/jp/ - Otaku Culture

Termagant rush kekekeke

>>12824482
I've always heard the 40k scene in Japan was small, but ultra-competitive.

>>12824510
If they're so into it then why isn't there more fanart on Pixiv.

>>12824482
I've always wanted to get into painting Warhammer models, but it's too expensive and I have no income.

>>12824530
That's the main issue with W40k. It is far too expensive for anybody who is not rich, not to mention that the models are cheaply made. No one can justify the expenditure except for the most dedicated.

I am extremely intrigued by it, but no way could I buy an army.

40k is for autists

here's some Corean 40k fanart

isn't it kawaii?

>>12824543

You can buy a 3d printer and make your own army for less than it costs to buy one. And then when the next rulebook comes out and your army is useless, you can just print another.

>>12824587
you say that as though acquiring 3D printers was itself cheap and easy

and besides, the models still have to be painted, which is a difficult and time consuming skill to develop

>>12824587
I would be more interested in just using placeholder figures - folded bits of cardboard, spare dice, coins, etc. From what I can tell, the models are of such quality that those who are actually fans of modelling go elsewhere, so the appeal to me would be the wargaming aspect alone.

But I know that is rather frowned upon in the community, so I don't bother.

>>12824602
>From what I can tell, the models are of such quality that those who are actually fans of modelling go elsewhere

yeah, which makes building an army even more costly and difficult

>>12824602
>>12824623
/tg/ itself can give you a thesis on all that is wrong with the models.

>>12824602
>>12824587
>>12824593
Just use Legos. Why are there still people who don't use Legos for wargames?

While I was in tokyo i only saw one shop selling it/ playing it and it was very tucked away. I dont think the scene is that big (its a lot pricier as well)

As long as we're on the subject of Japanese nerds and /tg/, why don't more Japanese nerds like Tolkien? Because I know for a fact that Japanese nerds love Western fantasy.

>>12824651
I guess the answer to that is that I have lots of old papers lying around, but no legos.

Although I did see a ruleset floating around some years back in which the miniatures were to be explicitly made out of Lego or comparable, so that when damage was taken you could actually represent it, and take penalties accordingly. It seemed very nice.

>>12824657
The japanese are the last people following the traditional RPG systems. Haven't you noticed?

>>12824651
>pluralizing Lego
Truly plebeian.

>>12824663
Tabletop aside, what about all of the anime, manga, doujins, hentai, and Japanese video games which draw from the high fantasy setting?

>>12824657
I can't answer that, but I know this world missed out by not creating some 80s-style adaptations of his work. I wish I could have seen Túrin Turambar and the Black Mecha.

>>12824602
>the models are of such quality that those who are actually fans of modelling go elsewhere
And given that those who are actually fans of wargaming also go elsewhere, it is a mystery how anybody beyond their teen years find this shit appealing.

I loved the setting from I was 13 till I was about 18, then I started realizing how poor the fluff, rules, models and business model was compared to several alternatives. Not to mention the cesspool formed by the majority of the fanbase.

>>12824671
Yes, and anime adaptation of Tolkien's works could have done so much more than Rankin and Bass did. It would have been glorious.

Although any adaptation of The Silmarillion or any of Tolkien's other posthumously published writings has never been a possibility, for which I am quite thankful. I can only image how Jackson and WB would butcher it.

When I played during 3rd edition you had to get a codex, a starting army, paints, brushes, spray cans which came down to at least $170 just to be able to play the basic game

and then you basically still had nothing

Do otaku even care about Western nerd shit anymore like they used to /jp/?

>>12825857
Yes. However it won't be reflected in media because everything is exclusively aimed at moefags and fujoshi nowadays.

>>12824680
>I loved the setting from I was 13 till I was about 18, then I started realizing how poor the fluff
You take it and possibly other things way too seriously.

>>12825933
I am a moefag, and see nothing wrong with it. Stuff coming out of Japan is shit anyway, so might at least go for cute shit.

40K is good, it's just that the fluff doesn't translate to the actual gameplay, so it's like being in love with two different things altogether.

The lore and series seems fun, but I never got into the game
Well, I have no friends to play it with regardless, but I doubt I would play it anyway

Fun to talk and read about though. If I played, I always figured I would play Orks with a Loli-Ork Warboss

I think it's cute how Lovecraft makes its way into really random shit.

>>12825984
>The lore and series seems fun

the setting is great but the lore is fucking stupid

>>12826033
You're right, that's more of what I meant.

Stuff all looks cool, but the backstory is lackluster

>>12824525
They're too busy painting figures to paint waifus.

>>12826033
this artist is fucking EPIC

I fucking love Warhammer 40K.

But I'm a secondary because I only read rulebooks and play PC games, never the tabletop.

Very few people play tabletop games in Japan and virtually no one knows Warhammer 40k.

Warhammer is much cooler than 40k

>>12828799
But a scene always exists.

>>12824482
Does anyone remember this?

>>12824482
>Korean nerds
There are no Korean nerds. There are Koreans who've left their country behind in order to be able to engage in their hobbies without being used by the government, and then there are Korean operatives.
The "geek" scene in Korea is dominated by propaganda-tool cyber-sports teams, astroturf "idol fans" and the made-up fans of the half-assed ripoffs of Japanese manga and anime that the chons put out to deceive Western dweebs into thinking that Japan and Korea have anything in common.
If a Korean actually took his hobby seriously instead of being used as just another strand of Astroturf by the government, he wouldn't live in Korea anymore. A casual look at Korean internal politics will tell you that continuing to live in Korea is literally consenting to perpetuate a historically revisionist kleptocracy.

Why is the MC of that recent LoR game able to pull bullshit without being bound to Sauron?

>>12824658
Could that may have been brickwars?

>>12829300
don't fucking talk about that game

it's more of an offense to Tolkien's legendarium than the cinematic abortions which are Jackson's Hobbit movies

>>12829098

>>12824657
because they only get shitty bootleg versions

>>12825997
to be fair lovecraft is a pretty generic concept, tentacle monsters from other dimensions and shit, whoopdidoo

>>12831710
mmmm didn't Lovecraft establish the archetype

that's like calling Tolkien generic

>>12831728
and tolkien's stuff is based off of nordic, german and celtic folklore, it's not like he invented elves, or wizards, or dragons, or dwarves, or ugly monsters

similiarly it's not difficult to come up with the concept of alien tentacle monsters, just because lovecraft was the first to get popular with it that doesn't make it any less generic

>>12831742
>it's not like he invented elves, or wizards, or dragons, or dwarves, or ugly monsters

uh, no, but he established the High Fantasy archetypes

like, all of them

for example, prior to Tolkien elves, faeries, gnomes, sprites, and whatnot were all roughly synonymous for "nature spirit"

>just because lovecraft was the first to get popular with it that doesn't make it any less generic

the archetype cannot be generic

otherwise it wouldn't be an archetype

it's everything that follows the archetype which is generic

>>12831764
trying to ride on semantics isn't really a good argument, they're simple, basic ideas and tolkien/lovecraft happened to get popular with them, that's all there is to it
also it's not about the originality of the setting it's about how well the writer works with it, but still shouting LOVECRAFT LOVECRAFT:DDD TOLKIENTOLKIEN the moment you see an alien tentacle or an elf is just autistic fanboyism

>>12831742
Not to mention that at the core Lord of the Rings is just God sending his Prophets to help the people fight against Satan and his Demons. It doesn't get much more generic than that.

>>12831773
I'm not riding on semantics.

Look, we all know that all ideas are grown from other ideas. That doesn't mean that no ideas are original. Truly original ideas, whatever their inspirations were, because archetypal, like Tolkien's and Lovecraft's settings.

>>12831777
What the hell are you talking about? Tolkien fucking hated it when people said that his stories were allegorical.

Also, the gods sent the Istari, not God. Eru almost never became directly involved in anything. Also Sauron wasn't "Satan," Morgoth was, and long before the War of the Ring Morgoth had been vanquished.

Besides, absolutely none of that is ever discussed in LotR itself. It's mentioned briefly at the end of The Silmarillion.

Please have some fucking idea what you're talking about before talking shit about something.

>>12831795
you're arguing against yourself, I hope you realise, in that sense if a setting has alien tentacle gods but it's not about 19th century detectives then it's already not the lovecraft archetype, because it's "grown" similarly any fantasy that isn't 1:1 with lord of the rings is already "grown", arguing with what counts as an archetype and whats generic is just semantics, in reality it doesn't matter, there's nothing new under the sun just shuffling basic ideas around, just like how tolkien and lovecraft did, if you try to gloss anything into it then it's just fanboyism

>>12831742
I don't think Lovecraft when I see alien tentacle rape monsters unless they're cosmic horrors from another dimension. Which most of them aren't. Most of them are just aliens who happen to shove tentacles into girls a lot.

>>12831795
Wow he tweaked a couple of things! It's still the same shit though, and Tolkien loves being pretentious so no wonder he spouts stupid shit all the time.

>>12831805
>there's nothing new under the sun

do you really not think that old ideas can't be used in new ways?

also your same arguments are used by people defending plagiarists, I hope you realize

>>12831811
I never got the notion that Tolkien was particularly pretentious. I mean, you have to be somewhat pretentious to even go about deciding to write volumes of fictional history about your fictional world, but other than that it's not like there's anything super deep going on.

>>12831811
>Tolkien loves being pretentious

I really don't think you know anything about Tolkien at all. Or LotR, based on what you said about "God sending his prophets to fight Satan."

Anyway, Tolkien was an academic. He taught at one of the most prestigious universities in the world, so he was allowed to be a stuffy know-it-all without being pretentious.

>>12831812
everyone does that and I've already said that it's fine, accounting a basic idea to a writer just because of being a fanboy is what's retarded

>>12831815
>I never got the notion that Tolkien was particularly pretentious

He wasn't. Even if the man were arrogant it wouldn't have been from pretense, because he had the qualifications for arrogance.

Not that he was arrogant, mind you. But he could be a bit overbearing.

>>12831815
>>12831816
>he was allowed to be a stuffy know-it-all without being pretentious
Lotr fanboys at their best. Nah he was pretentious as fuck, especially about languages, obviously since that was his expertise. The " I made real kuul languages but i wont tell u cuz that makes it cooler :^)" is just being a pretentious faggot.

>>12831817
We're talking about collections of basic ideas here though. Archetypal settings. A setting can't just be a basic idea, unless it's a really shitty setting.

So yeah, Lovecraft didn't invent tentacle monsters, but he did create the "cosmic horror" genre as we know it.

>>12831823
>is just being a pretentious faggot
I don't get how you got from "didn't want to publish some of his stuff" to there.

>>12831823
Do you know even fucking know what pretentious means, you tool?

Here, let Merriam-Webster explain it for you:

making usually unjustified or excessive claims (as of value or standing) <the pretentious fraud who assumes a love of culture that is alien to him — Richard Watts>
b : expressive of affected, unwarranted, or exaggerated importance, worth, or stature <pretentious language> <pretentious houses>

Are you telling me than an Oxford philologist pretended to know anything about languages?

>made real kuul languages but i wont tell u cuz that makes it cooler :^)"

what the hell do you even mean here? What didn't Tolkien tell us?

>>12831825
again, you're backpedaling into sematics, you're really obsessed about archetypes but it's either any old lore can count as an archetype and then tolkien is just generic nordic tale ripoffs or you just accept that every setting is just using the same ideas, including tolkien, and stop being autistic about it

the moment the idea of unknown dimensions or planes of existence appeared the idea that there might be mysterious evil things in there came along, because before there were different planes but you always knew what was there, if it was heaven, hell, asgard, underworld, whatever the shit it was always clear cut, the possibility of unkown planes having unkown evil only came about later but still it's not an original idea by any stretch

>>12831835
>exaggerated importance, worth, or stature
Tolkien's setting in a nutshell, nice work dude.

>>12831841
There's a substantial difference between known evils coming from known places and unknown (or unknowable) evils coming from unknowable places.

Sure, it didn't take a genius to come up with it, but if he was first (and I don't know that he was first) then he was first.

>>12831843
You were talking about languages. You explicitly said that Tolkien was pretentious about languages. Don't move the fucking goalposts.

>>12831847
the first were the theoretical physicists who came up with the idea of different dimensions, and after writers started writing about it, that's how it's always is, writers never invent anything they just write fiction based on religious texts, folklore or primarily after the 19th century scientific ideas, lovecraft was one of those guys and had compelling writing style, that's all there is to it

>>12831841
>again, you're backpedaling into sematics

No, I'm not. You're backpedaling into this idiotic argument of yours though, that "semantics" is the only issue here.

>generic nordic tale ripoffs

Tolkien drew from a well of inspiration much deeper than Nordic myth. Maybe if you knew enough about LotR to realize that you'd understand my point about "mixing ideas to create new ideas."

>>12831850
Languages were the example, because that's the most pretentious thing in there.

>>12831857
How are the languages pretentious? And did you not read the dictionary definition I posted for you?

Tolkien cannot, by definition, be pretentious about languages. He was a certifiable expert when it came to languages.

>>12831856
you're basing an argument on irrelevant words, that's pretty much using semantics the wrong way

every fictional work is "mixing ideas to create new ideas." so if you say that tolkien is an archetype for stories that mixed in tolkien's ideas then nordic myths are also an archetype and tolkien for using it is generic, at which point the whole argument became totally pointless, I can see the point of the other discussion now though you sure are pretty pretentious, no wonder

>>12831860
You do realise that the definition you posted had an a) and a b) part right? It's either a) or b) not a) and b), your reading comprehension is fucking shit mate. I don't see how you want to argue about novels like that.

>>12831854
Trying to attribute Lovecraft's notion of cosmic horror to the mathematicians who came up with hyperbolic space is stupid. Just because he didn't invent all-original ideas out of a vacuum doesn't mean he wasn't the first to introduce the idea of non-understandable cosmic horrors coming from other planes of existence.

>>12831865
He made a language. Some elves spoke it. Where's he exaggerating the importance of it? He never said you couldn't understand Lord of the Rings without undertaking a linguistic study of the language. Most people don't even care.

>>12831865
Yeah, I know. Tell me how "part b" makes any difference? How was Tolkien's knowledge of language unwarranted or of an exaggerated importance?

>>12831863
>you're basing an argument on irrelevant words,

the whole basis of the discussion has been on those words, they're obviously not "irrelevant"

>>12831863
>nordic myths

Again with that?

Look, if you hadn't learned everything you know about LotR from some third-hand source then you'd be referencing the host of other mythologies which Tolkien was inspired by.

>>12831877
>He made a language.

He made twenty or more actually, fifteen of them Elvish. And nine writing scripts besides.

>>12831877
sci-fi about popular theories at the end of the 19th century were rampant, lovecraft being the most succesful one don't make his ideas super original, they were entertaining, that's about it, but if you want to be in some blind fanboy rage then fine I'll leave you to it
>>12831880
your basis, which was wrong

trolls.......dragons........dwarves...... the fafnir myth makes like half of lotr up, actually it seems like you have no idea about myths, especially nordic ones at all

>>12831877
The black speech has literally barely any explanation despite being one of the most important ones, and there are a lot of other languages. Elvish is just the most well known.

>>12831880
>How was Tolkien's knowledge of language unwarranted or of an exaggerated importance?

No you still don't understand the a: and b: segments in Merriam, go back to elementary please.

>>12831892
>the fafnir myth makes like half of lotr up

That's ridiculous. Have you ever read the Fafnir myth, and do you even know what LotR is about?

>>12831896
Making childish insults isn't supporting your point. Or have you given that up, because now you know what pretentious means?

So... how about that Warhammer 40k /jp/?

How can otaku not love it?

Does futaba even have it's own /tg/ board?

>>12831897
cursed rings, a dragon sitting on a trove of treasure in a ruined dwarven kingdom fair enough that's the hobbit not lotr itself, but it's still tolkien's setting, clearly though you have no idea about norse myths at all since you said tolkien had nothing to do with it, which is extremely delusional, also don't confuse the concept of germanic, even hohenheimian concept of dwarves being nature spirits and nordic blacksmithing warrior dwarves, that tolkien based his setting of, just referring to an earlier point that I noticed

like really liking something is nice but being this delusional about it is pretty immature

>>12831897
Mate, it's not an insult I'm dead serious if you have no idea about sectioned definitions you should head back to school and ask your teacher to explain it once more.

>>12831910
>fair enough that's the hobbit not lotr itself

Yes, so you were wrong then.

>you said tolkien had nothing to do with it

I absolutely never said that you illiterate tool. I said that he drew from many other mythologies besides.

>>12831912
see
>>12831880

I think you missed that post. Here, let me repost the important bit:

>Tell me how "part b" makes any difference? How was Tolkien's knowledge of language unwarranted or of an exaggerated importance?

>>12831913
how does that make a difference? it's still primarily nordic, you trying to brush that aside is either trying to escape the fact that tolkien is just generic myth ripoffs or you actually have no clue
>you illiterate tool
so now you're coming with the childish insults, nice, well enjoy your retarded blind faboyism about tolkien being the most original god of everything, fucktard

>>12831927
>how does that make a difference?

Because you're emphasizing the Nordic influence at the expense of all else?

And tell me, is everything a ripoff? You said there are no new ideas, and while that's sort of true, you haven't made it clear whether or not you actually believe in whether anything can be original. But if you really think that Tolkien's stories are bald-faced "rip-offs" of Nordic myths then you're speaking entirely from your total ignorance of either Nordic mythology or Tolkien. Probably both.

>so now you're coming with the childish insults

That insult wasn't really childish. "Fucktard" is though.

I'm sure they're missing you on /b/ by the way.

>>12831921
You're joining the a and b point together, it's not about him being a fraud. Sure he knew about languages, which is in my opinion is just a total waste of time, I'm not saying that, I'm saying that he's being pretentious about his writing, making seem things mysterious and grandiouse just to seem cooler.

>>12831931
Fanboys are just such cancer Jesus Christ. That's the sort of people the internet attracts I guess.

>>12831932
>it's not about him being a fraud

I know. That's part a. Part b is about the "unwarranted importance" of his linguistic know-how then, which you take offense at for some reason.

>>12831938
Your
>He made a language. Some elves spoke it.
makes it pretty obvious that you have no clue about languages in the setting. If you did you'd realise how pretentious he is with them.

>>12831936
Allow me to paraphrase this post:

>I can't form a coherent counter-argument anymore so I'll simply spew garbage insults at this point.

Now instead of wasting the rest of your time raging how about you read up on Nordic myth or something, so next time you won't say something stupid like "LotR is a rip-off of Fafnir."

>>12831940
That's not my post you idiot. Tolkien made at least twenty languages, not one. I actually said that in response to that post there.

>>12831941
I don't care about myths, I'm just saying that you're pretentious fanboy cancer.
>>12831942
Your point is that Tolkien is basically God and if you doubt his genius originality then you're an idiot, I got it.

>>12831944
>I don't care about myths

Clearly not.

You were suffering from the pretense that you did care and know a lot, however.

Now that you've admitted that you don't know anything about Nordic mythology I'm sure you can admit that your arguments for plagiarism have been completely baseless.

>>12831948
I'm just saying that he was being pretentious about a lot of things, especially languages. And that you're following his example about being pretentious topping it with fanrage but sure.

>>12831951
how was he pretentious about languages, exactly?

and the only one raging here is you

>>12831959
>exaggerated importance, worth, or stature
I'm not really angry, I'm just disappointed that /jp/ gets the same autistic Tolkien fans as every other place. Figures though, 4chan always attracts the most autistic people, I was just naive.

>>12831964
Look, do you know how Tolkien was "pretentious about languages" or not?

>>12831966
Read the thread you lazy bum.

>>12831969
I've been here the whole time. You haven't made it clear, but maybe that's because you don't have any idea what you actually mean.

>>12831970
I already posted what I think, especially about the black speech. Don't blame me for you being lazy.

>>12831974
And I'm telling you that you need to do a better job of expressing what you think.

>>12831892
I don't even like Lovecraft. I just think you're just completely retarded when you insist that these two authors were apparently not original in any way because they derived ideas from sources.

But now that I have better perspective after watching you tire the other guy out I realized you were only ever here to shout retarded incoherent shit at people you thought were "fanboys" so they would exhaust themselves trying to make sense of your vague non-statements and go away, so props on that.