Happy Sunday! Another great video as ever! Watched in one sitting I might add 🙂 Mostly eating ice cream to make me feel better after a marginally rough morning, where I fear I may have screwed up the guitar exam I’ve spent the last few months preparing for in between other things!

So first off on the mind melter, just a couple of things of interest. The Culture novels (Iain M.Banks I think?) touch on the challenges of having huge star-spanning societies, incredible power, and what kind of lives you then lead. One of the interesting aspects of that is the idea of the ethics and practices that come from those ethics when the world is seen that way. In one book someone goes into hyper-sleep until statistically speaking their actions in a war would have been justified because more people were then alive than would have been had they not acted in that war.

As to the world as a simulation, there is a really interesting logic piece I read on this. So basically imagine if it was possible to build a computer that can simulate more atoms perfectly than it takes to build that computer. So if it takes say 1 billion atoms to build that computer, but it can simulate 1 trillion perfectly, then it’s definitely possible to build a computer powerful enough to simulate the entire universe perfectly inside the universe. If that is true, then in that simulation, it must hold that it is possible for the simulated universe to build a simulated computer, that can simulate it’s simulated universe. So on, and so forth it must go on, to an unlimited depth of simulations. If this were true, the odds of our world being the “top simulation” are vanishingly small, we are almost certainly living in a simulation. I believe some computer scientists at an American university were trying to build a computer to simulate atoms (which would have many useful applications) but would also help give evidence towards this debate one way or the other.

The KS pre-order question. I have no doubt that Monolith has done this with the best intentions, and have repeatedly demonstrated that they run good campaigns and work well with their communities to do right by them, so I don’t have any fear of them using this to by-pass consumer law. I don’t even think that is likely within this industry given the scale, the nature of the hobby, the nature of engagement companies have with consumers in this hobby (you aim to get life-long customers) I don’t think it’s a big risk. I do think there is a larger question to answer, and I don’t think Warren’s answer is comparing the right two things. Yes, this might be a safer bet with your credit card than a normal KS, but that isn’t the problem. The problem is it’s not a safer bet than a regular retail outlet within EU consumer law, and in the end, this is what this type of situation is more comparable to. So as I say, I think no problem with Monolith, or even wider within the hobby, but I suspect it is something legislative bodies are going to have to look at elsewhere. Because KS has always been about this balance between backer rights and campaign rights, and it tipped it away from the consumer to allow for greater risk to be taken (which benefitted everyone in the end). This could be a pathway to abuse, or perhaps not, it might be that consumer law would cover people in this case anyway, but that raises other questions because Kickstarter needs to also be a place where ideas can fail sometimes, again for everyone’s benefit. Honerous legislation might kill innovation.

Which models to use? Absolutely not a clear-cut question, but if I had to say, I’d say I’d go with the models designed for the range. That is mostly because I don’t play historical and I do love to see the theme and lore that is unique to that fantasy or sci-fi world expressed on the tabletop. That being said, as I’ve said many times before, I do love rules and lore first and foremost, and I am for sure up for purchasing rules without mini’s (I did for Malifaux for example, I did later buy mini’s for it, but I bought the rules first to have the rules and the stories). That being said, I agree with Warren that I think rules buying is much more accepted in historical, (I even said as much in my comment on last weeks XLBS), but not for the reason stated in the show. I think it really comes down to the fact that a Xmm blah-blah battle tank, is an Xmm blah-blah battle tank, whoever makes it. Not only that, a lot of historical gamers care really a lot that their tank really is as accurate as possible to the real thing, (up to a point, scale model making comments aside). So as a company getting into historical gaming, there is a real uphill battle to try and sell consumers on your new version of the Xmm blah-blah tank, when they have one they think is perfect already. Much better off to sell them some rules. Basically exactly what I said last week 🙂 Again relating to that, I’ve certainly had comments from people that they won’t even look at rules for a fantasy or sci-fi game, unless they can see the miniature range first and see if it appeals to them or not. Not saying anything is wrong with that (my wife would certainly fall into that camp!), but it’s not the first consideration for me (though it certainly is a consideration).

That all being said, I am very much in favour of letting people use whatever models they want, whichever ones they think are cool, and as long as it’s clear what is representing what, I’m easy-going, because for me fun gaming mechanics trump having the exact right miniatures. Obviously well painted on-theme mini’s are preferred, but if I held to that standard as a must, I’d never be allowed to play with my own poorly painted efforts!