns all of Europe with none of that pesky 'democracy' or 'representation' nonsense.
>What then?

Then we're one step closer to a democratic globalization?

Wait...
>Look at the EU trying to form an army answerable only to the Commission.

Are you talking about something similar to the UN Peacekeeping Department?

>>48948813
>You've never been to America, and you don't even know what a real report sounds like. Just stop, man, you're embarrassing yourself by pretending you know what you're talking about when you obviously don't.

I came from America. And you're missing the point - that shit in France, or the Siege in Australia...stuff like that still makes big news in those countries because it's not something that happens constantly.

From the states we only hear about the extreme mass shootings, because the lesser ones just don't get reported on to a national scale.

It's not an indictment on gun violence, just on the sensationalist nature of modern media.

>>48948817
But that's wrong.
The EU is not democratic.
Do you even know how it works?
The Commission proposes binding legislation and puts it to a vote. Members can vote to veto legislation, but they cannot vote to enact legislation. That means, de facto, that they also can't undo anything that has passed before.
That means that if the Commission wants something enforced on member states, all it has to do is keep pushing it until it gets through, and they have done some tricky shit like calling votes on odd days on short notice to push things through in the past... not counting all the times they just decided 'sod the vote' and did things basically without consent of anyone.

The problem here is that once the EU has an army that only answers to the Commission, that army can be used as a pretty heavy implied threat to keep things leaning the way the Commission wants--and when the Commission wants something and gets it, it's not the will of the people. The Commission is not elected in the traditional sense.

The EU is so very, very close to pulling a Palpatine here that it's insane. They basically just need to establish an EU central army, use it as "Peacekeeping Forces" in areas being trashed by migrants the worst to get sort of a de facto martial law going on, get people to sign off on things like removing that pesky Article 50 and so on, and then bing bang boom, massive empire. The EU will succeed where all the wannabe conquerers failed because people refuse to believe that their government might not have their best interest at heart, for some reason.
And that's a weirdly modern thing, too, this total faith in the all-encompassing father government who will protect and nurture.
Shit's all dystopian and gay.

>>48948749
Considering a legitimate revolt there would be a large section of the military that would support the people, and then a small section of the military that would basically pretend to stay loyal and then betray the military by passing information to civies or turncoating at the worst possible moment

File: Rick-and-Morty-Cant-Look-Meme-Versability.jpg (31KB, 559x320px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 559x320px

>browsing catalog
>notice gamefinder has more replies than usual
>"huh,maybe i'll find a game to take my mind off all this gay political shit since literally everything else today has been \pol\ nonsense"

i really thought.

File: No hope.gif (371KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 500x375px

>>48948975
This is it.
This is what we have become.

>>48949083
>>48948975
Look on the bright side; it's keeping it bumped!

>>48948975
>implying /pol/ has nearly the level of political awareness as /tg/

kek, there are niggas here who's idea of a good night is writing a constitution for a nation that their PC's will spend two sessions playing in. /pol/ might as well be a red version of /sp/

>>48943201
No, I just meant the murder/killing thing. I don't ERP.

>>48946606
>I mean, fuck, apparently the largest recruitment base for ISIS out of britain(other than people who are ethnically muslim) is gingers
THERE IS NO GOD BUT MUHAMMAD AND HIS PROPHET RON WEASLEY

>enter thread
>like half of it is filtered

good lord what is happening here

File: Unprepared GM.png (620KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

620KB, 1920x1080px

Lets get back to actual game finding!

>GM or Player
GM
>System(s)
Pathfinder
>Time availability
Sessions are from 5-9 PM on Saturday. PST
>Text or Voice
Text for IC, Voice for OOC bantz (not required but encouraged). Roll20 + Discord
>Contact Information
Grumbock#8832
>Additional Information
We're 6 sessions into the campaign so far, this game is heavy on the fluff so don't expect to be rolling loads of dice and killing lots of shit every session. The game is set in a moderately homebrewed Forgotten Realms, we can get into details once you're officially accepted. Only looking for one player right now.

>>48948255
So, what you're saying is, you're a sheltered child. Got it. Thanks for clarifying

File: index.jpg (6KB, 188x269px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 188x269px

>>48946606
>the largest recruitment base for ISIS out of britain(other than people who are ethnically muslim) is gingers, presumably in the vain hope it'll somehow earn them a soul,

Underrated post.

>>48949616

Wait, so you don't think changing legislation so that the only ammunition you can keep on the same property as a firearm is rubber bullets would be a good idea?

Genuine question - I admit I don't know enough about firearms to make a valid point either way, but this seems like a pretty solid middle ground. You reduce the chances of accidental deaths (though not remove it entirely because rubber bullets can still kill) but you allow people to keep a significant defensive weapon in their home.

>>48949647
Hunting with rubber bullets doesn't tend to work very well.

>>48949668

Do you need to keep live ammunition used for hunting on the same premises as the firearm? I mean, guns aren't illegal over here - but you can't keep the bullets and the gun in the same place.

Seems a simple compromise.

>>48949727
>the same premises
Do you know what a 'premises' is? I'm not storing my ammunition at somebody else's house.

>>48949752
Just double checking the local law of the land. Apparently what we've got is basically that ammo can't be kept in the same place as a gun. Same house, sure, but has to be separate safes. It is encourage to store ammunition somewhere else just to reduce risk.

>>48948941

In a world of modern warfare, I don't see how any revolt can succeed without the support of the military.

An armed civilian militia would only really come in handy for a guerilla resistance.

>>48948385
>he has carboard doors that open from a kick

>>48950022

As someone who has experienced an attempted house invasion, I can tell you first hand that some doors aren't as easy to break down as media would lead you to believe.

But to be fair, we had wire security door in front of our wooden one.

A question for people in favour of gun ownership for self defence -

For what reason would you choose to own a pistol for self defense instead of a shotgun?

>we used to have gamefinder threads. We used to have fun

>>48951197

If you squint your eyes, you could call all these weird /pol/ bullshit a sort of roleplaying.

File: pol - american rebellion_2.png (203KB, 1802x905px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1802x905px

>>48948749
>Your government has tanks.
>And drones.
>And missile launchers.

>It's a "nogunz pretends to have any clue on the logistics of war and the difference between policing citizens and destroying enemies" episode

>>48950963
Concealability. It's not easy to carry a 12Ga around in public.

>>48951242
If shit did go South, my money's on a Military Junta. Not Pro-US, just a good old fashioned Junta.

>>48951242

That's an extremely interesting and informative post. Saving it for use in Modern Games, cheer's dude.

Is an armed populace needed for all of that to get across though? Not an anti-gun thing, just thinking about settings. A lot of the points raised could cross over to other nations, just wondering if it would work in a no-guns place.

>>48947808
>The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that police officers at all levels of the government have no duty to protect citizens.
AHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA
AHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHHHA
AHAHahHAHAHahAHAHahhAHAAHh
AHAhhahahahahahahahhahha
ahahahhahhaAHAHAhahAha
seriously?
HAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH
OH MY GOD YOU LIVE IN A THIRD WORLD HELLHOLE!
fuCKING SHIT
THIS EXPLAINS EVERYTHING!!!!
AHHAHAHHAHAHAH

Jesus assramming christ can you people give it a rest. You're acting like fecking politicians, spewing out reality TV levels of meaningless drivel while managing to completely ignore the other side's arguments because you have some bullshit echo chamber them-vs-us complex.

Make your own thread for it if you really want to fling shit, god damn.

>>48951517

What are the benefits of a concealed carry?

>>48951656
Shooting people in places where you generally can't carry a gun openly.

Also, you don't have a giant sign on you saying "I HAVE A GUN SHOOT ME FIRST" that way as well.

>>48951675
So a concealed carry is a target denial thing?

The ability to have a weapon anywhere you go without it being obvious so that, in case of emergency, you can shoot without people realising you had a gun on you the whole time?

>>48951731
More or less, yeah. That and open carry is just kind of impractical, regardless of whether you have a longarm on a sling (Which is hilariously impractical) or a handgun in a holster. Even outside of an emergency situation, it draws far too much attention.

Mind you, I live in a country that has a nigh irrational fear of guns, so all this is from education, not actual experience.

>>48925160
New discord
https://discord.gg/7YeMz
>>48944827
Huh I've never heard an objection to milestone based. What's your issue?

>>48951761
Fair enough. I'm in a similar situation. I can't quite grasp the mindset on how the fear of criminals sneaking guns into places and shooting people is off set by making it legal for people to sneak guns into places.

>>48951790
Well, the idea is that if someone wants to go balls to the wall, everyone will go balls to the wall.

Very often people committing crimes don't want everyone to go balls to the wall. So, if there's a threat of someone being armed, they themselves will not go balls to the wall, and the wall will be balls free.

That, and there are times where someone with a gun would have been very useful. Considering the Orlando shooting however many moons back. Say what you will about Trump saying it, but if at least a few in that club were armed, the shooting would in all likelyhood have had a lesser bodycount.

Even if someone doesn't have a gun, say they have a knife, it is nice to have superior firepower to defend oneself with. There's no such thing as overkill when your life is on the line.

>>48951831

So it's the same sort of logic as a nuclear deterrent then?

>>48951856
Maybe not as dire, but kind of sort of. As I mentioned, it is also practical for dealing with problems if they do indeed arise (Which no doubt they still will. You can't magically stop all crime by everyone having guns).

>>48934400
I tried to add you and you didn't accept.

>>48951881
I suppose there's logic to support both sides of the argument. Having the threat of everyone potentially being armed is a massive deterrent.

Conversely, if the issue is the prevalence of guns in the wrong hands then making guns more accessible is hardly the right move.

Going back to the nuclear analogy, there is a reason why nuclear disarmament is a thing.

It's an interesting topic, none-the-less. Doubt any amount of discussion will ever change the issue with gun violence in the US though.

>>48951910
The issue of gun violence in the U.S. is one of having a volatile populace, not having access to guns. A common misconception is that more guns = more murders, but that is largely not the case. The issues lie deeper in culture, population, and hell, even economics. The amount of figures that you have to account for is absolutely bananas. My guess for the biggest contributing factors currently are ideology, poor mental health support, and poverty.

Guns are just a means. Same with knives, chainsaws, and trucks. If someone wants to kill someone, a lack of a gun likely won't stop them.

Not that it's all too related to your analogy, but nuclear disarmament is because no one at the moment really feels the need to have a large stockpile. It's not because they think it will make the world safer, it's because it costs money and manpower to maintain nuclear weapons, and as a bonus it gives a PR boost because most think it's about being peaceful. In any actual nuclear scenario, stockpile size doesn't matter because absolutely no one wants a general strategic exchange. Keep it limited strategic or tactical though, and you're golden.

>>48951967

Fair point. I suppose ridding the US of guns is treating a symptom, rather than a cause. Still, 'ready hands with ready means' and all that.

>>48951988
The issue is that you can't remove all guns from the U.S. There will still be illegal influx, and those who refuse to disarm.

If you did somehow magically disarm everyone, I would be willing to bet murder rates would stay roughly the same, though the number of knives and explosives used in them would increase substantially.

In my non-professional opinion, it is better to keep guns around in the U.S. and let it ride. But the case may be different for other countries. Hell, my country has miniscule murder rates, and guns are few and very far between. But I theorize that's partially what makes having no firearms good in my nation, is that there aren't a lot of us, we have a lot of living space, and we don't have all too much cultural friction.

>>48952025

Aussie?

My general thinking is - American's haven't tried disarmament. What's the harm in giving it a go? Have a voluntary gun drive/amnesty. Pay people for turning in their guns and see what, if anything, happens.

If it's voluntary, what's the worst that could happen?

>>48952055
The worst that can happen is that people begin getting paranoid. That's generally what happens in America when the government tries to do anything big like that. I'd also be willing to bet that the turnout rate on it would be absolutely pathetic, making the whole effort for naught. Because think about it, the people who are handing in the guns are generally going to be the civil people who have them for purely self defense, sporting, or recreational purposes. So you've just managed to break the balance of having those with legitimate needs for firearms as opposed to those with illegitimate needs. It's an issue that is unfixable in the forseeable future, and as I said, the best bet is to ride it out.

Also, you're close. I'm in the commonwealth, but not nearly great enough to be an Aussie.

File: BTRGAW.png (380KB, 1216x1286px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 1216x1286px

>>48952055
Bin that Raifu
Get a Waifu

>>48952109
That waifu appears to have severe dandruff.

>>48952181
Beggars can't be choosers mate, you browse 4chan.

File: 1467857300406.jpg (69KB, 718x720px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 718x720px

>>48951656
The fact that I've got a gun and you don't.

>>48952055
Senpai, I'm a yurocuck from a country with very strict gun laws and I still carry. What makes you think diehard american gun owners are going to turn in their guns?

>>48952233
>diehard american gun owners are going to turn in their guns?

A gun amnesty isn't for die hard gun owners. It's for criminals on hard times who'd rather turn over their guns for some quick cash.

>>48952272
Holy shit, I just looked up this retardation. Either it's going to be an easy way to dump a good deal of your evidence of a murder/robbery/whatever, or it's going to Darwin Award a few thugs.

Who the fuck thought this was a good idea?

>>48952331
>Either it's going to be an easy way to dump a good deal of your evidence of a murder/robbery/whatever,
>guns given back are not checked or registered in any way

the amnesty is only for owning a gun illegally not for doing illegal things with the illegal gun

>>48952519
>or it's going to Darwin Award a few thugs.

The vast majority of people who just own illegal firearms without using them wouldn't actually bother to use this program, unless they were just selling someone's stolen gun.

>>48952556
>sell your gun to the state
>buy two more slavshit guns for 10$ each
>give each to another nigga to sell to the state

>>48952851
Hahahaha sheeeiiit.

File: 2.jpg (70KB, 500x340px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 500x340px

>GM or Player
GM (Professor)
>System(s)
Pokérole


>Time availability
Tuesday Evening, 8/9pm-1.30 am - GMT +01:00

>Text or Voice
Discord

>Contact Information
https://discord.gg/kqe7t

>Additional Information
Pokémon RPG starting in the Kanto region but with the freedom for players to visit any of the existing regions.
Unfortunately there isn't enough out on Sun and Moon's setting to warrant its inclusion but if the players wish to journey there I'm sure I can piece something together with the barebones of fluff those games have right now.

The feel I am going for in the game is exploration and the feeling that you got from the anime but with a stronger emphasis on the fiction and canonity experienced in the videogames.


Accepting up to three trainers to come get their starter Pokémon.

>>48952851
Result: Less guns on the street.

>>48953628
>Text or Voice
>Discord

So text or voice?

>>48953698
Result: guns as secondary currency.

>>48952055
>Pay people for turning in their guns and see what, if anything, happens.
>If it's voluntary, what's the worst that could happen?

They have tried that.

So /k/ decided to get guns thats prices were lower than the money the amnesty was giving away, thus making a profit.

Self defence is the right that guarantees all other rights.

>>48955792
That'd be my response too.
If there's money on the table, you'd be a fool not to get some.

>>48955792
>Self defence is the right that guarantees all other rights.
Self defence does not have to be lethal.
Or i could get a tactical thermonuclear warhead to defend myself against the state or organized crime groups.

MAD is the best defense.

>>48958206
When a non-lethal alternative to firearms is created which is exactly equally effective as guns in every way then I'd agree with you. Until then, hands off and get fucked.

>>48958461
>exactly as effective
doesn't have to be, because you'd get the benefit of not getting as many gun homicides in the US.

But i'm sure you don't mind because you and your kids are not in school where one of the kids can crack their parents gun safe and then do a shooting which is like a monthly occurrence over there.

>>48958533
>doesn't have to be, because you'd get the benefit of not getting as many gun homicides in the US.
I'm not going to lower the ability to defend myself by the tiniest fraction because other people are irresponsible.

how the fuck are you STILL having this argument

>>48953628
What's Pokérole? I'm interested. Text or voice on Discord?

>>48957917
>>48955792
>>48955524

Result: Government thinks the Amnesty drive is successful due to massive turnout. Gun crimes rates remain unchanged. Pro-gun advocates get a new bit of statistic that they can use in pro-gun arguments.

Everybody wins.

>>48958568
Why not use rubber bullets or beanbag rounds? They aren't non-lethal (no such thing), just less lethal. You can still kill with them if you're irresponsible, but you're more likely to just severely incapacitate.

>>48960158
why are you ruining a game finder thread?

>>48960158
Why do you care if you kill someone who is attacking you? If they didn't want to die, they shouldn't have attacked you. Thinking otherwise is just weird.

>>48960207
Because I'm bumping it from page 9.

>>48960221
Because it's not the attacker I'm concerned about harming? It's an innocent bystander if I miss, or me and my family if there's an accident with the firearm at home?

Don't get me wrong, if you're do everything perfectly fine and responsible there shouldn't be accidents. But using that argument to say that there shouldn't be additional levels of gun safety is the same as arguing that you shouldn't wear seatbelts because everyone should just drive safely.

>>48960403
I absolutely think firearms training should be mandatory for those who wish to use them in self-defense, yes. But that's not restricting guns, that's just having mandatory education on them.

>>48960158 #
>Why not use rubber bullets or beanbag rounds?
Because they don't do as good a job as hollow points for their designated purpose; incapacitating an intruder. I'm not going to kneecap myself in a life or death situation.

>>48960675
What about the risk of accidental homicide or injury? Do you keep your ammunition in the same place as your gun or separately?

>>48960544
I tend to agree. There's been two demonstrated methods that work to reduce gun violence and homicides, and that has been to either get rid of as many guns as possible or to train everyone in their proper use and handling.

I think the reason most people argue for getting rid of guns is that it's probably an easier task than training nearly 200mil people in proper firearm safety to a military accepted level.

>>48960907
>What about the risk of accidental homicide or injury? Do you keep your ammunition in the same place as your gun or separately?
The gun and its loaded magazine are kept securely in the same place but separate. They wouldn't be much use for home defense if I had to treasure hunt around my house before I could use them.

>>48961010
Are they kept in a locked safe or just an out-of-the-way location?

>>48961044
I have a locked safe on each floor.

>>48961090
So in the event of a home invasion, the goal is to get to the safe, unlock it, grab out your weapon and ammunition, load your weapon and then use it to protect yourself/family/home?

Roughly how long does that all take you? I assume you've timed yourself before so you know how long you've got?

File: 1418074482064.gif (176KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 500x333px

>This thread

>>48961286
It depends on where exactly I am in the house but I have practiced and takes me extraordinarily little time. My doors and windows are secure enough that I'm confident I can get to my weapons before an intruder breaks in. I wouldn't keep them locked away as they are if I thought otherwise.

>>48961752

Cool, so as long as an intruder doesn't get in faster than you anticipated, or get in between you and your nearest safe, you feel safe and comfortable keeping live rounds in your house?

What are your thoughts on concealed carry laws?

>>48961817
There are no children in the house and my girlfriend has no interest in firearms. I mainly keep them locked up so that burglars don't steal them and put them on the street while I'm away. The safes are bulletproof so even in the extremely unlikely event that the rounds detonate spontaneously I have nothing to fear.

I support the right to carry. If you want to carry guns in public I believe you have the duty to make yourself proficient in their use.

>>48962079
>I support the right to carry. If you want to carry guns in public I believe you have the duty to make yourself proficient in their use.

So do you agree with the notion that to own a gun you should first be required to get a license after doing testing - both practical and theoretical - that demonstrates said proficiency, and you need to supply this license when purchasing a firearm as proof of competency and as a means of registering firearm ownership?

>>48962452
No, that's excessive and prone to abuse by authorities.

>>48962572

But it's basically the same requirements already in place for vehicles. Shouldn't firearms have at least equivalent requirements in place for ownership as a car?

And what sort of abuse do you fear it would be prone to?

>>48962594
>>48962572
>>48962452
>>48962079
>>48961817
>>48961752
>>48961286
>>48961090
>>48961044
>>48961010

>>TOO MANY THREADS TO QUOTE

.....I-is this the solution to getting a gamefinder sticky?

To allow /pol/ arguments to just eternally bump the gamefinder?

>>48928249
It's to meet up before hand to at least work out specifics I'm sure.

>>48962658
>.....I-is this the solution to getting a gamefinder sticky?

That's the hope, man. I don't even give a shit about guns, but it provides at least some interesting info for games set in a Modern America setting and it keeps the game-finder thread bumped.

A Game Finder Sticky would be fucking gold.

>>48962452
>So do you agree with the notion that to own a gun you should first be required to get a license after doing testing
That first other reply wasn't me but I basically agree with him. I don't think you should need a license to own a gun on your own property but I support requirements to carry it in public. >>48962594
I think gun ownership should be treated exactly like cars. You can own as many of them as you desire but if you want to take them out in public you need a license.

>>48962727
>I think gun ownership should be treated exactly like cars.

Wait, so you don't need a license to drive a car on your own property?

>>48962790
Nope.

>>48962803
What a weird system.

File: Jack.jpg (26KB, 630x390px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 630x390px

Is there anybody interested in Necromunda on roll20?

>GM or Player
Probably GM, but wouldn't be against playing
>System
Shadowrun 5e or Iron Kingdoms preferred
>Time Availability
Thursday nights after 10PM EST.
>Text or Voice
Either or, I'd prefer to do the RP in text, and the OOC chatter in voice.
>Contact Information
Discord: Kyote #3303
>Additional Information
None at this time.

>>48962951
I take no issue with it.

>>48964412
Eh, the situation is what it is.

Just seems to me that if it's illegal to drive a car in public without a license, you should need a license to buy a car. Even if you don't need a license to drive a car on private property, the only way to ensure people don't drive one without a license is to just periodically pull people over at random. Seems counter-productive.

But eh, I don't have to live there. As long as you are all happy with how everything is going, more power to you.

>GM or Player
Player
>System(s)
Rogue Trader
>Time availability
EST, Sunday Evenings preferably.
>Text or Voice
I prefer voice, especially with games I'm not used too.
>Contact Information
Skype, darkspineryenzx
>Additional Information
I've never played a WH40k game before and I've been really digging the lore surrounding Fantasy and 40k respectively. I don't really know everything there is to know about 40k and I've never played Rogue Trader or a d100 system before but I really wanna give it a shot.

>>48963273
Any possibility to do saturdays?

bazomb

>>48966511

File: 4e9801996cc489b4e8ff20a38ebe621c.jpg (71KB, 557x597px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 557x597px

>>48921000

>GM or Player
GM

>System(s)
Promethean: The Created, more to come on the horizon

>Time Availability
Tuesday mornings, Pacific Time

>Text or Voice
Voice

>Contact Information
Skype: flash.gitz.waagh
Roll20 page: https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/3848370/pieces-of-us

>Additional Information
Plan to do more sessions some time on the horizon, mostly nWOD. I'd also be keen on doing some AD&D session, if I agree with the rules; still reading about them, and I'm liking the Planescape and Dark Sun settings.

>>48925160
New discord
https://discord.gg/hkvxf

>>48963127
>Necromunda on roll20?
Like, we'd be roleplaying gangers?

>>48963127
The Mordheim league was a fucking blast, so yeah.

>>48963127
What kind?
Are we gangers? Do we belong to the Cult of the Red Redemption? Scavengers? Nobles?
I'm intrigued.

huh, a /b/ thread on /tg/.

And it's the game finder.

Christ guys. Just fuck it.

>>48968007
Calm your tits, fuckboy.

>>48953628
invite expired, i assume you got a full party? :(

>>48968817
Yeah. he put the invite on another board too. have like 20 people in the discord

>>48968817
https://discord.gg/x9ExZ

>>48964757
It would have to be every other Saturday, as I'm already in a dedicated game on the opposite ones, plus the fact that I have less time available on Saturday nights at the moment between work and having to be up early on Sunday mornings for the same usually.

>>48968867
expired as well

>>48968867
>>48969909
Not him, but on the chat. This should work indefinitely
https://discord.gg/rCsjKZE.

>>48969945
thanks a bunch

>>48970110
np

File: 1471999021105.jpg (14KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 400x400px

>>48967880
>>48967912
>>48967946

It would be a campaign with an overarching theme and plot but with conflict and contests between the various gangs/players. You can flavor and fluff the gangs however you want.

However, if I'm going to run it I would expect plenty of player-made lore and stuff, not a few shitty sentences.

>>48970498
So you mean... actual necromunda, with a gang for each player, not wacky rpg hijinks in the underhive with a bunch of juvies trying to strike it big?

File: Warriors-Movie-Poster.jpg (99KB, 707x470px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 707x470px

>>48970700
Correct. Can run a gang of juvies doing exactly that though, there would definately be rp involved with a self-insert of the player as the Leader of the gang.

A possible scenario would be something from The Warriors in which you've been set up at a meeting and have to return to your own turf.

>>48967647
The roll20 page isn't working. I contacted you on Skype.

>>48964660


I'd definitely be up for it, if that's ok. I'm pretty new to FFG RPGs and d100 in general, but I know at least a decent bit about the setting.

>GM or Player
Player
>System(s)
I'll play most anything. I have experience with a variety of games.
>Time availability
Either Saturdays after 5:00 P.M. MST or any time Sunday
>Text or Voice
I'm open to using most communication methods.
>Contact Information
[email protected]
>Additional Information
I'm completely new to playing any RPG online, so I'm not familiar with things like Roll20, but I'm sure I can figure it out.