Just don't mention Ewoks: The Battle For Endor.

It.
Sucked.
You think the prequels are bad? You haven't seen this pile of shit.

Wait for it.

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK YOOOOOOOOOOOOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU. Unless you hate your players and will make sure they die HORRIBLY.

This guy is the BBEG.

>>3039074

These are proof that Endor truly deserved to be blown up.

>>3039085

I own a double DVD with B4E and Caravan of Courage.

Yeah, making Wicket speak Basic was not the best idea, but it had to be done. See the Star Wars Holiday Special.

>>3039102
Was CoC:
a) Better
b) Just as bad
c) Worse
d) OH GOD MY EYES

>>3039099
Pic related

>>3039140
CoC had Cindel's whiny brother Mace. I cheered when- well, you should watch it.

This reminds me of Tucker's Kobolds.
I really want to do the Tucker's Kobolds thing to a party some time.

>>3039098

Ah god, that picture alone convinced to play Saga a few months ago.

This is kinda awesome.

>>"Nub nub?"

>>"They're trying to block up our weapons! Open Fire!"

>>3039197
I know. I just want to play an ewok-hunting Endor veteran.

>>3039074
>>3039079
>>3039084
>>3039089
>>3039102
>>3039130
>>3039144
>>3039161

This almost redeemed Ewoks. You're posts were good & you should feel good.

>>3039161

Poor guy.

>>3039204
Nub nub, bitch.

I want to run an Imperial SAGA campaign just for an attempt to do the Imperial Stormtroopers justice.

So... Endor = Vietnam?

THIS IS THE BEST IDEA EVER.

>>3039200
Man, stormtroopers suck at *everything*, even Sense Motive checks. :(

Is it bad if I want to play that old man vet narrator?

>>3039252

Do they go through any kind of training at all?

>>3039218
wut? THIS can be redeemed?
WUT.

Nub the fuck nub

>>3039084
FUCK THE EWOKS KILLED RORSCHACH!

I played an Endor vet once, had flashbacks when we met an ewok NPC

>>3039291
Yeah. They can. Hell, they were badass to begin with, people just forget a few details.

Remember the part where the Rebels got captured by those damn things? You remember what they were going to do if Luke and C3P0 didn't convince them they were gods or something? They were going to fucking eat them.

Fast forward to the end of the movie. It's a celebration and everyone's partying their fucking brains out. There's probably a feast involved too, with a party this size. In the middle of all this, there's an Ewok playing the drums with Stormtrooper helmets.

Gosh, I wonder what kind of meat they're serving.

>>3039279
Sure, its called "Follow Orders or get shot." Along with basics on how to fire a Blaster and to reload. It's like Imperial Guard, shitty training & shitty assignments. Most the stuff is learned on the field, but again like the IG, most never make it past day 1.

>>3039340
No, sorry, Ewoks are still gay, that shit has been done before and better, you are a fag.

>>3039291

Ah, I'm very sorry to hear of your crippling disability. I've been told that it doesn't permit you to read adverbs like "almost" or "nearly". It's absolutely tragic, I hope one day we can cure this horrible illness.

I'm so very sorry.

>>3039363
And then they're equipped with crap weaponry, rammed into helmets with shit vision, and have to wear what I have termed Accelerating Bullet Body Armour - protective gear that actually makes projectiles and blaster bolts do MORE damage.

>>3039363

Are we ignoring the prequels or are original stormtroopers not cloned?

Honest question, I really don't give two shits about Star Wars on most days and don't know all that much.

SW2: Attack of the Clones? It's not consistent though, they were kicking all sorts of ass in part 2 and then they just... Well, WILHELM SCREAMS EVERYWHERE. Even >>3039130 has a Wilhem Scream. They went from Kasrkin in 2 to Space Balls by 4. Probably all the good troopers just got the better jobs and they started recruiting non-clonefags or something, Lucas isn't big on keeping his shit together.

>>3039382
they changed who they were cloning from, so bad dna

>>3039382
It's actually canon that the Empire started getting non-clones to fill the ranks of their storm troopers. They weren't necessarily bad in the original trilogy, though.

>>3039382
>>3039381
I think some rebels on Kamino tried something and since then only Vader's personal legion are clones. Everyone else is a conscript or (rarely) a volunteer.
And has to be taller than Luke.

>>3039340
Did *not* make that connection before. I wonder if Leia likes long pig?

>>3039369
Faggot, the fact you even humor the thought of their redemption is Heresy.

>>3039381
They got replaced by non-clones when they could get volunteers by the billions, I think.

>>3039363
Imperial Guard are well-trained and have good equipment. Just because they're the official redshirts of the setting, doesn't make them shitty fighters. Same with Stormtroopers. When you're comparing them to smuggler crackshots and motherfucking Jedi... Mate, of course they're shit.

>>3039430
They did fucking kill the wookies. If it wasn't for the mary sues saving the day, fucking ewoks would of been eaten anyway.

>>3039403

Christ! You also suffer from "I wish I lived in a nightmare dystopian future" syndrome too! You poor guy.

I bet everyone is a crazy "heretic" aren't they? Just think about Spess Mehreens and relax little guy.

>>3039463
Exactly. The cannonfodder are much better than people make them out to be.

>>3039430 comparing them to smuggler crackshots and motherfucking Jedi

Yeah, but teddys with rocks & sticks? Come on.

But I don't think it's fair to criticize ewoks, if you look at anything in Star Wars too closely you find shit everywhere. Suspending disbelief is something that becomes more difficult as you mature.

>>3039508
Arnold had to resort to the same thing in order to kill the predator.

>>3039470
SPESS MEHRINES? That does help a little actually.

>>3039463
>ewoks would of been eaten anyway.
>ewoks would of been
>would of been
>would of

>>3039363

Except the average IG (Ex. Cadians) is actually well trained and equipped. They just suck in comparison to most of the crazy baddassed horrors from space they fight.

On the other hand, the quality of the Soldiers in the Empire is shown in comparison to troops which in many cases should have recieved less training and have worse equipment. It just doesn't seem to add up when the rebels kick their ass so easily and takes away from the ability to suspend disbelief.

Sure, it's just a movie, but it could be a better movie if it didn't make you wonder how the hell an empire could survive that long with *elite* troops which are so utterly horrible.

>>3039607

1. Overwhelming numbers
2. The Empire only lasted about two decades

Though iirc the original novel for Star Wars had the Empire existing for a lot longer than what the movies depicted.

>>3039079
>They're trying to block up our weapons [with flowers]!

What is this shit?

>>3039641

Who doesn't want an excuse to shoot them?

Ewoks >>> Gungans

>>3039649
People who have never met them and are operating under first contact protocol.

>>3039243
It was based on the Soviet-Afghani war I belief (same thing anyway)

Stormtroopers (clones) were replaced by Stormtroopers (normal people with harsh training on Carida) as the originals were made to age unnaturally fast as a part of the process to get them out onto the front line faster. They'd have to be replaced anyways, and you don't require a lot of high tech equipment to make a normal person, serving the role of marines (as in the soldiers on board a naval vessel for multiple purposes old school style marines) and elite shocktroops with regular rank-and-file army troopers (yeah, original, but who gives a shit) filling the role of basic foot soldier.

Of course, the Emperor had his own cloning vats for 'just in case' purposes at places like Byss and Wayland, but that wasn't the normal means of making Stormtroopers after the beginning of the Empire, until Thrawn started cloning them again (and the facility where they were cloned destroyed) and the system Carida was in destroyed later by Kyp Durron in the Sun Crusher. After that, I'm not really sure what happens with stormtroopers anymore.

>>3039690

Just putting that out there for

>>3039381
>>3039382
>>3039394
>>3039397
>>3039399
>>3039417

>>3039702
The Empire actually has a new plan for making Stormtroopers reliable. They set themselves on fire and hug their enemies.

>>3039702
Blaster rifles.

I think they had multiple power settings.

>>3039702
>maybe it would of been more effective

Now you're just being dumb on purpose.

>>3039607
The Cadians are only well trained when compared to other Imperial Guard.

>>3039812

Yes, for average humans they are well trained, that was my point. And yes, Cadians have doctrines like Sharp Shooters to put them above basic IG level quality.

>>3039721

So the evil empire was trying to disable the rebels while causing minimal harm with low power settings on their blasters, while the noble rebels went in to kill fucking everyone and set their blasters to the highest possible setting all the time?

Nah, the hit on Leia was just a glancing shot. The stormtroopers one-shot'd plenty of Ewoks.

>>3039889
Pretty much.

I like how elite soldiers in futuristic full body armor and carrying energy weapons are wiped out by stone age 2' tall carebears. What kind of armor can't stop crude stone tipped spears and arrows?

>>3039902
The hit on Leia was a direct shot to the hull of her plot armor.

>>3039905
Frankly this always annoyed me.

>>3039905

Their bodygloves are a weak point, apparently.

>>3039934
But it's just sad.

A platoon of US soldiers from the vietnam war would probably have slaughtered those ewoks, and they had no armor or lasers. Simply by operating with 1 bullet is good, a whole magazine is better and liberal application of grenades and napalm is best.

>>3039960
Hell, the colonial British could have done a better job. They had a long standing tradition of suppressing brown people with less tech.

>>3039564
DA CHOPPA

>>3039079

Man, I hope that guy got personally forced choked by Vader. What a dumbass.

>>3039989
I never said enslaving, I said suppressing.

>>3039960

You know the US lost Viet Nam, right?

The primitive locals were too much for them.

>>3040007

You know the U.S. backed out of Vietnam for political and not military reasons, right?

Napalm, pointless jungle fighting, and civilian killing were too much for the electorate.

>>3040007
It really wasn't the primitive locals that lost the U.S. the war, statistically there were many more Vietnamese deaths than U.S., ROK, Australian, New Zealand, ect. combined. It was a misunderstanding of their culture (A lesson that should have been learned from the way the French attempted to handle them) as well as a large movement at the homefront that lead to U.S. defeat.

>>3040030
Hahahaha. Sure.That's what it was.

Protip: Most people thought the kent state students deserved it and the the meme about people spitting on soldiers coming back never happend.

>>3040030

After how many years of not making any progress

>>3040007
The casualties were 20:1 in the Americans favor. It's worth noting that Vietnamese weren't spear chucking teddybears, they were experienced jungle fighters that were being funded and equipped by the Soviet Union.

>>3040030
Nobody believed My Lai actually happend, just like they still don't believe the other horrible shit today.

William Calley is considered a hero.

Hugh Thompson is considered a traitor.

The electorate never gave a damn about massacres and they still don't.

>>3040057
>kill ratios lol
have you ever played as terrans against zerg

>>3040078
They give more than a damn about "BRING MY BOYS HOME."

>>3040083
That's actually a very good analogy of the Vietnam War.

>>3040083

the us military actually is bigger than the population of vietnam what with the draft and all

>>3040093
No. No it is not.

>>3040129
i agree and i am the person who posted it

i was mostly just making fun of that guy who thinks kill ratios = most important

A loss is a loss.
Butthurt Amerifags can talk about kill ratios and military superiority all they want but they still failed to preserve the non-communist state of South Vietnam.
Amerifags are the most butthurt people when it comes to admitting defeat. Yours is a culture that venerates winners and spits on losers so I'm not surprised you will never admit to defeat anywhere. Care to cite a few historical defeats? No, I thought not, even though there are a few humiliating ones I can think of.

>>3040147
No one is saying it wasn't a defeat, they're saying that the Americans didn't lose because of military failure. The military performed like well tuned clockwork.

>>3040147
Yes, but we didn't fail militarily. In fact, we didn't really "lose" Vietnam as much as we "got tired of winning so hard." No, we didn't accomplish our original objectives, but it was still not a military defeat by any stretch of the imagination. It only showcased how effective the American military was at the time.

>>3040147

Custer's Last Stand, the War of 1812, etc

>>3040143
They're not the most important. I never said they were, but that kill ratio shows that it wasn't anything resembling the meat grinder of American troops that it's made out to be. The retreat was mostly because of political factors.

>>3040147
Can't see this as anything but a troll.

>>3040158
What?
That's news to anybody who actually served in the conflict.
See, to them, it looked like the brass had their heads up their ass and tried to use last centuries tactics.

>>3040147
Lazy troll is very lazy.

At least pick a viewpoint that you can defend for a few posts.

>>3040173
It's partly true, though. As an outside observer American culture seems obsessed with being the best, the winner and so on. Not just in military terms, but in every walk of life.

>>3040147
1812 is the only big one, and that wasn't the brits, it was the scots.

And they were drunk when they made it to Washington.
You can't stop a full freaking brigade of drunken scotts.

>>3040202
That's bullshit because as an outside observer of every other culture, they too appear to be obsessed with being the best.

This is how we get stupid shit memes of "Dur, Americans can't even find their country on the map!" while ignoring their country is, in fact, not any better.

>>3040202
As an American, I can tell you there's all sorts of different value systems, but naturally that's the kind you're gonna see out in the public eye.

It's sort of like how every single Indian immigrant I work with is a real arrogant dick. It has nothing to do with their race or country, it's because the only way to get a visa to get over here is to fuck over everybody else in line.

>>3040205
Sure you can. It just takes a literal river of Guinness.

>>3040205

Losing to a British Empire from across the ocean when that empire was currently getting it's ass handed to it by the French so hard they had to call SPAIN an "important campaign" and ended up pretending that they, not the Prussians, won the battle of Waterloo single-handed just to get their patriotic pride back...

The War of 1812 was a footnote to the British.

We lost a FOOTNOTE.

That's pretty fucking bad, I'd say. Even Afghanistan won it's British military footnote.

>>3040219
Well, I've been to America a few times in my life. And while no, not everyone is like that, I have noticed it is a trend. The other countries I've visited certainly aren't fixated with being #1 like people (in general, I stress) are over there. As for the thickies, well, you have your share, but so does everyone else. You just have more of them because you have more people than most places.

>>3040239
Oh come off it, Britain was immensely powerful at the time. Even getting a tie out of them as the tinpot nation we were was a big deal. And well, there was the battle of new orleans so we can pretend the rest of the war would have gone the same if we kept it up.

>>3040147
>>Care to cite a few historical defeats? No, I thought not, even though there are a few humiliating ones I can think of.

Because the leadership of all other nations make sure to publicly announce their past failures and misdeeds at every turn, lolamirite?

>>3040281
Scots did it.
Not you limey frog eating fucks.

>Now I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. You won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country. Men, all this stuff you've heard about America not wanting to fight, wanting to stay out of the war, is a lot of horse dung. Americans traditionally love to fight. All real Americans, love the sting of battle. When you were kids, you all admired the champion marble shooter, the fastest runner, the big league ball players, the toughest boxers ... Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. Americans play to win all the time. I wouldn't give a hoot in Hell for a man who lost and laughed. That's why Americans have never lost and will never lose a war. Because the very thought of losing is hateful to Americans.

Gen. Patton

>and that wasn't the brits, it was the scots.

urgh read history idiot

My favorite part of the War of 1812 is that in pursuing fleeing Americans outside of Washington DC, more British died of heatstroke due to running after us than would have in a full-scale legitimate battle. Americans ran away, but unlike the French we ran away SO HARD THAT IT KILLED THE ENEMY.

>>3040304
Thanks, kind anon.

>>3040304
Ugh.
Terrible fucking general who idiots idolize because of one half decent movie.
There have been countless great american military leaders, this self-righteous prick is not one of them.

>>3040269
Though the USA war aims was to take Canada , in that respect it lost , The British war aim was to keep the statis quo so in that respect they won.

>>3040346

The USA's aims were:

Take Canada
Stop the seizure of American vessels and the impressment of American citizens
BLOOD AND FLESH TO FEAST UPON
Get the English to take them seriously as an independant nation rather than continuing to regard us as a lawless and criminal section of the British Empire despite the Treaty of Paris

The aims of the British Empire in the war:

What, what? Why are you doing this all of a sudden, America? Jesus Christ, can't you fucks relax for one fucking second? I'm kinda busy at the moment. Look, I'll address your concerns as soon as I can but I have to deal with this lunatic frog midget. FUCKING STOP IT, YOU GUYS, GEEZ.

Britain still won.

>>3040417
>What, what? Why are you doing this all of a sudden, America? Jesus Christ, can't you fucks relax for one fucking second? I'm kinda busy at the moment. Look, I'll address your concerns as soon as I can but I have to deal with this lunatic frog midget. FUCKING STOP IT, YOU GUYS, GEEZ.

They sound so tsundere~...

...

...

Mmmmmmhhhh... tsundere Great Britain...

>>3040158
>>3040168
>>3040057
>>3040047
>>3040030

Shut up. Shut the FUCK UP.

Until American gives reparations to Vietnam for using chemical weapons on civilians, poisoning the earth & generally being fucking evil bastards - they can go right to hell.

"Well oiled machine" my ass. The tactic was to destroy the fucking jungle to win, and they still lost. And decades later babies are still borned deformed in Vietnam. Bravo, bravo.

Oh & they argued to Vietnam that Agent Orange wasn't that dangerous, and awarded the vets who were victims of it the (at the time) largest out of court settlement in history.

>>3040269
Ahh, so I guess its still impossible to get an Amerifag to admit defeat. Oh well, its what makes you an Amerifag anyway so its probably a bit much to ask for.

>>3040469
Americunts

>>3040447

>being evil means you lose due to being evil. Militaries can't be both evil and effective.

lol

>>3040205 and that wasn't the brits, it was the scots.

They guys we, you know, conquered & subjugated right? Poor argument. If we Brits can't fight then how the hell did we conquer our UK allies in the first place?

>>3040487

Exploitation of tribal conflicts and civil wars, mostly.

>>3040321
My favourite part was when we chased you back into the USA and then BURNT DOWN YOUR WHITE HOUSE

>>3040078
Thompson is one of the greatest men to live, while Calley is going to burn in hell if he ain't there already.

Any man that says different in my earshot will have fun debating their points with my fist.

>>3040486

I wasn't really discussing "losing", I was stating how morally repugnant, disgusting and shoddy your actions were. If you have to use chemical weapons to "win" then you're no better than Saddam gassing the Kurds or other countries in the "Axis of Evil".

You wouldn't do it now, but you did it then, and you've never admitted your foolishness.

As for "losing"... you lost. You didn't achieve your objective, your left the war & the enemy achieved theirs. That's a loss. You can say you weren't "militarily defeated" if you like, but you lost the War.
The same way the British lost the War of Independence, you fought a small portion of our army and had minor victories - but in reality it was the French that effectively ended our chance of victory in that War. You won, we lost.

But of course, your subjective views of "victory" change so that Americans are always the "victors". Doesn't matter how many kids are still born deformed, you won't admit your mistakes.

>>3040500

Because London has never been bombed, right?

Hey.
Brit faggots.
Battle of New Orleans.
Yeah.
Don't like that do ya?
You're just lucky we decided to take it easy on ya after that one. We won 1812, just thought we'd be nice to ya's.
>>3040417
You kinda just passed the whole "official british ships kidnapping American sailors and press ganging them". Most folk consider slavery to be a big deal.
>>3040447
I agree. I think. Focus your rants, it helps.

>>3040497

Mostly yes. Oh wait, is this an argument about "martial prowess"?

Us English, owners of the largest empire in history & responsible for winning more wars than you've ever fought, laugh at such notions. Wars are about more than soldiering, something Americans should know - seeing as their economy won most of theirs.

>>3040518
I wish there was more of us in America.

>>3040522
No mistake was made. War isn't pretty and never should be. You should gas civilians, burn school, bomb hospitals, whatever it takes to make the enemy back down and say "that's too much, we give up". If you ask me, the Americans were nothing resembling brutal enough.

>>3040522
GTFO moralfag. I for one admire a good scorched earth policy. Great way to cut your losses and kill babies.
Mmm, delicious babies..

>>3040530 I agree. I think. Focus your rants, it helps.

Agent Orange = Bad, basically. It makes me very fucking angry though, especially since America has done nothing about it. We were dicks every now & then.

Though the tax thing pisses me off, since you paid a barest fraction of what we English paid the crown, and you'd probably have an MP in Parliament after a couple years too. What a shame.

Oh & you won the War of Independence (obviously!) but you won because of the French really. I won't deny you guys gave us hell though.

>>3040544

So you agree that conquering Scotland isn't a direct measure of fighting ability since fighting ability wasn't directly responsible, but you've worded it in a way that makes it look like a refutation somehow.

I don't know what to do about this, guys.

>>3040565 You should gas civilians, burn school, bomb hospitals, whatever it takes to make the enemy back down and say "that's too much, we give up"

That's called terrorism mate, it's what your supposed to be fighting against. It's disgusting frankly.

facepalm.jpg

>>3040544
Modern Britain hasn't won dick. Your nation is a castrated nanny state and you know it.

>>3040565
>>3040569
Only the foolish think this is the proper way to wage war, especially in this day and age. It hurts more than it helps.

>>3040530
>Most folk consider slavery to be a big deal.
I was under the impression that slavery was A-OK back in ol 1812. Maybe it was cos it was WHITE SLAVERY that folk got so uptight about it.

>>3040569
>>3040565

And yet America has a "War Against Terror"...

.. seems to me the basic American thinks Terrorism is anything that threatens them, and Warfare is doing anything to Win.

Call me a moral all you like, us English learned what happens when a power loses it.

>>3040585
It is always the victors that decide what to call the combatants in a war. You say terrorism, I say it worked for Sherman.

>>3040585

It's only terrorism when it's done by people without an air force.

>>3040600
That was property ownership, not slavery.
Big difference, just ask any 1800's southerner.
Or fuck, any modern southerner.

>>3040609
I like to speak with a bad dago accent online.
It makes me feel tough.

>>3040522
Please tell me you're only referring to da gubbermint and not Americans as a whole. There are a significant number of us who are quite pissed off at our nation's past/current belligerence and cruelty.

Though to be fair, EVERY OTHER GOVERNMENT ON EARTH IS ALSO FUCKING SHIT UP LIKE THIS. That doesn't make it right, but do keep in mind that the U.S. isn't the only one with blood on their hands.

>>3040554
I hear that.

>>3040565

Bullshit. Utter bullshit. War is hell, true, but that's no excuse to try and justify becoming a demon.

>>3040585
I think his "Mmm, delicious babies" line denoted some kind of sarcasm.

>>3040585
>>3040589
Ahh, but your missing the whole point here. Atrocities are not committed to win wars, atrocities are committed for atrocities sake. Its because its an undeniable part of who we are that we must inflict suffering upon others. The fact that they may be coloured folk or speak differently is just an added bonus.

>>3040605
HEARTS AND MINDS, MOTHERFUCKER!

DO YOU KNOW IT!?!?!

>>3040603
England has its own problems.

>>3040586 Modern Britain hasn't won dick

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article2753975.ece

"It was bloody fighting, often at the point of a bayonet, that left 29 men dead and almost 100 wounded, more than 20 of them seriously. The Worcestershire and Sherwood Foresters lost nine men, as did the 1st Battalion the Royal Anglian Regiment"

Really? I don't hear of any americans doing bayonet charges against 100 armed men in the desert?

>>3040639
I have a background in psychology that says you're full of shit. There is no NEED to inflict suffering, and no, before someone brings it up, that's NOT what schadenfreude is.

>>3040616 Please tell me you're only referring to da gubbermint and not Americans as a whole.

Just the Americans that don't care about deformed kids in Vietnam

http://www.lewispublishing.com/orange.htm

>>3040649

Good job you have guns to protect your civil liberties RIGHT? I mean, those FBI guys are gonna back off & not arrest under the Patriot Act if you've got a handgun right?

Impressment isn't slavery.

Slavery is when people are owned by an individual.

Impressment is the seizure of people to force them to work for a collective body, like the military or the East India Trading Company, without individual ownership of the people in question. No one owns the impressed servitors, but those impressed have rather obviously lost any rights or liberties of a free man.

>>3040651

America has always been shitty at up-close-and-personal fighting. Always.

>>3040688

At least we don't put up posters glamorizing our government's failure as a free state.

>>3040688
No, the FBI isn't going to stop. But a firearm does give you your fundamental freedom to fight back. Possessing firearms gives the citizenry the weaponry with which they can fight should they band together and organize a proper resistance.

>>3040699

GO WOLVERINES!

>>3040698
Ah yes. Collective responsibility is so freeing. Pun intended.

Fuck you.

Have them all play Squibs if you want quirky short fuzzy things.

Squibs are way cooler than ewoks. Plus they have manpack tractor beam emitters.

>>3040687
And I have a ton of bodies behind me that says I do, cos I sleep easy every night knowing that there are folk out there indulging in what is most essentially human. Schadenfreude? No, Its just the comfort of knowing the natural order of things and what ought to be is consistent with what happens daily. this way I don't have to fret every time some little girl get murdered or whatnot, cos I know its the way things were meant to be.

>>3040600

The Slave Trade Act was passed by the British Parliament on 25 March 1807, making the slave trade illegal throughout the British Empire. The Act imposed a fine of £100 for every slave found aboard a British ship.

>>3040699
remember all of those times the us government took away rights

good thing you were there to kill the government with your pistol

peew peew do we get to win this time peew peew peew

>>3040699

You guys actually believe that? Seriously?

There are two ways a dictatorship can come about in the United States. The first way is an external or internal force that can militarily defeat the United States, which has the most powerful military in the world. Assuming that such a force could defeat the US military, do you really think a few million armed civilians would be able to stop them? This isn't 1861; a modern military force that isn't constrained politically will annihilate civilian militias.

The second way is for a dictatorship to come about with the consent of the population, in which case it doesn't matter if you have guns because you won't want to destroy the government. A few diehards would fight it, of course, but they'd be branded as terrorists and criminals and the public would view them as such. There wouldn't be some mass uprising and even if it did occur, the government would have the support of enough of the populace to ensure victory. Lets see how keen you would be to revolt when a city is nuked or napalmed.

You cling to your guns because you seem to believe it keeps your government in check. They don't. All they serve to do is promote violence amongst citizens.

>>3040746
A ton of bodies behind you. Right.

Hm. Internet tough guy or sociopath?

How cute. You've taken the predator/prey view on life because it makes you soooo bad ass. You're an idiot. Worse than an idiot, really, but I'm not going to waste my time and list the many insults I could apply to you.

You know what you're really doing? You're running away, you coward.

You're running away from the fact that as it stands a lot of change is needed in the way the world is. Running away from the fact that things could be better, should be better. Running away because it's easier to run than to face truth and try to change the looming monster that is modern Earth. If you think everything is as it should be, there's nothing for you to do. You don't have to do your part, don't have to feel sympathy, don't have to be HUMAN.

Heh. You don't have to be human at all when you've changed the definition of what it is to be a human so.

You have accepted the suffering so you don't have to suffer. That is the path of beasts, not of humanity. And you can try to lump humans in with animals all you like. There have been enough examples throughout history to show that humans can rise above such base instinct and amorality and become something more. There have been terrors too, in that history, but to claim that humankind has a need to see others suffer is to deny what shining moments we've managed.

But fine. You cannot handle the truth of things. You lean on your crutch of a philosophy and pretend to be some predator or badass, a human without humanity pretending that all is right with the world. Keep running away. Perhaps one day you'll turn and face things.

Or perhaps one day you'll run so far you'll vault off a cliff and into the fires of hell.

Either way, we humans will move on without you.

>>3040827
Gun ownership has been illegal in Washington D.C. for a long time, and the murder rates there are the worst in the country.
I'm not defending that guy's point; you're correct, we'd be fucked against any modern military. But the power of a handgun as a crime deterrent shouldn't be ignored.

>>3040827
>>There are two ways a dictatorship can come about in the United States. The first way is an external or internal force that can militarily defeat the United States, which has the most powerful military in the world. Assuming that such a force could defeat the US military, do you really think a few million armed civilians would be able to stop them? This isn't 1861; a modern military force that isn't constrained politically will annihilate civilian militias.
A few million well-armed guerrillas can be hell. See Iraq, where there aren't even a few million attackers, but the damage they do is enough that the occupying nation wishes to withdraw.

>>You cling to your guns because you seem to believe it keeps your government in check. They don't. All they serve to do is promote violence amongst citizens.
Disagree. A well armed populace means that criminals have to tread extra lightly.

>>3040857
>A few million well-armed guerrillas can be hell. See Iraq, where there aren't even a few million attackers, but the damage they do is enough that the occupying nation wishes to withdraw.

You missed
>that isn't constrained politically

>>3040857
>>Disagree. A well armed populace means that criminals have to tread extra lightly.

Because all those people carrying around handguns in the inner city really make people afraid to commit crimes around there.

>>3040850
>You have accepted the suffering so you don't have to suffer. That is the path of beasts, not of humanity.
Beasts, Buddhists, what's the difference?

>>3040827
>All they serve to do is promote violence amongst citizens.

This is wrong.

If you'd studied the subject, you'd know that gun-related homicide, particularly multiple-victim homicide, is less common in areas (of the US) where gun ownership is more common and easily allowed.

>>3040873
>>Because all those people carrying around handguns in the inner city really make people afraid to commit crimes around there.
What people carrying handguns?

>>3040857
>Disagree. A well armed populace means that criminals have to tread extra lightly.

Even as a Brit I have to agree with this. As is stands criminals in America, even the petty ones, will be able to get a fun with a fair amount of ease. They're alot harder to disarm than a law abiding civilian populace. Over in England knives are the choice weapon for random scummers because they're easy to get ahold of while guns really, really aren't. The latter also draws alot of attention, so only the more serious criminals tend to use them. It's why a gun ban over here works while one in America would be incredibly stupid.

>>3040875
To my knowledge, Buddhists accept that people must suffer and work towards the extinction of desire. Though suffering is inevitable as they say, it's the level of suffering that's debatable. They're not going to look at My Lai and shrug it off with, "Well, whaddya going to do, that's life."

>>3039074
Why the fuck is /tg/ having intellectual debates about human rights, big brother governments, and the freedom to bare arms?

I thought we are all about Dragons, Goblins and Sprites.

Maybe I'll institute a sword, mace, axe and spear ban in my players home town.

So basically I should stick with d6 then.

>>3039074
If you know D6, then you would not be asking this and playing D6.

>>3040850
I read this and felt like I needed therapy. Thanks, INTERNET.

>>3040855
Banning gun ownership in D.C. doesn't do dick because firearms are so prevalent in American society. I'm going to take a stab at it and say that the majority of gun-related murders are committed with illegally purchased or stolen firearms. If you didn't have so many fucking legal firearms, there wouldn't be so many stolen ones.

>>3041692
Go ahead and stick with a defunct, out-of-print game system that no one but fat-assed grognards play anymore

>>3042611
People will always find ways of threatening and murdering eachother. Guns don't have as much to do with it as the decline of civility.

>>3039074
Where can I download the Tales OP?
I've been looking for them forever.

Ewoks are why I hate Star Wars.

Guns are just so much more civilized than knives. If you shoot them in the right places, that is.

>all-Ewok

>>3040287
>>3040205

Holy shit

The Scottish ARE British

>>3042596
Trolling begets self righteous ranting, ranting begets therapy. God I love the internet

Trolling should be a form of role play, where one makes characters and fleshes them out with fictional anecdotes and phony POVs. Sockpuppetry is fair game to stir the argument and play the devils advocate. Enjoyment is to be had form responses to your fictional characters, but still one must wonder if the responses are fictional, and your opponents are puppets on strings, just like you are.
how many anons here are actually different people? Maybe they are the same person sock puppeteering a whole thread, or a whole board. Maybe I'm Jim Profit, and maybe I'm not, but one thing you cannot deny, trolling is a RPG.
Have fun tg.

>>3042723
inb4 slew of "NO I'M ANONYMOUS" posts.

>>3042723
Fuck off fagot, you are the cancer that is killing tg.
GTFO and stop derailing threads with shit about who won wars or morality or second amendment.

>>3042718
Americans are fat Ewoks.

Prove me wrong.

>>3042735

The Ewoks WON their jungle war.

>>3042731
I'm the one who derailed the thread with
>>3040147
>>3040569
>>3040639
>>3040746
Where are your fucking ewoks now?

>>3042738
Ewoks weren't fat.

What comic are those from?

COMICS COME FROM HERE:
>>>/rs/star+wars+tales

Jeez, you guys. I didn't realize that Ewok was the secret word that triggered a board meltdown.

>Go ahead and stick with a defunct, out-of-print game system that no one but fat-assed grognards play anymore
OK.

Ewok.

Fucking ewoks shat all over that film. A sign of things to come.

>>3040007
Even though ~I'm a Britfag, I side with the Yanks on this one- America won every battle in the Vietnam war, with ratios like 10 VC for every GI being killed in the Tet offensive.

There are many ways to define a 'win' in warfare.

While kill ratios and number of cities/jungles/what-have-you rendered into so much teratogenic slag can be impressive, I believe the "winner" is the side that achieved what they set out to achieve.

"Let's just kill as many of the other side as we can," is rarely the objective. (In many instances, even genocidal campaigns can be seen more as "Let's try and stop these people from doing whatever they're doing that I find so offensive.)

>>3047449
Can you really claim that one side "won" a war over the other, if the other side just picked up and went home one day due to internal politics?

North Vietnam beat South Vietnam, but they didn't beat the USA. They were just still there when the USA went home, and the Americans were never trying to eliminate North Vietnam, they were just trying to defend South Vietnam from their invasion.

One day they stopped trying to do that.

The only problems I ever saw with the Ewoks were their poor costumes/masks, and their clumsy gaits. They looked like dwarfs in teddy-bear costumes. But I thought that was much better than not having a role for clearly-inhuman aliens at all.

They had an awesome little primitive culture, an unabashedly predatory nature, and a gift for guerilla warfare.

When I was a kid, I even loved the Ewoks cartoon.

I don't know why people don't like them.

>>3047532
0/10,
>loved the Ewoks cartoon
gave it away.

Also, they WERE dwarfs in bear costumes.

>>3040850
Who are you, why do you know me, and why is everything after
>A ton of bodies behind you. Right.
speaking directly to me?

Goddamn, now I need therapy too. Goddamnit /tg/.

>>3040687

>schadenfreude
Schadenfreude?

>>3047507
War is a matter of will, as well as materiel. The USA fought a technically very challenging, asymmetric war in a regrettable way that sapped the morale of our fighting forces and the general public; we lost our will, so we lost the war. It was more 'our loss' than 'their win', but the distinction isn't that important-if you lose the 100m sprint because you decide to hop, the other guy still gets the medal.

>>3047785
NO NO GET IT OUT OF MY HEAD JESUS FUCK NOT AGAIN

>>3047786
Let's look at it this way: say it's some alternate-history WW II.

Germany is invading France. Italy is helping France resist the invasion. There is a political shift in Italy, and Italy makes an agreement to help Germany invade France and split the spoils.

Did Italy "lose" because they changed their mind about what they were doing? I don't think they'd feel like they had lost when their troops were sacking Paris.

Same scenario, except after Italy's political shift, they decide to pull a Swizerland and be neutral. Did Italy "lose" because they changed their mind? I don't think so.

People in the USA disagreed about whether they should be fighting that war from the start. For one side of the argument to win over the other is not the whole country winning or losing the war. It was just the country changing its mind.

looks like someone decided to resurrect a troll thread
>>3044411
Don't you ever mention that word ever again.
Ewoks killed StarWars long before fucking JarJar dildohead ever came to be.

>>3047821
So you agree that if a country surrenders, it can't have lost, they simply changed their minds.
Now we can all be winnarz!!!

I might just leave this here.

GUESS THIS IS WHAT YOU GET FOR TRAINING YOUR ASSAULT TROOPS TO AIM IN SUCH A WAY THAT SOME FARMER DUDE WHO HAS NEVER SEEN A GUN IN HIS LIFE, A PRINCESS AND A FREIGHTER CAPTAIN WITH DANGEROUS HOBBIES CAN HOLD OFF THE ELITE OF THE ELITE BY THE HUNDREDS WITH PISTOLS AND NEVER BE SCRATCHED BY THEIR ASSAULT RIFLE FIRE

NOW IF THEY HAD SENT FARMERS WITH PITCH-FORKS TO FIGHT THE EWOKS THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN A MUCH MORE EVEN FIGHT

ALSO WHY DO YOU PUT LASERS ON A SPACESHIP IF YOU CAN'T FIRE THEM BEYOND VISUAL RANGE AND EVEN IF THEY HIT, THEY DO ZERO DAMAGE BUT INDUCE SHAKING OF THE VESSEL, WHEN A KINETIC PROJECTILE THE SIZE OF AN A-WING CAN ONE-SHOT A GIGANTIC CAPITAL VESSEL?

Hay guize! wutz goin on in here?

*gasp*

Oh not again.

...

>>3047840
No high ranking officer in the US military would have said that they were incapable of holding off the North Vietnamese invasion indefinitely.

There is being defeated, and there is changing your mind. The Americans, despite having come freshly off a major battlefield victory (the Tet Offensive), and being fully capable of holding their ground, just said, "Fuck this shit. We're pulling out."

I don't think there's anyone who thinks it was a consistent decision with the decision to join the war. Nobody was saying, "We were right to try, but we just can't win this!" Plenty of people were saying, "This is crazy! We never should have been a part of this! Why were we ever in there?!"

A major factor in the American decision to withdraw was disgust with the level of casualties they were *inflicting*.

This is not "losing". This is just taking your ball and going home.

>>3047875
But you cannot deny that North Vietnam won by accomplishing what they set out to do while the US simply packed up and went home without accomplishing anything.
Thats a loss in my book.