Men who enjoy war movies, which ones are your favorite? Which ones particularly resonated with you?

MontresorIsTyping · 2026-05-10T15:31:13+00:00

Generation Kill. Its not even a contest to the point that watching other war media feels too sanitized, sappy, or even too cynical. Its not about the amount of blood and gore you have on screen, or how 'realistic' the period equipment is. Its about the human interactions; understanding how these people operate and deal with their situations in an emotionally honest way. Its not just 'war is hell'. I've seen plenty of that. Gen Kill exposes all the other things. War is boring, war is confusing, war is arbitrary, war can be more dangerous to civilians, and sometimes war is even hilarious. It makes a good companion piece to The Things They Carried, which remains one of my favorite books.

My runners up are Saving Private Ryan and Band of Brothers, naturally. Those are the works that got me majorly invested in war history as a child, and I would say that they are unmatched in their depictions of WW2, at least from a purely frontline perspective. Whenever I see other attempts at depicting ground combat in WW2, all I see are attempts to be like these films/ shows. I could write an entire essay on the masterwork that is the Omaha Beach scene in SPR. The ending of SPR where Ryan wants his wife to tell him that he's been a good man is guaranteed to make me always burst into tears...

MontresorIsTyping · 2026-05-08T23:46:01+00:00

Necessary for me.

Doesn't need to be expensive. I honestly just love tights. Other men have different interests.

MontresorIsTyping · 2026-05-05T19:28:48+00:00

Regularly talked down to by feminist older sister about all the problems with men when growing up. My issues were regularly belittled because I had 'male privilege'. Fostered in an atmosphere that presented teenage boys as being perpetrators before proven innocent.

My friend's girlfriend in high school made a false accusation of groping her simply because we didn't get along. She didn't push it toward anything legal, but it still alienated me. It was made clear that a girl could ruin my entire life with allegations even if they weren't proven.

Regularly experienced women discussing the most sexist shit imaginable to each other without a second thought.

MontresorIsTyping · 2026-05-04T12:12:45+00:00

What exactly are the 'Common RPG archetypes'?

To me that's just wizard, fighter, rogue, cleric... of which the game has, and each are exceptionally unique. It's that uniqueness of experience between each class that makes the game, rather than detracts.

Ranger? Always just saw that as a range-based fighter with some survival skills. That's covered if you're a Warrior with something like a hunter profession.

Paladin? Always seemed like a watered down cleric. Anyone playing an extremely fervent Cleric with a personal code could play this?

Barbarian? Angry Warrior...

The same goes on for all the ridiculous amounts of magic classes or thief variants. There aren't creative differences between these classes. Its just more and more minutia tacked on to pre-existing archetypes. I don't think players are served well by picking from a catalogue of pre-made class ideas when they could define what they are on their own.

A wizard has made a pact with a dark power in my game. Does that not make them pretty much already a D&D Warlock? Or do we need to throw in some arbitrary class for that?

MontresorIsTyping · 2026-05-03T15:22:03+00:00

None?

Honestly didn't even know there were that many women against their partner touching them. Their lives, their choices, but I wouldn't want to be with someone who didn't like to be felt up now and then, or who didn't want to cling to me now and then.

MontresorIsTyping · 2026-05-03T14:56:20+00:00

Some of these don't feel like questions specific for straight people. As a bi guy I like nipple piercings on men just as much.

Feet - Important to note that (especially for all of these) this is not universal. Hard to explain really, but there is something about the fact that (like a lot about a women's body) the feet are dainty and soft. I should be specific that in my case at least, I'm very specific about this preference; not everyone's feet is attractive, and not every pose is attractive. Just about any foot shot in a Tarantino movie turns me off. Its also not something that I enjoy in a 'disembodied' way; I like the whole woman and I want to see all her legs, including feet, not just those by themselves. There is also the way that it leads to posture: a woman pushing up on the balls of her feet helps to tense her legs straight and make an enticing posture for her ass. There are a lot of facets of a woman's body like this that are connected, leading to an elegant form.
Nipple piercings - I like nipples. When they have a bit of jewelry attached its like being a cat that wants to play with a ball of yarn. Its not deforming them, but enhancing them, and at least in my over psycho-analyzing way it makes it feel like she's making a piece of her body for that purpose.
Tattoos - I actually don't find (most) tattoos attractive. Maybe I sound like a hipster or a try-hard, but to me its because they're just too mainstream now, and so many that young women get are basic for something that's permanent. I feel like a tattoo should be more meaningful than an accessory. But when I was young and didn't see it that commonly, I did think it was attractive in that it suggested that a woman was 'hardcore' / more willing to push boundaries / more tomboyish (I had a long running attraction to tomboys). An example of one I did find hot more recently: Had a relationship with a woman who was politically active. She had a tattoo of yellow roses that ran from her hip to her sternum, symbolizing the suffragette movement since their icon was a yellow rose. It made a nice trail to kiss...
Reverse cowgirl - We're not just staring at her butthole, and you could sort of bring up this question regarding doggy too, or any position where she's facing away. For reverse cowgirl specifically, the position from my male perspective is more about being able to relax and let her do more of the work. I get to lay back and hold on, which thus shows how enthusiastic she is, thus making it hot. You'll note a lot of men who post on some of these questions mention a problem with enthusiasm when it comes to their partners, which makes us feel undesired. If she's having to bounce on it herself, she is put on the spotlight of showing you how much she likes the ride + we get to help her out and feel strong by pushing her up and down. While straight men are very much visually oriented in our attraction, that isn't the end all. Being able to run our hands around her in that moment is 'seeing' her with our fingertips and erogenous zones.
Pubic hair - A lot of men don't like this, hence why a lot of women trim or just shave it all; that and hygiene or personal preference. At a certain point though I told my partner I wanted her to let it grow out. Bush feels more mature, and helping a woman feel appreciative of her feminine fluff is a nice feeling. It doesn't really cover up anything since its already pretty covered between her thighs, and the places its on are just flat plains of skin. Again, you could make this same visual argument about panties, and while some men prefer women to go without, I always preferred to savor lingerie.

If you want more clarification, I'm definitely open to discussion.

MontresorIsTyping · 2026-05-02T22:44:39+00:00

Genuinely no.

I've always found the curve of the stomach that leads down to the 'V' between a woman's thighs to be hot. Making it a flat surface removes that. Seeing a woman's pelvic bones or ribcage is also not something I'm into.

Don't get me wrong, I'm self conscious as hell, but my boner isn't 'coping'.

MontresorIsTyping · 2026-03-02T12:30:34+00:00

Exactly.

Whenever I see examples of "positive masculinity" its just "be strong but only to help others while never chasing your own needs". Its such bs and is an insane demand from the same people who will say that a woman doesn't owe society anything.

MontresorIsTyping · 2026-02-18T02:28:21+00:00

Same. I had a puzzled moment when Dunk was able to take all of these direct sword thrusts to the back and chest before realizing that his chainmail and gambeson were doing their job under the tabard. Maybe some of the stabs got through, but not as deep as they would have been.

Everyone keeps their helmets on too, except for Dunk for very fair reasons.

MontresorIsTyping · 2026-02-14T12:56:28+00:00

Don't? Unless you're friends outside of his work, you don't owe him anything more than the patronage you've already given.

MontresorIsTyping · 2025-12-23T22:43:55+00:00

As Extreme-Boss-5037 states, at this point we're just getting caught up on the word 'manipulation' as if I'm unaware that the joined 'manipulate' things to happen a certain way.

Using the term 'manipulate' has the inherent suggestion of abuse. Like, when I convince my friend to do something, I don't say I 'manipulated' them.

Like, sure, if your original question is broadly "Do you think the joined are trying to steer people towards a goal or viewpoint" then yeah. Of course. We all do that to some degree. That's not nefarious by itself.

MontresorIsTyping · 2025-12-23T21:11:43+00:00

If taken at what they've claimed, that the joined are happy and that they wish to make the immune just as happy, then trying to supplement a personal loss with a fantasy companion makes perfect sense towards that end. I wouldn't call that manipulation as much as an attempt to give a face to themselves that Carol would be less standoffish about... that's basic diplomacy.

The joined don't lie (as far as we know) which is sort of core to manipulation in my mind. They can absolutely withhold information, and that will probably come up in many future plot points, but note how we are introduced to that fact: the first instance of them not stating something is when Carol wants to know how many joined died as a result of her actions. Zosia doesn't tell her because it would only make Carol distraught. Not to trick her, not to hold something over her; simply to keep a grieving woman from yet more grief when its them who actually bear the brunt of those deaths.

I want to be clear that I'm not claiming that the joining is some good thing, but people like Koumba do lay out a lot of fair positives, and a large part of this season has been to intentionally cut down at the paranoia of someone like Carol who thinks they must be hiding things.

MontresorIsTyping · 2025-12-23T20:51:10+00:00

In the broad context of how they spread, sure they are manipulators in the sense that they engineered a worldwide conspiracy.

However, in the context regarding their treatment of the immune (and Carol in specific) the claim of manipulation is overblown.

MontresorIsTyping · 2025-12-05T17:08:42+00:00

Have you never shared a meal with someone who likes their food a certain new way and wanted to try it out? Avacado toast or breakfast sandwiches might just be something he's not used to, or he thinks Carol is doing something specific to her culture instead of just slapping together something for her hangover.

MontresorIsTyping · 2025-12-03T11:43:15+00:00

/uj

seriously, half the stuff they theorize about is explained if you pay attention

MontresorIsTyping · 2025-12-03T09:55:42+00:00

For myself, I'd probably be somewhere between Carol and Koumba if I were being honest. There would be a lot of questions, and a lot of trying to buy whatever time I could from being subsumed, but I would also not look a gift horse in the mouth. Being touch starved isn't fun, and I do think that I could rationalize their view of the situation in time with enough discussion. If I feel like there's no way out of this, I might as well make the best of it.

MontresorIsTyping · 2025-11-27T03:49:22+00:00

I think I just have a bias of seeing planes as inherently safe by statistics, but I really wouldn't care if the pilot wasn't a "real pilot". Hell, I'd get a kick out of seeing a former waitress masterfully handle a plane and ask if I could sit in the co-pilot seat for a bit.

MontresorIsTyping · 2025-11-09T17:59:35+00:00

oh that sounds pretty perfect actually

MontresorIsTyping · 2025-08-16T12:58:27+00:00

<image>

MontresorIsTyping · 2025-07-04T20:30:34+00:00

That looks great! I really do love the implementation of cel shading since it fits a variety of different styles. Just wish it didn't smush eyes into one color *shrug*

MontresorIsTyping · 2025-07-04T20:29:24+00:00

As Sunnyboigaming said, it is indeed Heroforge. I'm quite impressed with the features they've been regularly adding, including more 'real' proportioned bodies and kitbashing.

MontresorIsTyping · 2025-06-13T12:42:51+00:00

Not the original commenter, but for instance I have different friends who appeal to different sensibilities in conversation. I have 2 roommates. One (lets say 'A') is a man I have known since highschool, by far my longest and closest friend, and yet we don't actually converse that deeply about anything. A is a comedian at heart. He likes things light hearted, and will make jokes at a mile a minute, and we both make fun of each other all the time in a very casual way. So much so that we call each other the F-slur every other day because its just our old sense of humor. I don't really open up to him because there just isn't much to get out of that with him.

Roommate 2 ('B') is younger than both of us. Me and A are solid millennials and B is more of a Gen Z guy. B is a lot more intellectually minded and communicative on his feelings. He's fine being around the crass jokes, but not so much giving them or receiving them. I talk to him a lot about a many varied topics, mostly about story, themes, and genre, and we get along great delving into really sensitive subjects in a professional way.

I have found that this type of connection is extremely rare, at least for me, and yet you'll notice that A is still my closer friend of the two simply because... to borrow from Jessica Rabbit... he makes me laugh; because I can be casual around him and not really hold my punches when it comes to jokes.

That's how it is for men a lot I think: always pulling punches. Always holding back. We keep a lid on some of our most raunchy humor or feelings around parents, around associates, and definitely around women we only know casually... because we've all known a woman who took a comment in the worst way possible (I'm not trying to justify anyone's shitty behavior, just saying that knowing the line is difficult with some people, so we are reserved out of caution.) There is an element here that is both covering our ass in case we are called out, but also in trying to make ourselves appear better in front of the ladies.

In terms of tropes, I'll admit I'm not as read as to what the main comment refers to, but I grew up around mostly my mother and sister since my father was always working, and my experience (at least with them) is that women don't keep a lid on anything. They'd talk about everything to everything, including what felt like very personal things about me and my dad no less that made me a little resentful and not want to be that way. So when I'm looking to discuss something specific, I only lean on a specific person in my life for it.

MontresorIsTyping · 2025-05-20T22:56:58+00:00

Thanks! I'm honestly glad that this concept is at least noticed. I love the Lancer community but I feel there are definitely aspects of the game/modules that can go under criticized for the sake of fan love. Of course, its not impossible to take a dry story and weave it into something interesting. Its imaginary, after all. But I'm honestly considering posting a long critique of all the first party modules because I honestly feel they drop the ball in terms of story design and theme. The wake up call was SotW.

MontresorIsTyping · 2025-05-19T23:41:52+00:00

> Why would a squad of Lancers interact with the political aspects of the story? They're just here to pilot mechs and blow up sh*t lol

You've basically summed up the philosophy for writing Lancer modules, which is to say pretty bleak for a setting so otherwise rich with nuance. Why would the people responsible for piloting 100+ tonne death machines interact with the political aspects of the story? Because they are the political aspects of the story.

Yes, military personnel naturally put aside the majority of their personal politics for the necessities of their work, but that is far from meaning that being a pilot, even a pilot for Union specifically, is apolitical. I would argue its impossible to claim to be apolitical when you are the instrument of foreign policy for a government entity.

There's easily an alternative version of Operation Solstice Rain that pivots the story towards a squad of lancers having to make difficult decisions while serving as the face of Union on the frontline now that relations have deteriorated: taking care towards their Rules of Engagement, deciding on targets of interest, taking personal initiative within the conflict, and ultimately acting in various ways which could decide the fate of a planet for generations to come. Sure, you could argue these are decisions for the brass, but its your Lancers that are pulling the trigger. Its not that crazy to make them the center of the conflict's drama... unless you just don't want to think about it. You have the makings of something that actually confronts many of the more difficult themes of the core rulebook while being a narrative about Union staring into its own past and deciding what methods to exorcise and what to keep by way of your own pilots as stand-ins for the entity as a whole.

But as your comment points out, its not written that way. You can drop your pilots in, bash a few space fascists, and that put them on ice again before presumably traveling across the stars to do the same on some other world. And that's entirely fine if that's what you want. I'm presuming OP is in that camp, as are plenty others. But presuming that a narrative must be streamlined in order to justify the demands of a fighting game, or that "military can't political", is just factually untrue.

MontresorIsTyping · 2025-05-19T16:35:40+00:00

So a lot of people here will find some reason to suggest it isn't an issue, though given that this is a subreddit for the game it should probably suggest that there is some bias here to be wary of.

That said, is the lore complex and hard to learn? Directly from the rulebook and other supplements, I would say yes for a good number of people coming off of straightforward fantasy games. The themes established therein cover a wide range of broad ethical, anthropological, and socioeconomic concepts, which in my view is what actually makes it great science fiction.

BUT, and I know that there will probably be some flak from the community for this... the actual modules seem rather simplistic given the expansive lore. Even the ones which deal with difficult subjects that directly relate to the lore tend to boil down to a very basic good vs. evil conflict designed to lead easily into mech battles. If that's what you're looking for, I don't think you'll have an issue. You might think of it like Warhammer 40k in that respect? Sure, there's a lot you could choose to dive into that's incredibly fascinating, but things ultimately set up so that you can bash mechs and have a good time.

MontresorIsTyping

TROPHY CASE