[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.23084206 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

Who do you hate more, Kender or Sergals?

>> No.23084223



>> No.23084239

the fags behind them
although Kender fags are sometimes funny

>> No.23084242


>> No.23084250

>race of obnoxious thieves who are dumb as bricks and are fully willing to fuck up everything to get a shiny object. supposedly loved by everyone for no reason.
>edgy furry wolf thing that eats people and has a huge following on the internet because humanity needs to be purged.

The answer is yes.

>> No.23084254

I've never seen a good quest with kender.

>> No.23084266

Purged with fire?

>> No.23084291

Who do you hate more, one retard or many retards?

>> No.23084294

Aren't sergals also pedophiles and rapists?

>> No.23084366


>> No.23084382

Anything to be edgy enough for a furry artist to make.

>> No.23084385

Sergals by far.

>> No.23084386

take a wild guess

>> No.23084442

Yeah, like every fantasy monster race ever.

>> No.23084587

No contest, really.

>> No.23084600

Angry marines are worse than borh

>> No.23084612


Why you gotta troll like that, homie?

>> No.23084624

>This is just my opinion
I will admit I enjoy inducing spite

>> No.23084627

Sergal slave, wat do?

>> No.23084650

Burn it at the stake and leave it to die.

>> No.23084654


Dude, you show up in a thread that has nothing to do with your opinion on Angry Marines and just post about Angry Marines.

That being said I'm probably just looking to argue with a person who says that Angry Marines are terrible. Feelin feisty and all that

>> No.23084657

Kender, I've never seen Sergals in anything outside of that abortion of a unified setting /tg/ attempted a while ago.

>> No.23084662

He's from /v/. Don't bother responding to him.

>> No.23084695


but his opinions are wroooooong

>> No.23084709

Every once in a while, I remember why I saved this image.

>> No.23084725

correct answer imperial citizen, It is heartening to see that faithful still...


>> No.23084728

To create hysteria?

>> No.23084742


You post that, people start eating each other alive.

Next question. What's worse about that picture, the Sergals or the MLP?

>> No.23084748

I hate Kender more, but that's because I don't have any furries at my D&D game.
(and if there are, they are very good at keeping it to themselves, and I am grateful for that)

>> No.23084750


>> No.23084752

Secondly: Who the fuck is the one in the middle?

>> No.23084756

Well I'm a ponyfag and I have nothing against sergals

>> No.23084760

Both of them and this tread need some hot loving.

>> No.23084774

The artist or commissioner's self-insert

>> No.23084775

furfag self inert?

>> No.23084779

I think it's safe to assume that sergalfags made the cross over and not /mlp/, so sergal gets my vote.

>> No.23084788

I just found out about Sergals right now and read a wiki article about them. I am going to go out on a limb and say they are WAY worse than Kender.

>> No.23084798

The specul snoeflak who commissioned the picture.

>> No.23084811

Nothing is worse than kender. Not even WH40K setting insertions.

>> No.23084821

What about a half-Sergal, half-Kender Ultramarine chapter master?

>> No.23084839

>suddenly imagine the artist shredded apart by a snowstorm of literal flak

Yes... you have made my day without even meaning to.

>> No.23084841

So, Blood Ravens?

>> No.23084877

40k is much worse than either Sergals or kender.

>> No.23084888

Blood Ravens don't have Sergal in them.

>> No.23084919

We're gonna ignore you now. Enjoy this over-posted gif in the meantime.

>> No.23084938


>> No.23085072

Idunno, I think Sergals are kinda aesthetically interesting. Kinda cool for wolf/shark people.

It's mainly the yifffags who are the problem.

Kender are mainly another sort of tiny-people who are moreso defined by their background than anything. Even a good roleplayer cannot redeem them as they are just that bad.

At least with sharkwolves you can disregard some of the background as an individual.(emphasizing the brutal warrior aspects and keeping sexual aspects to a zero or minimum, depending on the group.)

>> No.23085090

Man, Kender are just Halflings that wear shoes. They really don't deserve as much hate as they get.

>> No.23085129


No, seriously, it's like some retard with a giant fetish for halfling-mixed-with-devious-childr wrote up some race he could fap to. Fucking A. Just no.

I have to agree with >>23085072
While the Sergals are bad because of their fans and shit, Kender are just plain terrible always and forever. I hate both, but that dude got it right. I could see Sergals being done decently.

>> No.23085170


This, I read the Kender fluff and it is "they are adorable darlings of the universe" FUCK THAT SHIT.

Also Sergals do have an interesting visual design, it's a shame they are so closely tied to furridom.

>> No.23085198

>being done decently
>prehensile clit

choose one.

>> No.23085287

If I recall, it's retractable.

Either way, you act as if having detailed biology is outright a bad thing.

Just disregard or don't go into detail for sessions, like any decent gamer should.

You don't let your dwarf players go bearding with other dwarves in detail in your sessions, do you?

>> No.23085300

...Excellent point.

Although... a prehensile clit on a non-furry monstergirl... hmm. Maybe next time I'm on /d/ and see a drawfag thread I'll mention that.

>> No.23085325

dunnoh, probably the sergal vore/furfags since they get more of the spotlight

>> No.23085559


>Being Done Decently.

It can be done. Screw the weird sexual aspect, focus the military/warrior aspects, include things raiders and semi-nomads would have, include vassals and bam. Decent race.

Jesus fuck, you're all manchildren sometimes.

Also, fuck Kender.

>> No.23085677

Definitely Kender. Players who play kender are annoying in and of themselves, and have found a race to exploit that inner-annoyingness to the detriment of everyone.

A sergal player is kind of annoying, but not in an unmanageable way. They kind of embody all the things cat-haters hate about cats ("sneaky", "creepy", etc.) but they can be controlled, albeit they DO tend to be attention whores and chaotic in nature.

Where did sergals come from, anyway? What game, or whatever?

>> No.23085719

A furry created the race, and the rest of the "fandom" followed suit and thought they were cool.

>> No.23085801

Yup, AM has not been funny in years.

>> No.23086005

Ive never seen a good quest with sergals

>> No.23086009

I've never seen a good quest

>> No.23086024

> I think Sergals are kinda aesthetically interesting
And I think you're wrong.

>> No.23086052

No, it would be a chapter made by mixing Blood Ravens with Space Wolves

>> No.23086109

Nothing is or could be worse than kender. Fuck kender. They've been the preferred race of insufferable jackasses for decades.

Sergals I only heard of a couple weeks ago, when some guy on /tg/ kept using them as an avatar. I don't know the backstory, or where the idea came from, or what horrors they may have been used for, but I refuse to believe it could possibly be worse than kender.

>> No.23086135

They are like furry kender that have a vore fetish and prehensile dicks and tgchan fucking loves them.

>> No.23086338

Do they also have some retarded magical ability to make everyone like them regardless of how stupid and annoying they are?

Because if not, they're still one step behind kenders.

>> No.23086384

Judging by this thread, yes.

>> No.23086414

I actually think Sergals are really cool if done right. I've never rolled a game with a Kender in the party so I can't say. Most of the games I play either include the standard human, elf, dwarf trio. Occasionally an anthropomorphic animal here or there. Nothing too crazy.

>> No.23086456

I actually think kender are really cool if done right

I actually think cutebolds are really cool if done right

I actually think dickgirls are really cool if done right

>> No.23086477

You almost created the ultimate terrible character. However, you forgot a few things:
>He's an orphan
>part angel
>part demon
>Has sex with everything
>has pink pupils
>part pony
Now you have cancer incarnate.

>> No.23086505

>implying those arent the traits of their Chapter Master who is also a Lost Primarch and the Emperor secretly loved him more than Horus which is why he sent him away during the Heresy.

>> No.23086513

I'm sorry. Do you not have friends who play tabletop roleplaying games?

>> No.23086531

>>Has sex with everything
I meant less in the way of posters inexplicably liking them, but more in the way of "could walk up to the golden throne, steal the emperor's crown from his decaying skull, and still have the custodians just go "aww, how cute."

>> No.23086532

>Now you have cancer incarnate


>> No.23086544

Thank you for correcting me. THAT is cancer incarnate.

>> No.23086545

I believe we are using completely different definitions of the term quest here.

>> No.23086564

Nah. I just meant playing any RPG with friends. Sorry about the confusion. I'm tired.

>> No.23086589

Even if you "did Sergals right", it would still be really weird if your players knew what they were beforehand.

>> No.23086604

This is my one and only reaction.

>> No.23086632

I guarantee you, only one of my friends would know what they are.
And that's at most. He'd probably smirk or even giggle a bit and they say it's nothing. He'd probably back me up by saying it's an old race from a science fiction series and then just make up a title off the top of his head.

But seriously, unless you're playing with children, I don't see the problem in rolling one. I've never played a game where things got even remotely sexual.

>> No.23086746

You see this shit is why you monster-girlfags are just furries in denial. Which in some ways makes you worse than the furfags, at they are honest about their nature.

As to the OP's question, Sergals are worse but only because the huge amount of faggotry involving them that has been posted here. They should be sentenced to pic related.

>> No.23086785

wtf kind of crazy ass guro is that?

>> No.23086808

Battle Angel Alita

>> No.23086823


Fuck off, /tg/. Sergals can be done well just as Gnolls can be done well.

Kender really are the worst though.

>> No.23086864 [SPOILER] 

Don't get your panties in a bunch, furfag. Not everyone shares your fetish.

>> No.23086865


Fuck off, /tg/. Kender can be done well just as Gnomes can be done well.

Sergals really are the worst though.

>> No.23086880

>I've never played a game where things got even remotely sexual.

Would you like me to run a solo ERP campaign for you over IRC or even with other players online? I do this all the time and have clocked over 350 hours[i do not count prep time] of ERP DMing with things that go from purely human modern worlds to low-fantasy harem lord estates and even high-tier horrid gore fetishistic nonsense, with everything that makes even avid fetish readers turn stop and fly out their window, all depending on the kind of content you'd want in what kind of world you'd like to run in.

You know, just in case you're interested in trying something baser or more hedonistic or just plain graphically awful but also with coherency of story and character. Or even without any coherency at all, if you're into that sort of thing.

>> No.23086887

I don't think I've ever seen this done before - not even on Gurochan. Props to you.

Polite sage for off-topic.

>> No.23086915

>le battle-hardened warrior. Too manly for his own good. XDXD

Fuck off, /tg/. Dwarfs can be done just as well as elves can be done well.

Humans really are the worst, though.

>> No.23086916


It's not about that; Sergals and Gnolls can be done well. But I don't like seeing random furries without good reason- they should have fleshed out racial back-stories. Gnolls are demon spawn, and Sergals are some unique special snowflake race that aren't just the generic wolf/cat/whatever else.


I was mostly poking fun at the old as dirt >Le 40k purging reference that I am sick and tired of seeing on /tg/.

>> No.23086935

The fuck is a Sergal?

The only place I've ever heard them mentioned is /tg/.

>> No.23086943

I'm actually on F-list for ERP stuff.

I wouldn't subject my friends to my fetishes. I'm too ashamed of them. Plus I'm the only gay guy in our group. I think what a lot of people do is forget that they are playing with people who don't share their fucking fetishes.

>> No.23086980

Furry shark-wolves with prehensile genitals that eat babies.

>> No.23087018

Sergals are basically the same thing as every other furry fan fiction race, except a bit more fleshed out. Their laced with fetishes and over sexed. Annoying but tolerable.

Kender are like.. the Mary Sue race.

>> No.23087035

I see, I see.

The great thing about the groups I usually run is all the limitations are set beforehand etc, everyone knows what they're there for and what to mostly expect for RP.

I think I feel the same way you do about that, maybe even more because DM experience, unless everyone in the group in comfortable with the inclusion of sexual aspects in a campaign then it simply doesn't belong or it starts creating annoying meta-friction between the attitudes of the players. And that is terrible for ANY kind of game.

>> No.23087038

>Mary sue race
>not half-fae catboy

>> No.23087070

Yeah, I don't know. I just would feel extremely awkward with my group of friends. We're close but not close enough to ERP in the same room, out loud. That just seems really awkward. Sage because this is getting off-topic fast.

>> No.23087400

You also forgot heterochromia.

>> No.23087447

>le racist asshole le fucks all the le other races HFY IS SHIT XDDD

Fuck off, /tg/. Humans can be done well just as Orcs can be done well.

Catgirls really are the worst, though.

>> No.23087454

>Gnolls can be done well

>> No.23087501

>Race X
>parody of negative comments with added 'le's and emoticons.

Fuck off, /tg/. Race X can be done well just as Race Y can be done well.

Race Z really are the worst, though.

Sayonara, fa/tg/uys.

>> No.23087522

Kender aren't Mary Sues. They're just unrepentant sociopaths who will lie, cheat, and steal, but somehow it's ok because they're childlike innocents.

>> No.23087572

>parody of comments made about said subject
Statement that the aforementioned subject can be handled in a proper fashion.
Statement that a different subject is of the lowest quality.

>> No.23087894

And getting away with bullshit "just because" isn't Sue... how?

>> No.23087934

Is it possible for someone to play a kender as anything other than what you just said?

>> No.23087966

Mankind will only be free when the last sergal chokes to death on the last kender.

>> No.23088002

>sergal chokes to death on kender
Someone call the drawfriends!

>> No.23088103

What's up with the face?

>> No.23088320

Whats wrong with cutebolds?

People actually HAVE done them right (As in, not some kind of low-powered furry kender or weakling that's a conduit for every power ever) and it HAS been interesting.

Not all cutebolds are "aww daww lets not murder the filthy vermin" things, not all cutebolds are goku.

>> No.23088441

Nope, incorrect, wrong.
Cutebolds are on par with kenders on awfulness.
Fey corgy are near there as well.

>> No.23088519

>People actually HAVE done them right
[Citation needed]

>> No.23088552

But canonically cutebolds are slaughtered mercilessly and are considred nothing but pesky vermin.

Instead of winning over the in-universe characters, they win over the audience. It's basically the "instant underdog" package.

People tend to overuse it, yes (see: quest where you go from cutebold -> Superior wizard/archer cutebold -> Super soul eating wizard/archer cutebold -> Super soul eating lichking wizard/archer cutebold -> God -> Transcending everyone in existence all at once.)

Then you have it done right (Cutebold on a rescue mission -> Cutebold almost getting murdered -> Cutebold not understanding whats going on, almost gets murdered -> Cutebold's target and love interest is already dead -> More almost getting murdered -> Story ends with a little bit of coincidental heroism, the end)

>> No.23088631

>But canonically cutebolds are slaughtered mercilessly and are considred nothing but pesky vermin.
You always hear about this, but never see it. Also, its a retarded sympathy tactic
>Instead of winning over the in-universe characters, they win over the audience
Which is an equally stupid method. We are supposed to instantly care for a bunch of thieving little shits just because they are too retarded to understand the concept of property and have a childlike demeanor.

In fact, that sounds exactly like a kender.
>Cutebold on a rescue mission -> Cutebold almost getting murdered -> Cutebold not understanding whats going on, almost gets murdered -> Cutebold's target and love interest is already dead -> More almost getting murdered -> Story ends with a little bit of coincidental heroism, the end
So basically Furfaggotry Mr. Magoo except that we are supposed to be legitimately emotional over his bullshit.

>> No.23088838

>retarded sympathy tactic
Well before kobold camp, that was pretty much kobolds in a nutshell for everyone. Now a couple furfags will let them off easy if they haven't gotten in to anything

>sounds exactly like a kender
No, we are supposed to care for a bunch of thieving little shits just because they look adorable and/or are the main character. They understand property (and reproduction too, nobody really uses that joke anymore). Also people use them as non-thieving little shits too.

>Furfaggotry Mr Magoo
Eh, it was like playing a 1st level rogue for a one-on-one session of DnD

Also I guess start explaining whats wrong with the fey corgi thing. Also anything else you wanna shit on?

>> No.23088915

Some kind of always-on power?
That actually could be used for a decent plot point, think goblins 'kay? Now they have learned to make themselves likeable and sugarcoated while still being evil and rotten to the core and they use this ability to infiltrate other race's settlements.

Fuck! Making a campaign right now!

>> No.23089031

Sergals are alright. Kender are just That Guy magnets and a shitty race due to their VERY EXISTENCE being a direct problem.

>> No.23089069

>that was pretty much kobolds in a nutshell for everyone.
No, before that shitty Dorf Fort comic that ruined them forever they were nasty vermin that would steal all your shit and lay traps everywhere.
>we are supposed to care for a bunch of thieving little shits just because they look adorable and/or are the main character.
Caring for something just because it is cute or the main character is the hallmark of shitty literature. I suppose you didn't feel any sympathy for Christopher since he wasn't kawaii enough and therefore MUST be a villain.
>Eh, it was like playing a 1st level rogue for a one-on-one session of DnD
If the whole thing ran on DM fiats and you were facing a dragon, maybe.
>Also I guess start explaining whats wrong with the fey corgi thing
I never said shit about Fey Corgi, quit trying to change the subject since you realized how shitty Cutebolds are.

>> No.23089260

>I never said shit about fey corgi
See >>23088441
>Fey corgy are near there as well

Also I'm pretty much done with the cutebold discussion, its going to get nowhere. I honestly understand why you don't like it and I respect that, but I personally find the whole concept fun and don't really see how its the same level of horribly awful as kender.

honestly I even like the nose rubbing jokes

>> No.23089344

And that's not me. Congratu-fucking-lations on attributing to me opinions I don't hold.
>but I personally find the whole concept fun and don't really see how its the same level of horribly awful as kender.
Because it is literally exactly the same as kender. The ONLY reason you are supposed to like them is because DAWWW HE IS SOOO KEWWWT. They have literally nothing else going for them and most certainly nothing interesting.

Not to mention all the creepy porn involving them.

>> No.23089350

How is a race that only exists to be cute and nothing else not awful?

>> No.23089401

I honestly don't give a flying fuck about the dawww part, just the underdog shit.

Also creepy porn? You mean the ten gallon nosebleeds in mudyquest?

But is it literally on the same level as kender just because of that?

>> No.23089516

>just the underdog shit.
The only reason you care about the underdog part is because of the daww part. Cutebolds make shitty underdogs, no small part because everyone already knows they'll win.
>Also creepy porn?
Nosebleed shit, sergals fucking them, and a bunch of other shit that dribbles onto /tg/ from that furry hellhole tgchan
>But is it literally on the same level as kender just because of that?
No, its worse.

At least Kender have some skills, even if those skills all revolve around being thieving little bastards.

>> No.23089520

I said "near there".

>> No.23089679

I thought you were talking about cutebolds.

For Corgis I thought it was just something made as part of the whole corgi obsession people on the internet seem to have.

>> No.23089975

I hate Kender with the force of a thousand suns. I got no problem with sergals simply because they look cool and I think if someone sane rolled one, it'd be pretty cool.

>> No.23090036

>because they look cool
No they don't. They look like they were designed by someone who doesn't know shit about animals or animal biology.

i.e. a furfag.

>> No.23090058

'Visually they are pretty awesome, like a shark wolf thing

>> No.23090113

I think you need to settle down a bit. Maybe take a break from the computer. They do look pretty cool and varied compared to most fantasy settings and yet, they are familiar enough in appearance that I feel they could work in a fantasy or science fiction setting.

>> No.23090121

Which would be nice, if they had any of the traits of either rather than just a really sharp profile and the eyes of an herbivore.

>> No.23090142

>They do look pretty cool and varied compared to most fantasy settings and yet
Oh, then I suppose you might be right.

After all...

>> No.23090155

That's Original Character Donut Steele.

>> No.23090156

There is nothing.

>> No.23090170

And I mean nothing

>> No.23090176

Modrons are from a separate plane. They are completely different.

>> No.23090182

Also you forgot that the main character of the story they're jammed into hates them (if the same gender/opposite and gay) or loves them (if opposite/same and gay) and that they will do anything for them regardless.

>> No.23090201

That ever remotely compares to a Sergal in levels of interesting design

>> No.23090215

Because Sergals are totally from this plane of existence.

>> No.23090276


why are the features you describe bad?

>> No.23090281

They are. And they are the fucking worst thing to exist. Why would you compare Modrons to shitty ass Sergals? You people make me sick. Not only that but you compare them to Displacer Beasts, which are probably the best thing to come from D&D. I fucking hate you.

>> No.23090295

So um...this is the first I've heard of sergals. So they're essentially fuzzy psychotic landsharks? That honestly sounds kind of cool.

So what's the catch that's going to make me hate them...

>> No.23090301

It's because they were made by furfags.

>> No.23090321


ANyone who plays one is a furfag. They are dramawhores.

>> No.23090330

They're fetish creatures with prehensile clitori

>> No.23090332

Your argument isn't the fucking features then

>> No.23090360

They were created by a crazy Japanese furry chick

>> No.23090362

Do I really needd an argument? They were made by furries that's the only argumant needed.

>> No.23090363

>They are.
They dont exist in any lore save Sergal Lore, so they only live in Sergal Land, dead in the center of the Shitty Fetish Dimension
>not realizing that I was proving how there are so many things far superior to sergals in DnD to contest the claim that Sergals “look cool and varied compared to most fantasy settings”
Not my fault you cant read.

>> No.23090368


She doesn't die guys

>> No.23090379

Sorry, I'm kind of new here.

>> No.23090394

They have a whole bunch of fetish shit to them, like getting off on eating people and prehensile clits and rape everything.

>> No.23090396

Kender. There's a lot wrong with sergals, but I do quite like the design at least.

>> No.23090398

because prehensile dicks isn't a retarded feature. Why is such a thing even worth mentioning, it just suggests they are solely made for furry ERP.

>> No.23090408

Then you have shit taste in aesthetics.

>> No.23090415

Or, you know, you could try reading the original lore/world that tracy mick created for the damned things and find out exactly why it's not really liked even within their own community


oh yeah, I linked there, the person that made the sergal species and you won't have to read very long to find out why they're disliked.

>> No.23090427

Why would you like anything done by a frury?

>> No.23090498


Yes you do.

>> No.23090499


>///My species///
* Please add "Species©Mick39" on your pic or submission page if you make art that use my species.
*I am not limiting Sergal and other my races in personal use and free productions.
*I take copyright fee from pay productions use that gets over $1000 per month. it is 5% from all income.(Please ask me if you want to do.)
for example, printed book,pay-site and avatar production of "SecondLife".

I take everything I said back and I am so, so sorry that I even remotely liked it as an idea at all.
I need to go lay down, tg.

>> No.23090525

Yes you do need an argument, because just going "lol, furfag" whenever you want to attack anything with fur is stupid.
Besides, there are plenty of legitimate criticisms to level against sergals without resorting to rhetoric. like the vore, or the genital thing, or the inherent condescending attitude.

>> No.23090537


You don't have to be 100% behind them to think that they look cool. 90% of the images I see don't show off dicks and gnolls eat people and they are cool.

>> No.23090538

Sure is children in here.

>> No.23090545

Please, just stop. You aren't even using good evidence to back up your arguments.
Do you know what a good argument is?
The creator is a fucking prick who makes his living on copyright claims.
This is a good argument.

>> No.23090560

You'r probably all furry sympathizers. It's disgusting how far /tg/ has fallen.

>> No.23090662


Not gonna lie, I'm just fed up with all of this furry hate. Like, it's funny to joke about and some of the pictures are weird as all hell, but I've seen some shit that is people being bullies.

>> No.23090666


>Hey /tg/, I have a cool idea for a werewolf themed campaign. See, my players will come into town and hear of werewolf attacks, and there will be tension and intrigue as they try to figure out who's the werewolf or not, but then-


Leave. Forever.

>> No.23090676

Note the disheveled furfag sympathizer. Despise him!

>> No.23090701


I ain't give no shit bout no lore, mothafuckas look coo'

>> No.23090718


Homie, do you play /tg/s? Like tabletops and whatnot?

>> No.23090739

Hello friend, you must be new to /tg/

As such, you seem to misunderstand a few things about the board and the board's history. To clarify:
>/tg/ doesn't care about furry and never has.

>> No.23090785

that kind of campaign wouldn't be bad, but artsy furfag shit with ERP and the like should be shunned everywhere.

>> No.23090813

Except when the topic involves mantises.

>> No.23090822

For some it's hate. For me it's the disappointment faced with unoriginal oversexualized animal anthropomorphism and how it has little place other than within the niche the came from, and it fine if it can STAY there.
And I disagree with OP posting this thread in the first place, shame on him honestly.

This ain't no thread about a cool werewolf campaign in a diesel-punk universe, friend. Please don't use OOT examples.


Exactly. Other than the point that whenever people didn't like a thread they used to post porn in it and then let the 40k crowd image dump it into oblivion.
It was fun to watch those happen...

>> No.23090824

I remember Warhammer Wednesdays.
Which, you know. Were centered around hating furfags.
Speak for yourself, furfag.

>> No.23090831

>furfags literally cant tell the difference between a werewolf and a fetish beast
This is what pisses me off the most about furries. Since they cant tell the difference between their fetish and legitimate beastfolk, the rest of us have to suffer through them comparing everything to furshit and ruining perfectly good beastfolk threads with porn dumps.

YOU are the problem, anon, not the HURRESY spammers. They are just a symptom of the problem. The problem called your fursecution complexed ass.

>> No.23090850

Well I meant in a "furfags are the worst" kind of way

>> No.23090854

I disagree, but its all goo'

>> No.23090857

you could take the word furfag out of that sentence and it would still hold true

>> No.23090863

No, /tg/ hates furries like any sane board. Where did you get that idea?

>> No.23090873

>the board that was spawned from Warhammer Wednesdays doesnt care about furfaggotry

>> No.23090891

Sergals are just another fairly shitty furfag race, so I don't really give a shit.
Kender are in actual, published books, which means that some seriously bad shit has made it to the circles were it matters, so they get the greater part of my hate, such as it is.

>> No.23090894

Really Satan, did you compare a horror campaign premise starring a werewolf with the fetish-based faggotry of sergals?

You are even dumber than the average anon...

>> No.23090971

I see no reason that people liking things you don't need to be screamed into oblivion with cries of FETISH FAG FETISH FAG. The problem begins and ends with them.

>> No.23090979

This is /tg/, the magical land of in depth discussion and development of concepts.

This also includes taking a shitty concept and making it good. Luckily we can not only say "well if you take these parts out, you have potential", but get others to actually accept or even work on said potential.

Also yes porn spam is bad. Thats because its spam at all. HURRESY and furry porn spam is both just spam and both equally detestable.

>> No.23091004

Could somebody who doesn't have a clue what a Sergal is explain what they are and why they are so awful? All I can gather is that some furry made them one day. They seem like a perfectly reasonable monster race. Creepy things with unsavory habits. I'd be more than happy to face off against one as an antagonist. Is it because we are supposed to look beyond all of their deviant traits and treat them like any other species?

>> No.23091018

/tg/ has not ever at any point "got shit done".

>> No.23091035

It matters when they had tried to share it with everyone else and then act persecuted when they were looked upon and told,
"Keep that to yourself, yo."

>> No.23091038

>I see no reason that people liking things you don't need to be screamed into oblivion with cries of FETISH FAG FETISH FAG.
The moment they stop shoving their fetishes into my legitimate threads is the moment I will stop hating them for shoving their fetishes into my legitimate threads.

>> No.23091049


We hate furries, it's part of the culture.

But the expression of that hatred is where things get murky.

I've seen enough sergals to think that the base physical designs are cool, ignoring all the stupid ass fetish shit.

>> No.23091056


Please illustrate the difference between Gnolls and Sergals, and why one is acceptable fantasy and one is not.

>> No.23091058

>hey gaiz lets discuss my fetish!
And this is why furfags need to burn.

>> No.23091114

Examples broski

Lies, /tg/ has gotten plenty of shit done. But before I get told no, I define done as actually having a moderately fleshed out, usable concept.

The porn of Sergals is weirder than the porn of Gnolls. Also Gnolls are a much older concept.

>> No.23091131

That is not "acting". That is you bellowing with utter fury at any hint of something you don't like, when it is literally not a problem at all outside of you making it one.

That statement is currently being proven wrong. You have not stopped spasming with fury at their horrible crime of existence even in the absence of their actual existence. It is, for all meaningful purposes, causeless. You are not responding to "fetishes shitting up legitimate discussion" because that is not taking place. You are shitting up legitimate discussion because you falsely see its subject matter as something abhorrent.

>> No.23091132

Gnolls werent built from the ground up to be fetish shit and are only fetish faggotry if you have a That DM. Furthermore, they are usually treated as generic, loosely developed monsters rather than full blown characters, so you don't have to deal with some faggot going into lurid detail about their dickgirl hierarchy unless, once again, you have a That DM.

>> No.23091149

>You're just ACTING persecuted and should be burned at the stake and never allowed to speak of what you like ever because I don't like it!

>> No.23091167

>Examples broski
Try every single beastfolk thread or anything involving kobolds or dragonborn.

>> No.23091184

>fetish fetish fetish shit faggot shit fetish faggot
I still don't see anything awful about them at all. I see that you subjectively loathe them and insist on calling them awful at every opportunity, though.

>> No.23091193


So why not keep the look of sergals (excluding prehensile clits) and change the fluff?

>> No.23091222

The fluff isn't the problem, and it isn't what he described. The problem is that he sees something he deems "furry" and immediately thinks "HORRIBLE FETISH FURFAG SHIT FURSECUTION COMPLEX SHIT", perceiving it as an attack directed at him.

>> No.23091227

Are we talking recently? Because pre-mod crackdown yes that did happen from time to time (I mean, dragonborn threads started just for the porn back then)

What this guy said, and pretty much "well I don't like the other stuff, but they look neat" people in general

>> No.23091237

Why don't we change the subject.

How would you introduce Sergals into your campaign? How would you make them as non-sexual and crazy as possible?

I would make them a bit like Gnolls or Orcs, but instead of attacking towns and large bands they attack very small groups, and attack at night. They are more cowardly and weak, but also much sneakier and craftier. They are intelligent but rarely speak common or languages other then their own. Some of them can also become decent spell casters, though they lack the attention to become overtly powerful.

>> No.23091242

You/op openly brought up the topic of a shitty niche fetish race for discussion, /tg/ called it a shitty nice fetish race that doesnt need to be discussed, and now you are getting all butthurt over the fact that we dont want to discuss your shitty fetish.

Quit gettin so buttmad.

>> No.23091265

Because they look like shit.

>> No.23091293

>Someone else, who I'll assume is you to feel like the big man, brought up something I didn't want discussed. I declared it a shitty fetish and spammed it to shut down discussion, because you should never be allowed to speak and have a persecution complex. Now you are criticizing me, which I will deem "butthurt" in order to further demonize it.

>> No.23091324


What about them looks like shit?

>> No.23091342


Arguments are legitimate until proven illegitimate.

Also, sometimes your opponent needs help to find their argument.

>> No.23091343

They're animal-like.

In case you haven't noticed, the people who want to shut down any discussion of them don't tell the difference between fur and "shit".

>> No.23091364


Chill out, homie, let them speak for themselves.

>> No.23091375

Well that's, like, your opinion, man.
Personally, I think dwarves look like shit. They're just fucking midgets, for crying out loud, with all the fucked-up proportions that entails, but people still enjoying playing them. Your opinion on looks doesn't change anything.

>> No.23091392

They look like boring, anorexic gnolls. I really dont see what makes them so interesting to be worth polishing off all those layers of shit to make them useable.

>> No.23091414

Are you serious with that first statement? Because it's literally how it happened. People bringing their sexual fetishes into forums/discussions/threads that really didn't need them and then being really, uberly cross about being told off.
I'm not raging against anyone (unless you're talking about that other guy), but if you're really also asking:
> legitimate discussion
The topic of this thread itself was from the very beginning about discussing dislike in the first place
>Who do you hate more, Kender or Sergals?
I still think the Kender are worse because they're in published books while being generally unpleasant.
Then someone new to sergals asked why they were disliked, so I linked to their creator and mentioned the nonsense that began them, which had already stemmed from THE CREATION OF THESE KINDS OF THREADS TO BEGIN WITH!

No hate man, no rage, just disappointment...

Why not make something even better?! Your entire imagination is available and you want to spend it making sergals "better"? BE CREATIVE MAN, THERE ARE NO LIMITS.


>> No.23091424

There are no "layers of shit" except the ones being smeared around by bashers.

>> No.23091455

Bullshit, Blue is OP as fuck, that's not terror.
They're just waiting for the skin cancer to develop.

>> No.23091461

Actually the topic is "which is worse: Sergals or Kender?"

A guy got mad when someone was using "furry fetish fuel" as their sole argument and now that side is starting to hit "FURSECUTION" levels of mad, just as the yours has reached "IT HAS FUR ITS HORRIBLE" level.

This entire discussion has been escalated past the point of meaningful discussion, and we should take a break from this specific point for a while, see >>23091237

That new topic is about toning down the fetish fuel parts down to make it more acceptable, which should be fine with both parties since both sides actually consider sergals shitty overall.

>> No.23091478

>There are no "layers of shit"
see >>23090415
Sergals come with a shitton of baggage and would do nothing more than take the place of gnolls. I really don't see whats so interesting about skinny gnolls to warrant this big of a discussion.

>> No.23091485

>Are you serious with that first statement? Because it's literally how it happened.
The response was not "keep it to yourself, yo". It was "furfags should never be allowed to speak and should be burned at the stake and have persecution complexes". Which does nothing but shut down potentially entertaining discussion for no good reason.

>> No.23091487

I wouldn't

>> No.23091489


I find them to be quite distinctive from gnolls. Gnolls tend to be shown hunched over while sergals are more upright, also there is the aforementioned sharper features such as the nose. Also gnolls tend to be depicted with ragged armor and weapons, while sergals seem to roll around in their fur (or nazi uniforms cuz retarded fucking nazifurs). While the last detail can change if anyone picks up the race the other ones make them quite distinctive.

Also gnoll fur tends to be much darker than sergal.

>> No.23091521


>Why not make something even better

What is better?

Why not take something that I think looks cool and then change the shit that is fucking retarded?

For that matter, is this not the foundation of creativity?

>> No.23091525

So Sergals are just “Gnolls, but...”

Once again, tell me a role they can fulfill in a campaign setting that gnolls cant that warrants using them.

>> No.23091533

>why not make something better?
Not all of us have the imagination to make an acceptable race. I'm one of those people sadly, everything I make is a mary sue race/character

>> No.23091558


I thought the mad starts when a guy went "I think Sergals look cool" and then some people (or one) agreed and they got called furfags.

>> No.23091560

>everything I make is a mary sue race/character
No wonder you like sergals.

>> No.23091589

They can be the more dextrous version of gnolls, if your gnolls are of the big hulking variety.

also, some of us like a high amount of variety in our campaign settings.

Who said I liked sergals? All I said is that other people tend to be bad at making shit up that would be acceptable to others, citing myself as an example.

>> No.23091595

Because they are copyrighted.
But in all creative seriousness, if you really want to do that we can do that right now ITT.
Let's rename them, so no one gets confused that they're the same things. Any suggestions?

Show us them! Let us help you! Ignore the nonconstructive bastards.

>> No.23091603


...wut? The only similarity between the two are that they have fur.

Hell, the existing fluff for the two is relatively different.

That being said if I were to use them in a campaign I'd use them as just an aesthetic and create entirely new fluff behind them.

>> No.23091608

By that logic, why use gnolls instead of sergals? One does not need exceptional cause to choose one option over another. Perhaps it's personal tast, perhaps it's just a whim. One can't really give an excuse for either, and one doesn't have to.

>> No.23091628

>They can be the more dextrous version of gnolls, if your gnolls are of the big hulking variety.
Which can be accomplished by saying “you have run across a slimmer, more agile variety of gnoll”. This is certainly not such a dire niche that it needs to be filled with prehensile clits.

>> No.23091639


Not gonna lie, I don't got the drive right now to make a whole new race and right now they got so much baggage that I don't want to fight an uphill battle to make them acceptable by /tg/s standards. I just think they look cool and that sometimes the "BURN THE FURFAGS" shit goes a little too far.

>> No.23091643

>Because they are copyrighted.
I know that gets loathed a lot, but honestly it's fair of him to do so, since he came up with the idea.

>> No.23091660


You can take out the prehensile clits. The entire design of the sergal does not revolve around its clitoris (no more than any other fantasy race anyway).

>> No.23091667

>The only similarity between the two are that they have fur.
They both have canine features to them.
>the existing fluff for the two is relatively different.
You guys just said to judge them based solely on looks and not take fluff into account. Make up your minds, please.
>if I were to use them in a campaign I'd use them as just an aesthetic and create entirely new fluff behind them.
You JUST talked about how they cant be replaced by gnolls because of fluff differences. Make up your mind.

>> No.23091684

He already said you'd cut the overtly fetish shit out, and saying "Oh, they're more agile X" is falling into the same trap elves did with a mess of different varieties that only really differ in name.

>> No.23091691

>I just think they look cool and that sometimes the "BURN THE FURFAGS" shit goes a little too far.
I think the "BURN THE FURFAGS" shit starts at "too far". That mentality is constantly killing off otherwise productive or enjoyable dialogue. And not just about furry things, but about countless game systems, classes, races, worlds, or other things. And not just on /tg/, but all over the internet.

>> No.23091710

>"Oh, they're more agile X" is falling into the same trap elves did with a mess of different varieties that only really differ in name.
Thats what I am saying. The only big difference between a gnoll and a sergal is in name only.

>> No.23091734

>This is certainly not such a dire niche that it needs to be filled with prehensile clits.
Those wouldn't come up unless it was already the sort of campaign wherein genitalia play a role. Which isn't necessarily a bad sort of campaign.

>> No.23091746

So you are admitting the only thing that makes a sergal distinctive is its fetishy bullshit.

>> No.23091754


Anyone want to discuss how sentient geometric matrices would fight dolphin bats? Or even what kind of civilizations would result from differentiations in mathematics and what their philosophies might be like? Or why they would go to war with the dolbats in the first place and not take out the cancer causing shade of blue?

>> No.23091760

Gimme a minute

I don't need to use prehensile clits in my Sergals. They aren't an integral piece.

I also like the landshark thing and it would work great as a desert race. Sergal raiders being the predators of the dune seas.

>> No.23091789

Or, you know, their entire general appearance.

>> No.23091813


Eh, it's part of our origins and culture so I can't really hate it too much. I like to keep it around as a joke rather than a mantra, a "never forget" deal.

>> No.23091843

>thinking that kobolds are furry shit
>thinking people actually have a fetish for it and are not just doing it all for shits and giggles
Who let you out of /v/, Captain No-Fun? Dragonborn threads are really the only ones that are just a circlejerk of fetishists, the rest are just fa/tg/uys getting a laugh and exploring creative concepts.
Furries are scum but so are people who will look to shit post in anything that they don't like.

>> No.23091854

>fur and lack of fatty stores
>desert race
Shit dont make sense. A better desert race would be some sort of naked mole rat people, humanoid-ish graboids, snakefolk, or even fucking wheelspiders

>> No.23091857

Loaded language aside, no, I'm saying that a race's genitals are only relevant to a campaing where genitals are relevant.

>> No.23091873

wheel spider skeletons

>> No.23091882

But can we agree on cute = kill it with fire?

>> No.23091886

wheel spider skeletons in amounts equivalent to the mass of your party

>> No.23091895

>thinking that kobolds are furry shit
You seem to lack reading comprehension if you think I said that.
>thinking people actually have a fetish for it and are not just doing it all for shits and giggles
I dont care if its a joke or not, but when a thread is spammed with porn and fapfics, the effect is the same.

>> No.23091901

I remember posting in those threads with fervor. Middle school me absolutely hated them with their questionable tastes in art, high amounts of sheer drama, and terrible persecution complexes.

Now I have an FA and ERP on f-list almost everyday. No one knows this secret but since this is an anonymous image board, I figure I'm safe to admit this. This doesn't make me a hypocrite, does it?

>> No.23091909

Do you feel a compulsion to harm this.
This is not a question?

>> No.23091911

Khajiit spring to mind.
Loose, light fur actually prevents overheating quite well, actually.

>> No.23091913

Quit gettin' mad at everything.

>> No.23091941

>I need everything to be as close to real life as possible in my fantasy games
Some of us don't

>thread spammed with porn and fapfics
[citation needed]

>> No.23091944

This so much.

Also, there are furfags who post here who don't talk about their fetish and talk about normal /tg/ things. However, no one knows they exist because no one fucking knows that they are furries.

>> No.23091956

That face is pretty punchable.

>> No.23091980

Then go for it man. I hope you have a plasma screen.

>> No.23091987


>> No.23092000

>How would you introduce Sergals into your campaign? How would you make them as non-sexual and crazy as possible?

... like any other fantasy race? You know, "you see what appears to be a humanoid wolf, it's snout bearing features of a shark" and leave out the unnecessary details. Kind of like how you introduce centaurs as humans with the lower body of a horse instead of "these guys have HORSE DICKS!"

Seriously, take out the sexual details and all you have is another fantasy race. Done.

>> No.23092058

The true Dark Souls 2 begins here.

>> No.23092074

It works the same way in the ERP campaigns I run.
Although there is focus on muscles, you don't just say:
"The naga pops out of the bush, and he's got a dick! Two!"

It just has no immersion for the players.

>> No.23092081

No, I just like to have my races make sense in the locale. You would be bitching if someone had you fight a tribe of mermaids in the desert.

Unless they swam in sand because that would be pretty bitchin, but then they wouldn't be your typical mermaid.

>> No.23092109

What about just one as a boss?

>> No.23092197

What the fuck, /tg/. Did you all just take stupid pills this morning? Because neither side of this completely fucktarded argument is being intelligent in the least sense.
First, you have the furry kids getting buttmad at obvious trolls and going back to their old ways of "fursecution, stop making fun of me, bawwww!!!" I've been in enough beast men character art threads to know that you all have thicker skins than that.

And then you got all these Warhammer neckbeards yelling about "Heresy" and Sergals are killing my /tg/ and being all dramatic and shit. As if fighting in this thread is going to determine the future of /tg/ as we know it. I thought you all had matured and everything.

This leads me to this theory. What if the furfags in this thread aren't even furfags at all. They're just people who want to make the anthropomorphic crowd look bad by acting completely fucking stupid. And what if the kids yelling on about how retarded Sergals are just because a furry made them are furries themselves trying to make the Warhammer crowd. Throw in a couple of people who are genuinely a part of each group and you have this thread.

Thanks for reading this in my voice.

>> No.23092213

Joke's on you, I've never watched that show!

>> No.23092242

It's still a good show.
Did you at least read it in the voice of a black man?

>> No.23092270

I read it in the voice of a native american chief lamenting something.
I got a weird mind.

>> No.23092287

My opinion on the subject is that if you want to masturbate while watching the Disney cartoon of Robin Hood, that's fine as long as you don't do it in public. Public masturbation is rarely a good idea.

>> No.23092294

I have no idea why people are so thin skinned in this thread.

Then again, I seem to be one of the only people not bothered by sergalfag too

>> No.23092301 [DELETED] 

My internal commentary is done exclusively in the voice of Morgan Freeman.

>> No.23092303

On the contrary, public masturbation has saved lives, son.

>> No.23092317

0/10 some subtlety is required

>> No.23092321

but he is a black man

>> No.23092338

what about that post was not true?

>> No.23092356

he said rarely, not never

>> No.23092365

I'd use them like cold-weather packs of raptors hunting down the players. I've got no idea what their fluff is, and given that they're a creepy as shit fetish race I don't want to go looking, but they seem carnivorous and angry.

Load them up with bonuses to unarmed but leave them unable to effectively use non-racial weapons or wear armour?

>> No.23092367

1. Cutebolds
2. Kenders
3. Sergals

Sergals are last just because I've never ever played with one.

>> No.23092449

>played a game with Cutebolds
Ooh, I need to hear this horror story.

>> No.23092478

no one does
we don't need this kind of experience

so tell us

>> No.23092692

You know, over time I have actually come to really love Sergals. Even Kender.

Not because of what they are, but what they do. They give us all something to hate. We as a group loathe them, and that focus helps us make limits on what we do.

When someone acts like /that guy/, you can point out that they're almost acting like they should be playing a Sergal or Kender and slap their shit. If they're normal people merely slipping into becoming /that guy/, then it might fix them.

I like them as an example of the unity they provide us. The unity of people desperately wanting to murder the concept of them.

But if we ever succeeded, we'd just have to make new Sergals and Kender ourselves.

>> No.23092729

I seriously don't understand how cutebolds went from a fun /tg/ joke into a thing that's considered worse than fucking KENDER by default.

I played a cutebold once even, and everyone in my group had fun! What the hell!

>> No.23092738

>plays the Golden Mean
>brings up "persecution complex" and "you're a stereotype" bullshit

>> No.23092766

It's a hate meme. That's all the explanation it has, same as any other hate meme.

>> No.23092844

You only think they had fun because they didnt speak out against you.
See >>23092367

>> No.23092889

New people coming in and not getting it, then lead to negative conclusions by the already existing dissenters. Then the haters outnumber everyone else and it becomes common to hate it without any real reason, unlike the furry hatred which is actually based in fact. It became a meme.
Or, to simplify in broad terms, newfags and /b/ in muh oldschool tee gee.

>> No.23092893

They annoy me because too many players either try to play off their downsides, grab the spotlight constantly to seek attention, or get LOL SO RANDUMB.

>> No.23092943

If the furry hatred was ever based in fact, most of it is gone at this point. I'm pretty sure over half of people who hate furries now do it for no reason.

>> No.23092999

But that isn't true, because I asked them about it after I started seeing all this hate.

One of them called me a dumbass for thinking I was being a bother

See, I didn't do any of that. I rolled with the downsides, didn't try to fuck with where the spotlight went, and the closest to LOLRANDUMB was someone making a suggestion in jest while we were taking a break during the first session.

If someone tried to pull any of that, I would be annoyed too.

>> No.23093032

True, anything involving animals at all are under fire as being "furry" nowadays.
But I'm not willing to write it off just yet, as actual furries are still legitimately cancerous.

>> No.23093059

>True, anything involving animals at all are under fire as being "furry" nowadays.
Only furries seem to think this since they cant distinguish the difference between beastfolk and furries.

>> No.23093078

Then you played a kobold, not a cutebold, unless you specifically asked to play as derpy furry bait.

>> No.23093138

>I'm pretty sure over half of people who hate furries now do it for no reason.
Go to wikifur. Click random article. There, you now have at least one reason.

>> No.23093170

You can probably find far more than one reason on one page, anon.

>> No.23093201

No, they aren't. They're a group that is popular to hate. A legitimate reason has never manifested itself.

>> No.23093218

Only if you decide to loathe furries pre-emptively, and hold the entire concept accountable for anything that coincides with it.

>> No.23093252

Listen here kid. This is coming from "a furry". Only reason, I'm bringing this up, is because it's relevant to the topic. There are plenty of reasons to hate the furry fandom as a whole. Take it from someone who's been here for more than 5 years. The fandom used to be much worse than it is now. Everyone who was a part of it had this really bad persecution complex and they honestly believed that everyone else shared their fetish. You'd have to be completely retarded to say there was no reason to hate them.

>> No.23093276

Hatred just doesn't come that easily to me.
It was just some artist's page.
He has a really stupid fursona that's a hybrid of a wasp and a fox but I don't see why I should hate him.

>> No.23093278

Explain the difference then? You keep going on and on about that so now I'm curious on where you draw the line. (Note: where YOU specifically, YOU, draw the line)

The character was pretty dumb. One of the limitations broski

Actually there is a legitimate reason: the loud fucks who shove it in people's faces and get mad when it isn't accepted. I've seen it first hand. Also I'm a quiet furfag

The other problem is people who start making the definition of "shoving it into people's faces" into things that non furfags bring up.

>> No.23093285

Fairy Butt-Beads is enough a reason for me. I played with a furry that invented them.

They are not what you think, they are not butt-beads for fairies, they are butt-beads made from living fairies. He made them for the half-giant in the party because he thought she was lonely...

>> No.23093287

>loathing a "fandom as a whole"
There's your problem right there.

>> No.23093298

I don't hate the game, I hate the player.
Anthros are perfectly fine. Much of your childhood cartoons had them and they can be used perfectly well in serious situations.
But the furry fandom is a different beast, no pun intended.

>> No.23093300

>It's only a cutebold if it's bad
come on dude

>> No.23093315

People who don't talk about their fetish in public, UNITE!

>> No.23093334

>Actually there is a legitimate reason: the loud fucks who shove it in people's faces and get mad when it isn't accepted.
That's just a nasty way of saying "existing in a basher's line of sight". They are so oversensetive that they think it's "shoved in their face" if it's so much as mentioned on a webpage.

And this has nothing to do with the concept of "furries". It's something totally unrelated that coincides with it.

>> No.23093352

>Thunk feels sad
>here's some butt beads with living fairies in them

>> No.23093361

That's a legitimate reason to hate the people that display that behavior maybe, but not all furries do that. Just hate the ones that do that. Isn't the fact that you mentioned your furfaggotry a sign that you display the same behaviors?

Just hate that one guy, why do you need to hate everyone he's associated with. Fandoms don't have entry regulations, they're all going to have some shitlords.

>> No.23093377

I would but I don't want to embarrass myself. Someone might think less of me.

>> No.23093378

I find the term disgust more applicable than hate.

>> No.23093409

Anon, I'd probably be a furry by the definitions of most of 4chan. >>23093252 has it right. Don't bother apologising for the shitheads, because the thin-skinned pricks deserve their treatment.

Try http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnJDGLUZU and report back.

>> No.23093432

There's a difference between bringing it up for no reason and bringing it up because its part of the conversation friend. Context

See, I would banish him immediately if that came up

No I mean there are people who can't keep things to themselves and will shove their interests onto other people, and get mad when it isn't accepted. Some of these people get off to furry porn.

You quoted the wrong line for that comment, which is >The other problem is people who start making the definition of "shoving it into people's faces" into things that non furfags bring up.

I mentioned my furfag status to illustrate that even other furfags find that kind of behavior unacceptable. Also see the first post I'm replying to

>> No.23093437

Oh good sirs, it physically pains me to see you gentlemen all worked up ranting in hate and frustration over all this nasty furry business for hours on end. Its as if the mentality and maturity of this board went down to undesirable /b/ standards. And we can't have that now can we?

I must ask though, what has a furry ever physically and intimately done to you that you must hate them across the internet? Are your hobbies and entertain mediums so precious and vital to your social and ethical identity as a human being that hating and wishing a obscure community of depraved fetishist death will purify your autistic and cultural preferences from corruption and decay?

Or are you all secretly having a fun and exciting time, because conflict of any kind is the only thing that rekindles your wills to live as you wallow in first world mediocrity?

>> No.23093441

I've seen this before and I certainly don't like these people.
Why should that make me hate furries in general?

>> No.23093455

>thin-skinned pricks
You just don't listen to yourself, do you?

>> No.23093461

Part of me wants to make a male version of foam adventure with a fellow friend who is also relatively normal. In the video, we would just quietly drive to the department store, give the woman the measurements we need, pay for the foam and then drive home in complete silence.

>> No.23093482

I would post "rage threads in a nutshell" but apparently the account got shitcanned off of youtube

>> No.23093507

Sergalfag you're late.

>> No.23093538

Is Sergal characters actually a thing?
It's kinda hard to imagine that all the people raging here actually had to deal with it before.

>> No.23093539


>> No.23093554

Alright fair enough.
I'm a furry too but there's generally no reason to bring it up unlike now where it is indeed relevant to the conversation.
I just don't understand the 4chan mentality of hating every single member of a group.
I'm sure there's at least one person in most groups who is an alright person.
I don't like mlp but I don't hate all bronies as a result for example.

>> No.23093567

>No I mean there are people who can't keep things to themselves and will shove their interests onto other people, and get mad when it isn't accepted.
Again, there are a lot of people who think that anything they perceive is "shoved in their face", react with vitriolic hate, and claim the people calling them out are "mad about not being accepted". There are Christian fundamentalists who act this way about two guys holding hands in public; I once saw someone claim that they only displayed affection specifically to offend him.

Of course, there are also gays who intentionally flirt with straight people specifically to make them uncomfortable (or, as they tend to put it, "piss of those homophobic redneck fucks").

It's a complex issue with many different shades, but people bring up the hypothetical extremes to justify the opposite extreme.

>> No.23093569

>I don't like mlp but I don't hate all bronies as a result for example.
Thats because you are a furfag like them.

>> No.23093572

/tg/ sometimes has threads where they actually talk about Sergals in a polite manner. And then this thread happened. I actually had no idea they were hated this much. I do know that /tg/ hates (and always will hate) Kender.

>> No.23093601

>Or are you all secretly having a fun and exciting time, because conflict of any kind is the only thing that rekindles your wills to live as you wallow in first world mediocrity?
Welcome to the internet. Both sides are just bored people getting their jollies in different ways and secretly enjoying conflict.

>> No.23093603

I know I am, however my time is short, and my personal businesses unending.

And of course as a token contribution to this so called rage thread, so here is a video of a anthropomorphic fox playing Warhammer 40k for the first time, with a workshop grognard coaching "her".


>> No.23093605

I've seen them. They weren't that bad. Pretty interesting, actually. They focused more on the political and social aspects, like the relations between the northern and southern tribes, and less on things like prehensile clit hoods. Though I wouldn't have minded that, either.

>> No.23093617

They're a thing in my group because most of us are furries and everyone is either neutral to them or likes them. They're not a problem when everyone is ok with them.

While there is a significant amount of overlap between the two groups, bronies are not inherently furries and vice-versa.
Now that I think about it few of my current friends are bronies actually.

>> No.23093702

>I just don't understand the 4chan mentality of hating every single member of a group.
Thats a human thing, not just 4chan. See: Racism

>It's a complex issue with many different shades, but people bring up the hypothetical extremes to justify the opposite extreme.
Pretty much this

0/10 try harder

People have hated cutebolds for a while. Pretty much a month ago I was in the same position (but for cutebolds)

I had to pause before the first second elapsed. Hopefully I don't cringe too badly.

I don't understand the "bronies aren't furries" deal. Its horses right? I think quadrupeds that talk still count as furry, but I might be wrong.

Also, I never did explain my mary-sue race, but eh, I also have depression and a fear of making mary sue characters, so I just need to get input every so often to stay on track and not worry about it.

>> No.23093706

Ok. So not all furries do bad stuff. But I can't for the life of me think of a single good thing a furry has ever done.

>> No.23093715

You and I both know good sir, these /tg/ unified setting world building threads were giant magnets for trolls and undesirable ruffians of all kinds. Why it got so deplorably bad, that the trolls were spamming bukkake and fecal porn all over those threads, and no polite discussion could ever get done.

>> No.23093726

I made this profile on F-list.

>> No.23093768

What's that accent? It sounds like an American pretending to be British.

There's that copypasta about the guy in a dog suit and a mentally disabled kid. Sergalfag might be able to find it.

>> No.23093772

I don't consider all bronies furry because though speaking is technically an anthropomorphic trait (I think) that isn't the reason why some bronies enjoy the show.
Some bronies would like the show regardless of what race the characters are and the fact that the characters are ponies has no bearing on why they like the show.

>> No.23093831

Oh, that explains it then. Thanks anon

>> No.23093862

>Thats a human thing, not just 4chan. See: Racism
And the worst part is, people are fully able to criticize it in others, but when they themselves do it, they think that it's different because their own pet peeve is just that bad. Excuses always sound better from the inside.

The problem is, if someone is okay with X but not with Y, then they'll judge people who hate X according to their own opinion of X, while judging people who hate Y (like themselves) by their own opinion of Y. In other words, thinking of their subjective preferences as objective, and disregarding those of others, when judging people for handling their subjective preferences.

>> No.23093914

You're welcome anon

>> No.23094131

>this thread.
What happened. I think so much anger was poured into this thread, there's no way /tg/ can be angry again for an entire week. It's like you guys went /v/ level anger this time.

>> No.23094148

It got a little more civil near the end

>> No.23094177

Yeah, but still. I don't remember /tg/ getting this angry in quite some time.

>> No.23095030

I'm pretty sure furries will be a rage inducing subject for the rest of time on 4chan

>> No.23095343

There has been civil discussion of the furry RPG on /tg/.

That shit doesn't apply here.

Still, a good release of anger every once and a while is good

>> No.23095439

The furry rpg?
Which one?

>> No.23095485

Probably Iron/Jade Claw. It is actually a decent game. I have never seen /tg/ talk about Albedo.

>> No.23095509

I want to try Ironclaw, it does look pretty good.
Albedo and Ironclaw aren't the only furry rpgs though.

>> No.23095690

The only decent ones that I know of...unless you count TMNT/After the Bomb

>> No.23095810

Albedo IS Ironclaw, just in a scifi setting. Also, the furries working on Ironclaw actually tried and made a fun game. That's why /tg/ doesn't hate it.
Count Ironclaw as one good thing furries have done.

>> No.23095811

Oh yeah I didn't know you were only including good ones.
/tg/ enjoys discussing bad rpgs sometimes

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.