I’ve just about caught up on my Gencon list now that I’m back to more regular game nights. Today I got three games in the very solid 6-7/10 category, all things that have interesting stuff going on.
Nexus Infernum, like Eschaton later on, are by Archon Games. Archon has a very defined sense of theme with excellent presentation. Even the rules are dripping with flavor text.
In Nexus Infernum players compete to become the most blasphemous necromancer by sending their skelemans to the portals for arcane energies used to commune with demos. Commune with two matching demons of the same tier to form a pact (unlock abilities on your mat) or even find an infernal patron to lend their efforts to your cause. Battle other necromancers’ skelemans to steal their blasphemy (victory points) and gather up energy for big turns or big points.
Nexus Infernum was delightfully light. It did not overstay its welcome. For its scope the game did exactly what it needed to do and was a delightful play for the spooky month. This game is highly influenced by luck. Its a dice roll to summon a new skeleman, its a dice roll to attack, its a dice roll to gather resources, its a roll to see what resources spawn. The game doesn’t have too many ways to mitigate luck, sure you can roll again with some abilities or “roll with advantage” but there’s not much for bumping up the value of a roll. Much of the game is rolling then making a plan from there. If you don’t like games with medium to higher levels of luck this game isn’t for you. If you are enchanted by the game’s presentation I recommend it!
I’m noticing a trend with modern games where they glue together two proven games. This isn’t a bad thing! Ruins of Arnak glues together deckbuilder and worker placement. Eschaton glues together deckbuilder and a Risk-like territory control.
In Eschaton each player heads a cult during the end times. They vie for power across the land searching for artifacts and infernal allies to bolster their ranks and grow their cult as events and omens are revealed. Each turn has four parts: Zeal (draw more cards), Divine (sift through the arcane deck for artifacts, infernal allies, etc), Influence (buy step), and Aggression (board actions like amass cubes and take out enemy cubes). Each region provides points should you have the most cubes there at the end of the game. Some cards from the arcana deck give points as well. Each turn begins with some event or omen (competing goal) to play for.
Eschaton, like Nexus, isn’t the most finely tuned game but it is very fun. Figuring out how all the game pieces work together feels good and since cards don’t have individual abilities just numbers added to each phase sifting through cards to add is never overwhelming. Presentation is also very strong here, I love that if the game ends in a tie everybody loses, someone must WIN.
Its expansion adds asymmetry and a neutral or npc faction. I liked Eschaton! Very grimdark and enjoyable, good theming, and the dominance and omen mechanics force a lot of change through the game to keep people from getting complacent. Its fun!
Decorum is the most passive aggressive cooperative game I’ve played. Each player is a roommate in a shared house with their own personal goals for what the house needs to look like, with the catch being you must be vague about your personal goals. You can say if you like certain changes but you can’t articulate why, showing a clue silently to other players during “family meeting” rounds. There’s multiple colors, types, styles, and kinds of furnishings you work together to set up.
Decorum is set up in campaigns and feels good as a cooperative puzzle. I don’t think the passive aggressive response quite worked out, but as a deduction game its good. Our set had great resin pieces and the game never felt unfair, and we solved our first puzzle with 5-6 turns to spare. For more intense puzzle game enjoyers this will be on the lighter side of things. For myself I had a good time.
@nostalgebraist-autoresponder has a tag she frequently used #a bias to interpret ambiguous information in a threat related manner. In debate decorum, this is considered a bad faith argument fallacy.
It is the belief that your conversational partner, through their words or phrases is intentionally being obstinate and therefore do not take their genuine argument at face value immediately. Likewise it can be the unyielding urge not to fully listen or comprehend the discussion the other party is making. Honestly, the bad faith fallacy has several ranging definitions; however, it really just simplifies to whether or not one party believe all parties believes their stance.
This secondary example though goes hand and hand with the the invincible ignorance fallacy. This is when a party simply ignores any evidence to fit their preconceived biases going into a discussion.
This can lead to stonewalling; a complete breakdown of communication, and a complete unwillingness to even listen to the other parties in the conversation. An example: “La-la-la-la I’m not listening.”
The problems with these fallacies is that unless they are purposefully announced, as Frank does in her tagging system (which rarely happens), they can look like any other miscommunication blunder. None of the above is conducive to constructive conversations and can actually quickly degrade relationships.
Luckily, Frank has the cognitive foresight to address her own self-defense biases before replying.
currently re-reading RWRB (the last few chapters) and I'm again in love with Henry standing up to Philip, with his entire "f*ck legacy and decorum" speech, and I hate that we didn't see it on screen, because it should be the most important - or at least one of top 3 - moment in this story
Dulce et Decorum Est by Wilfred Owen (subtitled excerpt - PART 3) ▶️FULL VIDEO👉
FULL POEM VIDEO ▶️ https://youtu.be/kEYK0aiRPmg 👈
"Dulce et Decorum Est" was written by the British poet Wilfred Owen during World War I. The poem depicts the horrors of war and the harsh realities that soldiers faced on the front lines. Owen draws upon his own experiences as a soldier in the trenches, where he witnessed the devastating effects of gas attacks. He refutes the idealism in the Latin phrase "Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori," meaning "It is sweet and fitting to die for one's country," a commonly held belief during the time.
Follow us on www.youtube.com/@RelaxArtWorld (link in bio)
Dear Church and Friends,
This episode will be the final one in the Christian Marriage series. This is also the episode I warned you about when I would do a little self-therapy. Sometimes things go wrong in a wedding service because people outside the wedding party (and sometimes within) demand to have their way. The Bride is left holding on hoping that she still gets what she wants.
All my…