Max McGee
My name is Legion: for we are many.
Hi, my name is Max McGee. I have a mood disorder, an anxiety disorder, moderate to severe Crohn's disease, and way too much free time. I make tabletop roleplaying games for a living and RPG video games for fun. I have over ten years of experience with the latter. It hasn't always been easy--plenty of the time it's straight-up sucked-- but I'm never going to give up.

"To the quitters and the complainers,
if we never meet again, remember when.

They lost their nerve
They just went straight
They didn't have the balls to hold it down and they brought everybody else right down with them.
While clowns must stand.

We'll make a toast to absent friends and better days,
To remembering and being remembered as brave
And not as a bunch of whining jerks!

Don't lose your nerve.
Do not go straight
You must testify (or I'm going to come to your house and punch you in the mouth)
cause clowns must stand."

And uh, I can't believe it's come to this, but: Ahem.
Mage Duel Extreme
the (maybe sort of) final(ish) game from Max McGee



of games, representation, and women's cheekbones

There's no real rhyme or reason as to why a given object or activity is masculine or feminine.

That's not actually true. Some classifications as 'masculine' or 'feminine' are in fact probably arbitrary social constructs. But others I would argue are social constructs derived from the politically unpopular but undeniable fact that human beings have sexual dimorphism. And this sexual dimorphism in humans manifests in ways that are not purely physical.

This is true. It is also yet another argument in favor of gender role abolition.

I don't see how that is so. If lots of guys want to embody the traditional masculine gender role or lots of gals want to be 'traditionally feminine' how is that fact in itself an argument in favor of abolishing those roles? Can you explain?

of games, representation, and women's cheekbones

Even 'cuz, for reasons and purposes, you're pretty much the reason i have been avoiding this thread, because i can't distinguish your discourse from people who would death threaten me, among other things, so i guess this says volumes about your contribution to the topic.


I haven't threatened you with death and wasn't planning on it. How is that in and of itself not an incredibly meaningful distinction? I don't think I should get a trophy for simply not being a malignantly awful person, but surely you must at least recognize the distinction.

So, if you feel that a femhype article is comparable to a fox news article, you have place no here. You've missed the point, and you're not contributing to anything; only, mayhap, to the constrution of an unsafe place for people like me who want to be taken seriously, and feel secure while doing so.

I was staff on this forum practically since before you were born. Seriously I have been here since 2008. That's seven years now, and that's just RMN, not even gam mak in general. Speaking as a crotchety old person, if I don't belong here, I have no idea where I do belong. I think there's room here for everyone. But if anyone's gonna go, it sure as hell ain't me. I'm practically part of the architecture.

Take my advice. Grab your things, and retire yourself from this thread. It'll do both of us good.

no u :P

The truly ironic thing is that you and Max are basically two sides to the same depressingly droll coin.

Max has a history of showing up, derailing and shutting down discussions like these. From what I can tell, it gives him some false sense of superiority. There's no point in trying engage with him. You'd be better off arguing with a brick wall.

this is bullshit.

Of course F_G you may believe whatever you wish but as far as I'm concerned, attempting to engage the other side is the entire reason I'm here. I am asking the question "why does this matter?" and looking for any answer but "of course it does you Philistine stop silencing me!" or "read my gender studies curriculum!". You know, like, a meaningful answer.

Here's another way to look at it. I am here to challenge you. It's not vitriolic and it's not abusive. It is a challenge to your presumptions. It is a challenge to the unproven presumption that someone calling a fictional character on the internet a tranny actually matters or means something beyond itself.

Go play any first person shooter on xbox live and you will be, or so I'm told, assaulted with 14 year old rear births screaming 'nigger' and 'cocksucker' and 'bitch' and 'slut' and 'whore' and 'faggot' and 'kike' and so on and so forth. This does not point towards the fact that in the western world we live in a 'racist heterosexist capitalist patriarchy' or whatever. It points towards nothing but the undeniable truth of John Gabriel's greater internet fuckwad theory.

People are dicks, people are toxic, they always have been, they always will be, grow up, toughen up, and get over it. Now speaking from personal experience, not getting upset by toxic behavior can be really, really hard when that toxic behavior is directed at you personally. There is thread after thread after thread on this website where I personally lose my shit HARD in response to bullying and abuse.

But seeking offense from comments made about (fake) people who have a demographic variable or two in common with you? That's just asking for unnecessary pain.

This is not me shutting down the conversation, and I'm sick of that accusation. This is me participating in the conversation. The invitation I am giving is not one to shut the fuck up. The invitation I am giving is an invitation to endeavor to prove me wrong.

The current discourse on oppression understand that most of the violence happens in conceptual level,

Violence cannot happen on a conceptual level. That is not a real thing. You are misappropriating the concept of violence. You are perverting the definition of violence. There is no such thing as 'conceptual violence'. That is an academic construct created by the radical social justice left, not a real thing that mainstream scholars recognize as legitimate.

1)Max, please fuck off and try to be more productive (and positive). You have some shitty opinions, my friends have shitty opinions, and no one is going to convince the other to change their mind, so I suggest a bit of a paradigm change on how you go about these things. Oh, and some Robert Greene.

Shocking thought Zieg, telling someone to 'fuck off' isn't really very productive (or positive).

Also, my opinions are not shitty, they are great.

I apologize if people who genuinely wanted to participate felt I would jump on them for failure to properly kowtow to my expectations.

You don't get to decide whether my desire to participate is genuine, you know. If I wanted to not 'participate', I wouldn't post. I'm going to try to minimize my bickering with you because I don't want to derail the thread further, but I had to say that much.

Pink vs. Blue Et Al

AE, you fail to take into consideration that our ideals of right and wrong are skewed by the fact that we are nurtured to believe in the wrong rights and the right wrongs. It is a sad fact that most girls look into the mirror and see faults because that is what media teaches them to see. It teaches them that they have to look like x model in order to be considered pretty (never mind that the model in question doesn't look like she is represented).

It's the same skewing that happens when the girls' aisle in a toystore is filled with pink 'sexy' dolls and cuddly toys and the boys' is blue and full of trucks and sports equipment. And in the case that there is something sporty in the girls' section, it's pink and flowery, and in the case that there's a doll in the boys' section, it's got rippling muscles and guns and 'manly' things added.

It's thrown in our faces all through our lives until it becomes a habit to think 'pink is girl, blue is boy' and to shy away from association with the opposite. An example. I bought my niece an omni-gender clothing set - a well-made camo jacket, pants and tee-shirt. It was clearly not boys or girls wear - using dull reds and yellows in the design. It was cute as hell. My sister never let her wear it once. I got reamed out for buying her 'boy's clothes' and told my more than four people that I should have bought her a cute dress instead. I got the clothes so she could run around and get dirty without worrying about messing up the 'pretty' clothes she has.

The idea of male is this, female is that is so deeply ingrained in people that a 2 year old was not allowed to dress in certain clothes because people might think she was male. This is the pure and simple of it - people are influenced every day of their lives and it skews their ideals of right and wrong, good and bad, boy and girl, completely.


In my opinion, a (convincing) argument has yet to be made that the mere existence of gender norms is harmful. Dogmatic adherence to gender norms under threat of physical/emotional violence? Yeah, that's bad. I am cautiously hopeful, guardedly optimistic, that at least in the relatively progressive Western World (TM), our generation is the last generation to grow up with that bullshit.

But that doesn't mean that normative gender roles themselves are harmful or toxic.

But stereotypical guy stuff and stereotypical girl stuff should totally be free to exist, and guys should be able to like "boy stuff" and girls to like "girlie stuff" without any fear of reprisals or being called some kind of gender traitor.

When do you grow up?

Growing up isn't really something that happens. People fake it until it becomes the truth. Some people fake it their whole lives.

This is actually true.

Stupid robots, stealing mah jerbs.

They tuk arr jerrrbs!

What if you can't physically work?

That's a very corporate emotionally-devoid answer I gotta say. Also no one ever truly supports themselves 100% unless they don't have money, don't pay wages, or rely on any human services.

That money your earn working pays for other people to support you, it pays for a landlord to trust you with his house, it pays for the power that goes to said house, Economics 101; working and being 100% independent is something very few human beings can do, there's also the lack of security since being totally independent would mean having to find a piece of land that's uninhabited and then hope no one decides to be a cunt and demolishes it or such..

I agree with this. By this robologic, my Crohn's Disease makes it impossible for me to ever grow up. Because I sure as hell am too sick to work a full time job that will support me at any reasonable lifestyle level. Not to mention pay the costs of medicine I can't fucking afford.

Like peter fucking pan, I am a boy who can never grow up. Because my digestive system doesn't work? Fuck that.

Heck, even non-physical conditions can jeopardize someone's ability to support themselves 100%. I mean, again here I am example. I have a crippling anxiety disorder that I can't really afford to treat. As a result, I am a 29 year old man getting by with no driver's license, because driving is one of the things I live in unholy irrational terror of. Again, this factor in why I cannot support myself speaks to something besides pure immaturity.

On a positive note, the other day I finally started to realize that I was kind of a big deal in my chosen field of endeavor. More than anything else to me, that felt like growing up.

Some people say it is when you reach economic independency but with the job market as it is, i haven't been able to find a stable job in a year and a half that i began scouting, so if i don't have a job and are therefore incapable of sustaining myself, that means i am not a grown up isn't it? Life is so shit.

Yeah that's the other thing, you can be mad able-bodied and still struggle to meet this standard of "maturity". Back in '08/'09, shit was so bad in the US that as a college graduate I couldn't beg borrow or steal a shitty retail job at fucking Gamestop or Barnes & Noble. True story.

of games, representation, and women's cheekbones

There has also been a tendency for the last few years for people to try shut down discussion about Social issues or their impact on the media(often by being snarky). You what? There are people who get hyperoffended. Do you know how many of them have been on this thread? 0. Zip zilch. Not even one.

If you can't see the perpetually offended outrage brigade's presence here, I think that you critically failed your Perception Test sir and/or madam.


hey can someone let mawk know that I have him on ignore. so he probably should not waste his time attacking me because i won't see it. for instance i wouldn't have known at all if not for BM quoting it with his masterfully jujitsu like riposte.

also maybe somebody could let him know that personal attacks aren't cool but nah? why would we want to enforce forum rules in a non-selective or fair way or anything. that would be crazy. only one side has to worry about their tone, after all.

Also yeah I support GamerGate, what of it. :D

Beyond that: I agree with pretty much everything that The Artist formerly known as BizarreMonkey said. Rock on. Sanity and reasonableness also came from SnowOwl and from Mog.

I am a staff member of this site, and while I am not a moderator, curating a non-hostile atmosphere is something I have taken fairly seriously ever since it became apparently a couple years ago that people were having problems here. Isn't it funny how nobody ever complains about it except you? If you feel my actions are unbecoming and inappropriate for a staff member of this site, you can lodge a complaint with the greater administration, but I assure you you won't win.

I strongly recommend you just stay away from this topic, Max. Don't say I didn't warn you.

Oh boy.

I am not complaining about curating a non-hostile atmosphere, because that is something I actually approve of (shit, where was any attempt to do that here a few years ago). What you are doing is entirely different. It is censorship which you are obviously a really big fan of. "You're not allowed to say 'tranny' because some people find it triggering." Give me a fucking break, dude. Those people need to take Stephen Fry's advice. I am increasingly of the blanket opinion (though obviously there are exceptions) that if you are being offensive, you are doing it right, and if you are being offended, you are doing it wrong.

I have no interest in lodging a complaint with the current administration, dude. I know which way the wind blows. I am talking directly to you. I am telling you that in short, you are a bad person in a position of (obviously quite trivial, but still demonstrable) power. The fact you are in a position of power is not a counterargument to the fact that you're a bad person, nor do your threats or the position you're in to silence, censure, or harm me change my feelings about your conduct one iota. I say this really only because of the 00.000001% (and I'm not sure I put enough zeros after the decimal place) chance that you might actually reflect upon your behavior and realize where you are in error. But I'm not holding my breath. Do whatever you've gotta do and call it whatever you want to pretend it is. After all, you will anyway.

Ok, WetMattos this article is kind of like...exactly what we're talking about. It's a "thinkpiece" that obviously comes from extreme radical crazytown. It's not mainstream, it's not impartial, and it's not academic. It's like the equivalent of quoting Fox News or Breitbart, only moreso, because those aren't extremist enough. Maybe The Daily Stormer? It's alarmist, sensational, seething with unjustified faux-outrage, and creating an entire mountain range out of an issue that is not even a molehill for the vast, vast, vast overwhelming majority of gamers (and, although I have no data on this, I would still bet money that it's not even an issue for the vast, vast, vast majority of trans gamers). Normal people, straight, gay or whatever, do not give a crap about this shit. SJWs aka the perpetually offended outrage brigade, are the only people who care or lend credence to these types of articles.

The RMN Skill Exchange

I heartily approve of this topic. Great idea.

of games, representation, and women's cheekbones

author=Feldschlacht IV
I'd like to point out (although as an aside and definitely not in reference to the original grievance of this topic) that the 'crazy SJW' is sort of a thing now and are capable of kind of concerning feats, up to most recently, a hardline feminist group trying to get Tyler the Creator (a rapper) banned from Australia and almost succeeding due to concerns of his lyrics, and so forth.

It's beginning to make the idea of the 'Horseshoe Theory' (the idea that far left and far right become more and more similar, in this case, the similarity of authoritarianism to 'banning' things they don't like) concerning them more and more credible, up to and including banning people from continents, hushing controversial discourse from colleges, and bullying, harassing, and even suing people.

The whole idea of 'shut up about crazy SJWs because we're not talking about those' is um...tenuous, depending on the conversation. The concept of 'crazy far leftists who are fucking shit up' isn't as far fetched anymore.

Just an aside!

Give this gentleman the thread-wide-rationality prize.

but what I don't understand is how can 'gamers' be a real and identifiable subgroup, but 'SJWs' not be? how can one set of broad generalized behaviours be categorized and the other not be? if people self-identify as being an SJW, doesn't that de facto make it a thing?

Confused In Saskatchewan

They're both totally real subgroups, Kenton A. it's just that 'gamers' are actually a fairly diverse group of people that includes salt of the earth mensch-types like most people on this forum and repugnant filthmonsters, whereas avowed SJWs pretty much are made up entirely of repulsive filthmonsters.

It's kind of like saying "I don't understand how Italians can be a real and identifiable subgroup and Nazis* can't be". Obviously both are recognizable demographic groups. It's just that one of those groups are Nazis and deserve whatever they get for all the Nazi stuff they do. :D

(*Godwins every thread all day long.)

Once upon a time I used to laugh at the concept of 'PC Police' when it was something I associated with the Fox News crowd, then I read Solitayre's posts and realized he actually was literally and exactly that.

Mad <3s at Sated for dropping C-Bombs into this fucking delicate ass waltz of a thread. Reminds me of community organizer Saul Alinsky's "100 blacks" farting en masse at the symphony orchestra. (Count me as a continental US'er that gives as much or less of a shit about the word 'cunt' as anyone in Australia.)

Ok, now the moderately serious part of my post:

This is seriously the most heated argument between people who basically fundamentally agree with each other that I've ever seen. You shouldn't use transphobic slurs in a hateful way and you should include whatever types of characters in your game you damn well feel like, portrayed however you like because it's your game and fuck all the haters. Arguments about tone and conversation-accessibility set aside, does anyone actually disagree with any of these fundamental points? I'm not saying like "close the topic, plant dynamite at all the key structural points and go home" but you'd think at least things could be a bit less fraught!

of games, representation, and women's cheekbones

@WetMattos: Yes, quite arcane, I find your jargon and terminology rather impenetrable. Also keep in mind that philosophy grounded in radical feminist and racial theory is not like...fact. It is academic material created prolifically by a very insular academic community and a very specific subculture and is very self-referential and incestuous. (I took a single gender studies course in college and spent the entirety of it disagreeing with pretty much every single thing the professor taught.)

I am not interested in reading about "Feminist/Gender Politics Theory XYZ" because I don't believe it has value and it is not worth my time. However if you were to unpack yourself how a character can be hegemonic, in natural language, that is something I'd take the time to read and try to grasp. But "read author xyz" or "look into theory xyz" is not something I have time/energy for.

If you don't have the time to break down these ideas, obviously that's fine. Just saying, that's something I'd be definitely be willing to engage with. But if understanding this stuff has "reading and accepting all theories produced by academic feminism and gender studies" as a prerequisite, that is never going to happen.


As a professional writer I realize that this resembles mystical thinking, but to me, characters have an inherent truth to them. So no, white is not the "default" race for a character I think of. The default race for a character I think of is whatever race they are when I think of them. This is not something that I don't think about, exactly, but it's also very much not something that I plan ahead of time.

When my mind creates a character, it does so holistically. That character then has a race, a gender, an identity, maybe normative, maybe not, but in any case part of that character's holistic truth. I realize that this is...not a perfectly clear explanation. But thinking that anyone is anything by default is...kind of antithetical to the way I make art? Likewise, so is planning to have a "diverse" and "inclusive" cast...that's anathema to the way I create too. Characters don't exactly come from my brain fully formed, but they do come out with the basic shapes, race, gender, and so forth. There is no default.

The fact of thinking of a character that is a minority is not offensive to me, it's natural. It's the idea of planning in advance that X, Y, Z of your characters will be X, Y, Z minorities for the sake of being perceived as sufficiently "diverse" or "inclusive" to bow to political correctness that I find abhorrent, because it seems very dishonest.

That said, given about 80% of what's written in tumblry circles as critique of works that depict minorities, I totally understand why writers would want to sidestep the entire minefield of an issue by just writing people the same color they are. There doesn't seem to be any way of portraying female characters or whatever, minority x, that won't offend at least an overwhelmingly vocal minority. Look at arch-feminist Joss Whedon getting screamed off of twitter by a frothing mob of rabid radfems.

Game developers that don't... like making games...?

Saw thread title, immediately thought it was about me.

It's not quite that I don't like making's just that I'm a million years old and

The Unpopular Opinion Thread

I think that any interesting person's demographic identity (their race, gender, sexual preference, and so on) is the least interesting and least relevant thing about them.

The kind of diversity that interests me and that I value is diversity of opinions and viewpoints, not demographic diversity as represented by stock photographs of smiling racially diverse yuppies as appearing on corporate tech and finance websites. Give me 10 people all the same color who think differently over 10 people of different colors who all think exactly the same.

F_G's infographic least America isn't the VERY worst of all countries? "USA, USA, USA!"

Liberty, you should check this out.

The Golden Age of Game Making

I'm actually really sad I missed this.