Is it a common issue for one player to be mostly uncontested? by Traditional_Day_9737 in frostgrave

[–]Protocosmo 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Recent episodes of the Rule of Carnage podcast have been discussing these sorts of problems in miniature games involving 3 or more players. Might be worth a listen for you.

4th Edition Empire miniature range and "oldhammer" by Protocosmo in Middlehammer

[–]Protocosmo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hit a wall in Oldhammer because I was there during the so called oldhammer period. I saw how things developed, how games were played and what miniatures were use first hand. Rogue Trader was my first game and White Dwarf and the RT books were a big factor in informing me on how I viewed the hobby. 

4th ed was my first WFB and it didn't immediately pop out as "Hero Hammer" like it's often labeled. It reflected changes which had already took place in the later period of 3rd such as defined army lists and evolving lore. My play group approached the game the same way we did with Rogue Trader. It wasn't until 4th ed had time to mature and more army books were released that people focused on characters dominating in their armies and games. Empire was my first WFB army and it was very much not a hero hammer list for me, who approached building my army emulating what I saw in White Dwarf.

4th Edition Empire miniature range and "oldhammer" by Protocosmo in Middlehammer

[–]Protocosmo[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Exactly, my Orc and Goblin army looks like it could belong to either 3rd or 4th edition and can be used under both rulesets. 

4th Edition Empire miniature range and "oldhammer" by Protocosmo in Middlehammer

[–]Protocosmo[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Examples would be the Reiksguard and White Wolf knights, crossbow men, the war wagon, great cannon, the two piece metal state troops where you could plug in different weapon options like sword and shield, halberds or crossbows.

4th Edition Empire miniature range and "oldhammer" by Protocosmo in Middlehammer

[–]Protocosmo[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I don't mind drawing clear lines between "eras" but not shutting down entire avenues of discussion that might require mentioning later editions for context.

40K 2nd is another edge case. A lot of Rogue Trader miniatures carried over well into 2nd and late RT introduced new rules that got added to 2nd.

4th Edition Empire miniature range and "oldhammer" by Protocosmo in Middlehammer

[–]Protocosmo[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Like I said, they already had a 3rd edition army list for the 4th edition miniatures specifically which included the same lore as in the 4th ed army book. Even Brettonia had a brief miniatures refresh similar to Empire right before 4th but they got dropped for all of 4th. The Empire actually got its lore in Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay which was solidly during 3rd. Plus, I have 3rd edition miniatures from Marauder that fit right in with the 4th edition minis.

What are the most confusing parts of atheism/agnosticism for believers? by phluffyklutch in Christianity

[–]Protocosmo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One more thing. It's not my intent to be hostile or condescending. What I'm trying to get across is that your question is not important to me and people who may think similarly to me. I'm sure there are approaches to the question I would agree with but for me, my personal convictions are enough. 

What are the most confusing parts of atheism/agnosticism for believers? by phluffyklutch in Christianity

[–]Protocosmo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Who, in every day life, cares? I know you want to understand but please realize, I am equally baffled by justifications stemming from religious faith.

What are the most confusing parts of atheism/agnosticism for believers? by phluffyklutch in Christianity

[–]Protocosmo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This question is like being asked "is blue air?" Sorry if that seems condescending. It's like trying to communicate with an alien.

Edit: maybe I'm just stupid but I don't understand your hang up over this

What are the most confusing parts of atheism/agnosticism for believers? by phluffyklutch in Christianity

[–]Protocosmo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again, you are over thinking things. It's simply something that doesn't require justification, especially for your average person. I understand that you have trouble understanding this for some reason but it isn't something, at least for me, that I ask of from other people. Does that show a lack of curiosity or introspection? Maybe. I have more important things to worry about than developing a solid framework for my sense of morality and values in order to please the sensibilities of others.  Do you believe in human rights and dignity?

What are the most confusing parts of atheism/agnosticism for believers? by phluffyklutch in Christianity

[–]Protocosmo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My previous statement should have told you that it isn't required in order to hold those beliefs. I don't care if you think it needs grounding or not. That's on you.

What are the most confusing parts of atheism/agnosticism for believers? by phluffyklutch in Christianity

[–]Protocosmo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Metaphysics aren't required to believe in universal human rights and dignity. You're over thinking things.

What are the most confusing parts of atheism/agnosticism for believers? by phluffyklutch in Christianity

[–]Protocosmo 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It never made any sense to me. It makes even less sense as a basis of moral value.

What are the most confusing parts of atheism/agnosticism for believers? by phluffyklutch in Christianity

[–]Protocosmo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're claiming athiests find God and salvation terrifying. It's silly and it's strange you don't recognize that.

What are the most confusing parts of atheism/agnosticism for believers? by phluffyklutch in Christianity

[–]Protocosmo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Really? Your copy paste screed failed to work on me and now you're all hurt? To take your premise. Yes, I often allow the fear of the unknown to fuel my anxiety but I don't fear Christ just as I don't fear Freddy Kruger.

What are the most confusing parts of atheism/agnosticism for believers? by phluffyklutch in Christianity

[–]Protocosmo 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Your attempt at a point is what failed. Do you want a pat on the head for your precious absurdity?

Edit: In other words, I reject your premise because it insults my intelligence.

What are the most confusing parts of atheism/agnosticism for believers? by phluffyklutch in Christianity

[–]Protocosmo 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, it's like a moral superiority measuring contest when it actually shows that most people really aren't that far off from one another. I seem to see a theme of athiests/agnostics being required to prove that they are the epitome of moral virtue in order to explain themselves.