• We've issued a clarification on our policy on AI-generated work.
  • Our mod selection process has completed. Please welcome our new moderators.
  • The regular administrative staff are taking a vacation, and in the meantime, Biigoh is taking over. See here for more information.
  • A notice about Rule 3 regarding sites hosting pirated/unauthorized content has been made. Please see here for details.
  • Due to issues with external spam filters, QQ is currently unable to send any mail to Microsoft E-mail addresses. This includes any account at live.com, hotmail.com or msn.com. Signing up to the forum with one of these addresses will result in your verification E-mail never arriving. For best results, please use a different E-mail provider for your QQ address.
  • For prospective new members, a word of warning: don't use common names like Dennis, Simon, or Kenny if you decide to create an account. Spammers have used them all before you and gotten those names flagged in the anti-spam databases. Your account registration will be rejected because of it.
  • Since it has happened MULTIPLE times now, I want to be very clear about this. You do not get to abandon an account and create a new one. You do not get to pass an account to someone else and create a new one. If you do so anyway, you will be banned for creating sockpuppets.
  • Due to the actions of particularly persistent spammers and trolls, we will be banning disposable email addresses from today onward.
  • The rules regarding NSFW links have been updated. See here for details.

What are your most hated fanfic tropes

ForestDweller said:
Charisma in litrpg should really be a mind compulsion effect instead of a personality change.

Dungeon Crawler Carl uses Charisma that way. When a cat has high charisma, she gets perceived as incredibly cute. When a woman has high charisma, she gets perceived as incredibly hot (MC got an instant erection when he got bewitched by one).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Late reply, but how would a very high CHA, but very low INT/WIS manifest? How would the charisma stat work? Would it make people go easy on them when they were wrong? Would it invoke a kind of cute tone to their words? Would it make people look at them with sympathy/pity?
 
Stimpak Medic said:
Late reply, but how would a very high CHA, but very low INT/WIS manifest? How would the charisma stat work? Would it make people go easy on them when they were wrong? Would it invoke a kind of cute tone to their words? Would it make people look at them with sympathy/pity?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yes to all above. CHA is basically the ability to persuade people to your side and to do your bidding.
 
Stimpak Medic said:
Respectfully, I disagree. Sometimes, killing your enemy is very effective, but since you said political enemy, at what point is it justified morally to kill that enemy?

I have a hypothetical.

Say your political opponent is a nazi and nobody but you knows that, nazis are bad, we all know that. They are running for president and will do irreprable damage to whatever country you live in. They are growing in power but to the public's knowledge they have never committed a crime in their life, but you know what their endgame is. They are constantly getting away with challenging you within the law.

Would you have them killed or kill them if you knew you could get away with it?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
And so you've given an example of provocation. Killing this Nazi will strengthen his supporters and spread his views on the wave of "he was a musin, they killed him for no reason, so he was right." In this case, killing him just because he's a Nazi, without confirming that he actually committed murder, will in fact make you a Nazi as well. After all, you're justifying the murder of a man based not on his actions, but on his ideological views. Exactly what Nazis do. Here's a logical example of how you've swallowed the bait of your Nazi adversary.
And yes, who determined that your political opponent is a Nazi? You personally? Did your opponent commit any Nazi crimes, or was their only crime simply disagreeing with you and then using their symbols to troll you? This matters, because if there are no crimes, then you will be the Nazi in such a dispute, not the person you accused of Nazism.

Ultimately, your entire "effectiveness" boils down to giving your enemy the Barbara Streisand effect: if he dies, people pay attention to his views and whitewash them based solely on his death. If he survives, he defeats you in the election by accusing you of Nazism. Your entire effectiveness ultimately becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. So, you've just given an example of why killing your opponent is stupid.
 
Last edited:
ForestDweller said:
The idea of killing the evil leader of an Empire will just end the evil empire is something fiction likes to do but it has no basis at all in real life.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Not to mention the whole power vaccume, or the idea of sucessors.

And sure, sometimes the Empire will collapse because the Big Bad is the only one with the skill to hold it to together (See the Afsharids of Iran for an example of a short lived state.) But there will always be a power vaccum.
 
Tera Forma said:
And so you've given an example of provocation. Killing this Nazi will strengthen his supporters and spread his views on the wave of "he was a musin, they killed him for no reason, so he was right." In this case, killing him just because he's a Nazi, without confirming that he actually committed murder, will in fact make you a Nazi as well. After all, you're justifying the murder of a man based not on his actions, but on his ideological views. Exactly what Nazis do. Here's a logical example of how you've swallowed the bait of your Nazi adversary.
And yes, who determined that your political opponent is a Nazi? You personally? Did your opponent commit any Nazi crimes, or was their only crime simply disagreeing with you and then using their symbols to troll you? This matters, because if there are no crimes, then you will be the Nazi in such a dispute, not the person you accused of Nazism.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


I think you're missing the forest for the trees. I apologize if I wasn't clear enough. The point wasn't "Is it moral to kill nazis?" forget nazis, I just said nazi since almost everyone agrees they are the bad guys, Remove nazi and replace it with the "ultimate evil mc bad guy who twists babies heads off and drinks their blood for fun". It was, is it ever moral moral to kill your enemies if they are the ultimate evil that WILL do harm to you and those you love, since you said you shouldn't kill your enemies.

To further it, what is the line where killing them becomes a moral neutral, and a moral good?
 
Last edited:
Stimpak Medic said:
I think you're missing the forest for the trees. I apologize if I wasn't clear enough. The point wasn't "Is it moral to kill nazis?" forget nazis, I just said nazi since almost everyone agrees they are the bad guys, Remove nazi and replace it with the "ultimate evil mc bad guy who twists babies heads off and drinks their blood for fun". It was, is it ever moral moral to kill your enemies if they are the ultimate evil that WILL do harm to you and those you love, since you said you shouldn't kill your enemies.

To further it, what is the line where killing them becomes a moral neutral, and a moral good?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Kill them morally. The problem is in the logistics of planning. Because assassination only really works when other methods have already been tried and failed. Assassination is when an irreversible failure has been effectively initiated. Everything is clear. This is an extreme argument. It's not for nothing that they say, "War is the last argument of kings."
 
Tera Forma said:
Kill them morally. The problem is in the logistics of planning. Because assassination only really works when other methods have already been tried and failed. Assassination is when an irreversible failure has been effectively initiated. Everything is clear. This is an extreme argument. It's not for nothing that they say, "War is the last argument of kings."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yes, it is an extreme argument since nobody bases arguments on the easy to answer, no stakes answers. Ideals are only sound when they are tested to the extreme and remain consistent. Nobody disagrees with the idea that murdering and raping somebody is not very nice, but there is still discussion about the death penalty for mass murders in some states and countries.
 
Stimpak Medic said:
To further this point about modern things in medieval settings, I instantly drop a story if modern terms and lingo is being spoken by a 12th century French peasant.

Edit: Ideally, when writing about a time period/Culture, doing the bare minimum of research goes a long way. Even if it's just learning about the clothes, names of political powers, and terms used around that time.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Meh this is a silly complaint someone in medieval France saying "ok" is not going to break immersion. It's just not practical to have people in period dramas speak archaic languages, I mean I doubt most audiences can understand anient languages either 12th. Centuries French or Latin.
 
Theman said:
Meh this is a silly complaint someone in medieval France saying "ok" is not going to break immersion. It's just not practical to have people in period dramas speak archaic languages, I mean I doubt most audiences can understand anient languages either 12th. Centuries French or Latin.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

What a weird misrepresentation of my point. It's not only "Ok" and both you and me know that, yet you still typed that out. I wonder why that is.

But I'll humor your straw man for a moment. I've seen people writing these characters using 20th and 21st century terms and sayings. Including but not limited to Social distancing, boomer, New Normal, glow up, and simp.

Surely you can understand why someone in a medieval fantasy land calling someone a boomer or simp takes me out of a story?

Edit: Nobody is asking people to read 12th century texts and replicate them, but using terms from the 20th-21st century is jarring.

What a weird comment.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 5 more.
    • Total: 12 (members: 8, guests: 4)
    Back
    Top