For: 8
|
- Self-Nom & For. Now, this didn't do as well in PLS as I had hoped, but I've revamped this a good deal since then. This version features an updated opening, improved images, and (most recently) a lovely "cover" from our own Sonje. The very positive original Pee Review (made before any of the said improvements occured) is here. Vote away. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 23:21, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
- Very For. Dame
  23:38, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
- For This was particularly amusing. Staircase CUNt 23:46, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 GODDAMNIT GUILDY!!! Give me a chance to get a feature. You've probably had 3 articles featured already in the time mine's been on VFH. But for.  Don   Puttano cHeDDs       00:21,28May,2009- For. Oh fuck. Style
 Guide 06:48, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, absolutely. Am I allowed to re-roll my character? -OptyC Sucks!
 CUN14:43, 28 May
- For. per above. Mnb'z 16:59, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yes! —Sir Socky
   (talk) (stalk)  GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 23:33, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
|
Against: 5
|
- Very against. IronLung 01:07, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Offended, prehaps? Staircase CUNt 01:09, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- See my comment below. IronLung 07:10, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Slight against per Groovester...wouldn't it be better to feature the overview which links to the other pages? Loved the article and think it needs a feature but it should go on the overview page for sure. Tagstit talk contribs awards 01:59, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Disturbed against Not that funny, plus the white part sounded a bit too much like a recruitment drive for the KKK. Racial stereotypes are funnier if you do them like this, or at least with less (albeit false) irrational hate. --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent
     12:12, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Against. If this was hilarious, I wouldn't mind the whole racism thing (which I know is satirical). But it could have a few more jokes in there, I think. Nameable ((talk?)) 18:10, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Against. Tired stereotypes, plus it made me feel uncomfortable... Le Cejak • <16:58 May 30, 2009>
|
| Comments
|
Abstain on the basis that I think Dungeons & Dragons: Real Life Edition: Overview should be improved and expanded and featured in this article's stead. Sir Groovester | Contributions | Talk Page 01:03, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Comment. I tend not to see this as offensive since it's clearly satirical. "Satirical" as in "not mocking anyone's racial traits but the people who imagine them as the truth." I'll have to admit it teeters on the border though. -- Style Guide 06:53, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- I too thought the article was clearly satirical, but voted against because I feel it falls entirely on the wrong side of that border you mentioned. IronLung 07:10, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Author's Comment: I meant it to teeter very close to that "border"--those of us that have ever played a D&D game know that your character's race is a MASSIVE factor as what your character winds up being. That, of course, is quite racist when you really think about it. If such a system were carried over into a "real life" edition to the game, I wholeheartedly believe it would look something very much like what I have produced. That's the whole point. I'm mocking the game for being so racist, not the groups of people. I showed this to the group of friends I D&D with, and they all got a massive kick outta the whole thing, because they understand this underlying concept. Those that have voted For, I imagine, feel likewise. I'm not a racist, for those of you who may think so, despite my admitted fascination with the whole Nazi German aesthetic, so for those of you who are deeply offended by things so gravely insulting as the clearly over-stereotypical ability mods of a particular race, I have words for you: get over it. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 15:28, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah. Problem is there is one specific race there that doesn't get mocked. White people are a clear target for such mockery and that would definitely help the article as per Cheddar. --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 17:55, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- "Proud, intelligent, and noble, Caucasians come from an ancient bloodline." Are you quite sure that's not mockery? Look at the picture, read the caption again, and tell me with a straight face you don't see any satire there. -- Style Guide 08:18, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
- When reading this, it's probably best to imagine you are not human. Imagine that you are one of the people in the regular D&D ames (like a troll or wizard or whatever the fuck is in those). If you were one of them, this wouldn't seem racist at all. But I bet if one of those played the game they are in, they'd get pissed and jump on their fairytale comps to complain about it. Don Puttano cHeDDs 17:12,28May,2009
- The only change i might make is to get rid of the BEST RACE thing. From a game perspective, it's not really fair if there's an obvious best answer. You should point out some of the stereotypical faults, such as arrogance, redneck-ness, and wigger-ness. Don Puttano cHeDDs 17:12,28May,2009
- However, when it comes down to it, I wouldn't play this game. Where are the Italian stereotypes? C'mon! Mafia? Chef Boyardee? Al Pacino? So many possible routes here. Don Puttano cHeDDs 17:23,28May,2009
- They're coming when Advanced Dungeons and Dragons: Real Life Edition hits the shelves. -OptyC Sucks! CUN17:26, 28 May
- Second Author's Comment. As to the whole "Whites are the best race" controversy, this too is meant to be overtly stereotypical. It's also a shot at the almost-exclusively-White D&D playership, who, in writing the book, make themselves out to be the clear best. Not to mention that going the "best race" route is a lot more general than going the "redneck" or "yuppie" route, and therefor allows for more flexitibility. And I mock White's a great deal, too, with things like "white guilt" and their general stuffiness. So, again, get over it, those of you who haven't. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 21:50, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Do you have anything to say to those voting against or abstain because they think this shouldn't be featured but the overview which links to the other pages should be featured in its place? Tagstit talk contribs awards 22:36, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- I never envisioned you as a racist! Just a paedophile! Seriously though, I just got an overall "bad taste in my mouth" impression from this article. Not to say I can't see the humour, but I agree with DJ_Irreverent's take on things. And he's an Australian, so when he says racism has gone too far he's probably on to something. (I have implied permission to make fun of him via my New Zealandishness.) IronLung 01:07, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
- Third Author's Comment. I can understand why you might have a "bad taste," IronLung, it's fine. So long as you don't think I'm a bigot haha. I respect your (and everyone else's) opinion, though I also think I have the right to respond to/defend my work as well. So yeah. And, in regards to Tagstit's question, I really don't think there's much to be done with the "Overview" page, I made that mostly as a means of linking to all the other articles in the planned series so the whole thing would feel more "authentic." It's a nice idea, but I don't think it's gonna happen (I don't plan on it, anyway)--sorry, Tagstit. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 04:47, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
|
GODDAMNIT GUILDY!!! Give me a chance to get a feature. You've probably had 3 articles featured already in the time 
