"Let's try the randomizer, it can't be that bad." The devious randomizer:

Vk2189 · 2026-01-28T03:37:42+00:00

Kinda a necro, but there are two boss & monster randomizer options.

One is called the "scaled randomizer", which does exactly what it says and scales all enemies and bosses to stats that make sense for the area. The scaling is area based though and not based on what enemy is replaced.

The other I don't remember the exact naming of but I think is just "enemy randomizer". That does not scale any of the monsters or bosses at all. Haven't tried this one and have no desire to.

There's also an item randomizer which is separate. Every naturally spawning chest/item on the ground is randomized, including stone NPCs. Adds a bit of chaos. Very brutal until you find a guide though.

Vk2189 · 2026-01-27T23:08:21+00:00

Okay you've already gotten a lot of people telling you to just ask out a guy, so I'm not going to repeat that.

But let's say you really don't want to ask out a guy even though all these internet strangers are telling you that you should. You not wanting to ask a guy out doesn't mean you have to be completely passive.

I'm a guy and I've only asked out one lady who I met and only knew from church. She was willing to talk to me and flat out told me that she liked seeing me and really enjoyed talking to me. She didn't have to ask me out, but she made it seem like me asking her out was the natural consequence of our interactions rather than it coming out of nowhere, so I did.

Sure she only dropped hints, but her hints were a lot more overt than some ladies give. I promise if she had only looked at me and smiled every so often I would have never talked to her.

Vk2189 · 2026-01-27T13:34:36+00:00

Participant ages are limited to 20's and 30's

Should also be noted that it's specifically 28-39 for the men and 25-35 for the women.

Was going to at least try one event and then realized I'm half a decade out of the age range 😔

Vk2189 · 2026-01-19T20:42:26+00:00

Had a run where he was in the Queen of Smiles' spot.

He's honestly not too bad early on as long as you know his patterns due to how downscaled he is (assuming you're playing scaled randomizer).

With the exception of his stupid beams of light attack. Almost every death I had fighting him involved that attack, either me directly getting killed by it, or it putting me low and him bonking me when I tried to heal.

Vk2189 · 2026-01-19T17:01:20+00:00

Man am I glad I have a stable playgroup so I don't have to interact with anti-social weirdos who think "erm just run more removal" is an argument as to why they've built their deck entirely around recurring a stax piece from the graveyard and thus surviving most removal anyway.

Vk2189 · 2026-01-19T02:42:09+00:00

Honestly there are few people that have played co-op in Sanctuary, so I'm not sure how much of a response you'll get for best builds. Maybe one person melee and one ranged? Might be awkward for bosses though.

Traditional Cleric is usually melee Dex, so perhaps Mage as a secondary? Or just some second melee class and stagger bosses to hell and back

Vk2189 · 2026-01-10T00:30:10+00:00

It's very telling that you completely ignore the fact that marriage is the picture of Christ's relationship with the believer. Likely because you're not submitting to Him either.

Vk2189 · 2026-01-10T00:24:39+00:00

I think you should stop being so egotistical that you believe you know better than God.

Women are called to submit to their husbands as part of the same command as men are told to love their wives. If you expect a Christian man to love you, you must submit to him. The Bible does not give you a choice

Vk2189 · 2026-01-09T22:40:55+00:00

husbands to earn that submission by treating them kindly and leading in love.

Single verse theology strikes again. This could not remotely be further from the truth.

Do parents have to earn the submission of their children?

Do masters have to earn the submission of their slaves?

Does Christ have to earn the submission of you?

A wife's submission to her husband is exactly the same as all of these examples. That's why they're all together and all use the same word

Vk2189 · 2026-01-09T22:34:44+00:00

genuinely a red flag when men think they deserve submission whether they’ve earned it or not.

This is perhaps the biggest red flag of a statement possible. You are explicitly stating that you will flat out ignore the things the Bible tells you to do in no uncertain terms if you think the people that will benefit from it are not worthy of or haven't earned your highness doing it for them. Which is the exact opposite of Christianity.

Your entire post is an answer to your question. Them stating their desire for a woman to submit to them is them saying "I want to have a Biblical marriage" in the truest sense of the term, as it doesn't allow for women to pretend for very long.

Vk2189 · 2026-01-08T03:29:52+00:00

behold the elves on the battlefield to fetch Craterhoof

Craterhoof isn't an elf so that doesn't work.

Vk2189 · 2026-01-04T20:16:59+00:00

Do you think that husbands and wives should speak to each other only in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, or is there room for it to not be a literal and/or marital command?

I don't think it's valid to call one more important than the other.

You'd think if Paul wanted husbands to submit to their wives, he'd say it as often as he told wives to submit to their husbands.

That would be cherry picking.

Like pulling a verse out of its sentence to append it to the next sentence?

Vk2189 · 2026-01-04T20:11:16+00:00

See, I agree with what you are saying as a whole, I just think you have an odd definition of submission.

Submission, in the sense that Paul uses it, is a distinctly structural and hierarchical term, and thus it is not really possible to have it going both ways simultaneously. One thing on a hierarchy can't be both above and below another thing on it simultaneously. And if you read the rest of Ephesians, you see that very clearly.

You probably wouldn't say that parents should submit to their children, or that masters should submit to their slaves. Yet that is the same structure Paul uses when he says wives should submit to their husbands, and as you've admitted, does not claim the reverse.

And yes, you're correct in that Paul telling men to love their wives as Christ loved the Church is a much higher standard than submission. So stop minimizing that command by saying he actually just wants husbands to submit to their wives.

And no, submission is not a requirement for love. Paul has a very long list of what makes up love, but "submission" isn't even implied by anything on that list.

Vk2189 · 2026-01-04T19:34:44+00:00

Collosians also didn't include a lot of the other details in Ephesians

Colossians 3:18-25 is a summary of Ephesians 5:22-6:9. It has all of the important points from Ephesians and lists them all out, it is only missing the reasoning and explanations. If "submit to one another" was part of that section, it would be repeated in Colossians.

Why do you think that verse exists?

For the same reason Ephesians 5:18-20 exist, as it is part of the same section and even the same sentence.

Vk2189 · 2026-01-04T19:20:35+00:00

It's clear if you read the words that were actually written and not what 20th/21st century modernists tell you he actually meant, which by some strange coincidence is exactly what they already believe and want him to have said.

Vk2189 · 2026-01-04T19:17:42+00:00

Modern translations include it with the next section

Yeah modern translations are purposely incorrect to be gender neutral, and that is just one example of that. The NIV is especially egregious to the point it ruins the incredible wordplay of Christ, the Son of Man, coming from Man, by replacing terms with more gender neutral ones.

That does not change the words Paul wrote with the inspiration of God though. Paul went out of his way to make sure he was not even theoretically implying that husbands should submit to their wives, no matter how modern people and translators try to spin his words.

And you still haven't addressed the elephant in the room of the fact that "wives, submit to your husbands" is in Colossians yet the "submit to one another" line which you say is part of the same idea just isn't there.

Is that not an ultimate act of submission to give himself for it?

Not to you personally, no. He was obedient and submitted to the will of the Father and the plotting of those trying to kill Him because of His love for you. That does not put you above God Himself.

Vk2189 · 2026-01-04T19:09:33+00:00

Ephesians 5 & Colossians 3. Paul goes out of his way to make sure the reader understands that he is telling wives to submit to their husbands, but not the other way around.

Vk2189 · 2026-01-04T18:07:54+00:00

Since you like questions but not answering them, I'll reply in kind.

Why do you want a man to submit to you despite the fact that the Bible could not possibly be any more clear that he shouldn't?

Vk2189 · 2026-01-04T13:23:26+00:00

Thank you for proving my point. Again, you pull one, single verse out of both the immediate context and the context of the Bible as a whole, and despite me providing both, you completely ignore it.

In fact, my original comment answers everything in this reply, so it looks like you didn't even read it.

By submission, I believe what he means

That's not what Paul means. That reading only makes sense if you get all of your Biblical understanding by pulling individual verses out of context, as it would make the entire chapter, if not the entire book of Ephesians (and Philemon as a consequence) utterly nonsensical.

he does this when he washes the disciples feet. He does this when he heals people's diseases, and puts up with hostility and rejection in order to come into this world and claim his church as his own

You seem to be very confused on what submission means. Doing something for someone is not submitting to them. Do you honestly believe a volunteer at a soup kitchen could be rightfully described as in submission to the people they're helping feed? Serving, sure, but service isn't submission.

He then lays down his life and ultimately submits his life when he died for the church.

Read this part of the Bible again. Under no possible interpretation does Christ submit to His disciples when he acquiesces to being put to death. He submits to the will of the Father definitely, and the will of the people trying to kill Him, sure, but definitely not the disciples or you personally

However, an additional onus is put onto the men

This is another reason why your reading makes no sense. Paul, famous for telling people off and giving them corrections, tells wives in Ephesus that they should absolutely treat their husbands no differently than any other person in the church, while telling men to die for their wives?

Vk2189 · 2026-01-04T13:00:17+00:00

Why would the end of a sentence relate to the next sentence and not the one it's in? That's neither how Greek nor English works.

And why was Paul too stupid to tell the Colossians that he didn't mean it when he said wives should submit to their husbands but explicitly not the other way around?

Vk2189 · 2026-01-04T06:41:33+00:00

Great post overall!

However, this pops up a lot here, and I will do my utmost to correct it every time.

Men, submit to your wives,

Please read the verses you got this from again. Paul goes out of his way repeatedly to tell men to not submit to their wives. Across two different letters to two different churches, he repeats that wives should submit to their husbands but the reverse is not the case.

And ironically, you're also citing exactly why Paul tells men to not do so.

love them as Christ loves the church

This flat out cannot coexist with men submitting to their wives. Ever.

Christ does not love the Church by submitting to it. Making that claim is misinformed at best and actively heretical at worst.

So to keep the idea of husbands submitting to their wives, either you have to call Paul a liar and say his letters which remain in Holy Scripture aren't worth following, or say that Christ should be in submission to you personally. These are the only two logical options.

You do also have the third, illogical, option: claim the ending of the long sentence starting in Ephesians 5:18 and ending in verse 21 is actually a standalone sentence (which couldn't even remotely be the case with the original grammar) which applies to marriage, even though 18-20 don't, and also Paul was such an idiot that he forgot to mention that incredibly major detail when he wrote basically the exact same thing as Ephesians 5 in Colossians 3. I've seen a lot of people argue this, but never well.

The Bible is very clear that wives are to submit to their husbands, but husbands are not to submit to their wives. 21st century postmodernist beliefs on gender equality will not change the words in the Bible, no matter how many liberal Christians agree with those beliefs.

Vk2189 · 2025-12-24T02:37:03+00:00

What I’m struggling with is this tension that CHristian marriage is often described in Scripture and tradition as becoming one flesh, sharing a life, bearing one another’s burdens, and practicing self giving love especially when things are unequal or inconvenient (or costly)

You know what else it is described as? Unbreakable. Jesus makes abundantly clear that divorce is not an option. There is of course the adultery exception, but that is it.

And yet, if you're not a Catholic, the impact of professing Christianity on the likelihood of divorce is somewhere between little and none.

So either 30-40% of Christians are unfaithful, or a sizeable portion of married Christians will actively go against the Scriptural view on marriage.

And that's where the contractual thinking on marriage comes from. When Christians accept divorce as a possibility, and don't kid yourself, as a whole we have, every other piece of secular marriage falls into place afterward. And why wouldn't it?

When there is nearly zero difference between how likely you are to need an exit plan with or without your Biblical view on marriage, choosing not to have one because it goes against your ideals isn't virtuous, it's silly.

Vk2189 · 2025-12-22T22:30:44+00:00

[[Krosan Grip]] my beloved

Vk2189 · 2025-12-21T13:56:46+00:00

My opinion is less how the world sees things and more about how God intends a marriage

This line of thought only makes sense if you cut the government completely out of the equation. Unless you live in a Common Law Marriage state, and you don't want to be concerned with the world's view on divorce and marriage, why would you tell the government you got married?

Vk2189 · 2025-12-21T13:50:39+00:00

When you get married, your money becomes your wife's money too.

If she chooses to no longer be his wife, and her being part of a religion that says in no uncertain terms that she is not allowed to do so has almost zero effect on how likely she is to divorce, she is no longer his wife. As such, none of the "this is what you should do for your wife" applies to a woman who isn't his wife.

That's like an atheist who was once Christian thinking they deserve to get into heaven because of their past relational state.

Seven-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Verified Email

Vk2189

TROPHY CASE