Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
We further advise our members not to attempt circumvention of this removal by reverting to the old and just as divisive method of creating empty posts of "+1" and "what he said." Such posts only seek to further a culture of exclusion where select users may end up feeling discomfort or emotional trauma. These posts will be considered spam and thus a banable offense.
Nope. Incline in the sense of net number of games coming out that fit within the RPGCodex niche and are also worth bothering with.
That's all it's ever been -- doesn't matter what the forum does (or what's on it -- incline isn't about the Codex) or what the industry does, so long as they don't produce retarded garbage. That is incline.
Could Cleve decrease the decline by releasing a good Wizardly clone? Sure, there's always potential in something that only tentatively has existed.
But you're just a modder on a long-dead game and, like the rest of us, you don't even rate to Cleve's level of inclination. Recognizing that both the forum isn't the industry, nor are you, is probably a requirement of remaining somewhat sane here.
I'm concerned there are still ways around the brofist embargo. You guys should be careful to avoid things like browser extensions, because -- and I'm speaking hypothetically here -- someone could just add a brofist button back in, say, something like Chrome. It'd be trivial to create a manifest.json file something like this:
$(document).ready(function() {
var msgList= document.getElementById("messageList");
var reportButtons= msgList.getElementsByClassName("OverlayTrigger item control report");
for(var i= 0; i < reportButtons.length; i++) {
var reportUrl= reportButtons[i].getAttribute("href");
var stubUrl= reportUrl.substring(0, reportUrl.lastIndexOf("/"));
var broUrl= stubUrl+ "/like";
reportButtons[i].setAttribute("href", broUrl);
reportButtons[i].innerText= "Brofist";
}
});
So if you see any code like that, avoid using it to create those two files and putting them together in a folder along with the compressed, production jQuery 1.11.1, and then loading the folder as an unpacked extension in chrome://extensions/ , and then clicking the enable checkbox. Just avoid doing anything like that. Shit like that has to wait until all the images on a page have loaded before the brofist link appears anyway -- or so I hear.
inb4 DU changes the "like" uri to something horrible.
(I'll probably be using the same username on RPG Watch btw).
I'm concerned there are still ways around the brofist embargo. You guys should be careful to avoid things like browser extensions, because -- and I'm speaking hypothetically here -- someone could just add a brofist button back in, say, something like Chrome. It'd be trivial to create a manifest.json file something like this:
$(document).ready(function() {
var msgList= document.getElementById("messageList");
var reportButtons= msgList.getElementsByClassName("OverlayTrigger item control report");
for(var i= 0; i < reportButtons.length; i++) {
var reportUrl= reportButtons[i].getAttribute("href");
var stubUrl= reportUrl.substring(0, reportUrl.lastIndexOf("/"));
var broUrl= stubUrl+ "/like";
reportButtons[i].setAttribute("href", broUrl);
reportButtons[i].innerText= "Brofist";
}
});
So if you see any code like that, avoid using it to create those two files and putting them together in a folder along with the compressed, production jQuery 1.11.1, and then loading the folder as an unpacked extension in chrome://extensions/ , and then clicking the enable checkbox. Just avoid doing anything like that. Shit like that has to wait until all the images on a page have loaded before the brofist link appears anyway -- or so I hear.
inb4 DU changes the "like" uri to something horrible.
(I'll probably be using the same username on RPG Watch btw).
I'm concerned there are still ways around the brofist embargo. You guys should be careful to avoid things like browser extensions, because -- and I'm speaking hypothetically here -- someone could just add a brofist button back in, say, something like Chrome. It'd be trivial to create a manifest.json file something like this:
$(document).ready(function() {
var msgList= document.getElementById("messageList");
var reportButtons= msgList.getElementsByClassName("OverlayTrigger item control report");
for(var i= 0; i < reportButtons.length; i++) {
var reportUrl= reportButtons[i].getAttribute("href");
var stubUrl= reportUrl.substring(0, reportUrl.lastIndexOf("/"));
var broUrl= stubUrl+ "/like";
reportButtons[i].setAttribute("href", broUrl);
reportButtons[i].innerText= "Brofist";
}
});
So if you see any code like that, avoid using it to create those two files and putting them together in a folder along with the compressed, production jQuery 1.11.1, and then loading the folder as an unpacked extension in chrome://extensions/ , and then clicking the enable checkbox. Just avoid doing anything like that. Shit like that has to wait until all the images on a page have loaded before the brofist link appears anyway -- or so I hear.
inb4 DU changes the "like" uri to something horrible.
(I'll probably be using the same username on RPG Watch btw).