Thursday, December 31, 2020

NYE (2020) Frostgrave

A game of Frostgrave (1st edition) played on New Year’s Eve 2020, between me and my partner (E).

E had a Witch and I had an Illusionist. Both warbands consisted of an apprentice, crossbow, two archers, and three thugs. These were slightly smaller than usual, but I wanted to keep things fairly simple. In hindsight, perhaps we should have changed the wizard and apprentice’s activation ability to two soldiers.

I chose a full complement of spells for each of us, as follows:

E

Me

Witch: Animal Companion (8)

Illusionist: Teleport (10)

Witch: Familiar (8)

Illusionist: Glow (10)

Witch: Poison Dart (10)

Illusionist: Monstrous form (8)

Enchanter: Telekinesis (10)

Soothsayer: Reveal secret (14)

Necromancer: Raise zombie (10)

Sigilist: Push (10)

Summoner: Leap (10)

Thaumaturge: Heal (10)

Thaumaturge: Heal (12)

Witch: Familiar (12)

Illusionist: Fool’s gold (12)

Necromancer: Raise zombie (12)

 

I deliberately went a bit heavy on Out Of Game spells. To be honest, I like this for those with higher casting numbers anyway, especially as there’s no possibility (in a one-off game) to improve them, as you can in a campaign. In this case though, I was also mindful of keeping things simpler during the actual game.

We didn’t have that much success with our pre-game spells. Both wizards successfully raised a zombie, my apprentice summoned a familiar, and E’s managed an animal companion – we used a giant goose model, counting as a bear.

Set-up

We weren’t playing a scenario, just a standard ‘treasure grab’.

The table was a 2x3 rectangle with deployment along the long edges. Since this meant that we were fairly close to each other from the start, we decided to just move onto the table in the first turn. That also solved any issues regarding who was to deploy first.

Five treasures were placed: one in the centre (on the remains of a ruined tower) and another towards each corner. This normally means two relatively easy ones for each warband, with the central one likely to determine the winner.

I’ll give all descriptions from my point of view, so the treasures are referred to as far-left, near-left, central, far-right, and near right.

Turn 1

E’s wizard enters the table with a thug and two missile troops, on my right-hand side, and heads towards the far-right treasure. My own wizard enters centrally and tries, unsuccessfully, to teleport herself towards the far-left treasure. E’s apprentice and goose enter centrally and stay behind the ruined tower.

My apprentice decides to be bolder and teleports herself into contact with the far-left treasure, leaving her pretty exposed. E’s thug and zombie move to threaten her, while I have a thug run up to the near-right treasure (but can’t pick it up this turn) and my zombie close in on the near-left treasure.

Here’s the state of play at the end of the turn:

Treasures are represented by the gold discs. You can just see the thug and near-right treasure, poking out from under a bridge. You can’t really see the far-left treasure but again it’s under a bridge, just above the archway on the left-hand side of the picture. You might just be able to see my apprentice’s wand sticking out from under the bridge.

Turn 2

I need to protect my apprentice, so she can grab the treasure and get out alive. My archer shoots and kills E’s zombie. That’s first blood to me (though, of course, the zombie was already dead). My wizard then casts push at her thug, successfully pushing the thug, but not very usefully as the thug hit an obstruction and wasn’t really any further away as a result.

E’s thug grabs the far-right treasure, while her archer and crossbow both shoot at my archer, but both miss.

My apprentice picks up the far-left treasure and starts retreating. I temporarily forgot about the halved movement, so initially thought she could get back through the archway, which would have allowed her to retreat off the left-side of the table behind a wall. I had to go back and correct this shortly after!

E’s apprentice climbs the central tower and moves into contact with the central treasure (but can’t pick it up yet).

In the soldier phase, I made another mistake. I had my left-hand archer shoot E’s thug for 7 damage, before realising he’d already activated in the wizard phase (he was the one who killed the zombie), so I had to do another frustrating take-back. However, this was more than compensated for when my crossbowman shot and killed E’s apprentice, who had been left dangerously exposed. My two thugs then climbed onto the tower, one of them into contact with the central treasure.

Turn 3

E’s wizard hits the thug in contact with the central treasure with a poison dart, reducing him to one activation per turn (ensuring he won’t be going anywhere quickly with that treasure).

My wizard casts push against her goose, then my apprentice teleports back towards my own board edge (taking one damage from empowerment in the process, but well worth it to get to a much safer position with the far-left treasure).

E’s archer and thug climb some ruins and start heading across one of the two bridges leading to the central tower (from my left-hand side). On my right, her archer one-shot kills my archer (with a natural roll of 20), while her crossbow does six damage to the poisoned thug, who is now looking in a bit of trouble.

I decide to use the poisoned and wounded thug as a sacrificial roadblock, putting him at the near-end of the bridge in front of E’s own thug, while my other thug picks up the central treasure.

Turn 4

E’s wizard climbs onto the other of the bridges to the central tower and takes three damage to cast another poison dart at the thug now in possession of the central treasure, but rolls a 2 and misses.

I still need to do something about the two of her soldiers on the bridge, but thankfully they’re exposed. My wizard casts push against the archer, taking one damage herself from empowerment but leaving him facing a 6” drop. My crossbow takes a shot at E’s thug but, despite rolling an 18, misses. My apprentice then pushes the thug 13”, for a 7” drop.

In the soldier phase, E’s thug manages to take the far-right treasure off the board, making her the first to secure a treasure token (albeit that I’m in possession of the other four). Her goose then charges up the bridge that I’d just cleared and kills my sacrificial thug.

My zombie carries the near-left treasure off the board, while my thug does likewise with the near-right one. That’s now two secured for me. The thug in possession of the central treasure moves to the near edge of the tower, drops down (only a 2” fall), and starts the slow journey back towards my board edge.

(No end of turn photo this time.)

Turn 5

E’s wizard drops down from the bridge and this time succeeds in hitting the thug carrying the central treasure with a poison dart. I realise that drastic action is going to be needed here, if I’m to secure that treasure. My wizard advances herself in front of the thug and tries to push him towards my board edge, only to roll a 2. I decide to take a big risk and empower it with eight health. Thankfully, the spell does at least work, and gets him up to my board edge. It has, however, left my wizard rather vulnerable, with E’s forces closing in from each side, especially when E’s archer proceeds to finish off my crossbowman allowing the goose to charge into contact with my wizard.

Turn 6

I win priority, so my archer shoots E’s crossbow-woman, doing 9 damage – not quite enough. My wizard is locked in combat with the goose, but elects not to fight as she’s more likely to lose. (Is this a beardy move? I know other games allow the option of not fighting – we think of it as simply taking evasive action or ‘fighting’ defensively.)

Her wizard then poison darts my archer, but that’s the last meaningful action of the game before my apprentice simply walks off the table, with the last treasure, thereby ending the game immediately and extracting my wizard from a potentially tricky situation. (Again, I wonder whether this is exploiting the rules in a way, but that’s what happens when the last treasure’s taken…)

Post-game

A 4-1 victory to me. We didn’t bother rolling for the treasures, since this isn’t a campaign, but we did roll for injuries anyway. My thug made a full recovery, but the crossbow was badly wounded (miss a game) while my archer was dead. I’d probably have been able to replace the losses with the treasure gained, though it would have put a dent in my winnings. As for E, she’d only lost her apprentice (and the zombie), but she rolled a full recovery, so her one treasure would have been pure profit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thursday, December 24, 2020

Publication: A Sufficiency Threshold is Not a Harm Principle (Bioethics)

 My latest publication has just been assigned to the January 2021 issue of Bioethics. My paper is open access, so available to everyone.


Here's a word cloud summary:


(Generated by https://www.wordclouds.com/).


And here's the more traditional abstract:

Douglas Diekema influentially argues that interference with parental decisions is not in fact guided by the child’s best interests, but rather by a more permissive standard, which he calls the harm principle. This article first seeks to clarify this alternative position and defend it against certain existing criticisms, before offering a new criticism and alternative. This ‘harm principle’ has been criticized for (i) lack of adequate moral grounding, and (ii) being as indeterminate as the best interest standard that it seeks to replace. I argue that these are not serious problems. I take Diekema’s negative point to be right—our actual standard for intervention is not literally the best interests of the child—but I disagree with his proposed replacement. First, Diekema’s proposed harm threshold should be more carefully distinguished from Mill’s harm principle. Second, there is no reason to assume that the standard for permissible intervention coincides with the threshold for harm (or serious harm). Thus, I propose that the best alternative to the best interests standard is not a harm principle, but rather a sufficiency threshold between adequate (or ‘good enough’) and inadequate (or ‘substandard’) parenting.

Tuesday, December 08, 2020

A Slight Change of Emphasis...

 This blog has evolved a lot since I started it way back in 2005. I posted a lot more in those early years, from about 2005-2008 and much more sporadically since 2012 (in 2016, I only managed 11 posts all year, which is less than one a month). It's picked up a bit this year, probably due to being on lockdown.

 

I had considered giving the blog up entirely, but I find this a useful repository for things like news stories that I may want to come back to later, so my present thought is that it's still worth keeping, even if I'm mostly just talking to myself. However, to keep regular content, I need things to post.

 

With that in mind, I've decided to diversify my posts and (as of last month) start including a couple of things that have been part of my life for a while, but that I've hitherto kept off this blog:


1. Photography. I'm not a great photographer by any stretch of the imagination. (Nor do I have a great camera, though I'm not blaming that entirely.) Nonetheless, we've been getting into local walks since lockdown began in March and I've been documenting these with photos.

 

I'm not going to go back in time and post many from earlier in the year, but expect to see periodic photography posts in future. Some of these I may even use for teaching. (Regarding tags, I already had one for 'pictures' which were not necessarily my own. I think for now all photography will also have the 'pictures' tag, but also a new 'photos' tag, though I may re-think this in future.)


2. Gaming. (Note: this refers to board or table-top wargames; not computer/video games.) I've generally kept my wargaming hobby off the blog, because I also use the blog for professional purposes. However, I've decided that there's no need to separate the personal and professional, given that I've already used the blog for all kinds of other personal interests, such as football and music. So, expect to see the occasional post either about building/painting miniatures, collecting, or gaming with them, such as this Frostgrave battle report from last month.


I don't expect either of these to amount to more than a post or two per month, and I'm not going to stop posting the other things that I have been posting, but (given that my recent record is normally only a post or two a month anyway) this may amount to a bit of a change in focus.

 

As ever, I don't expect anyone who stumbles across this blog to share all of my interests. So, if anyone else is actually reading this, feel free to pick out the bits that interest you. Perhaps these new additions will actually find me some new readers, who may want to ignore all that academic philosophy and political comment...

Friday, November 27, 2020

Organ Donation Change

I haven't caught a bus now in over eight months, due to the ongoing pandemic, but the other day I saw one of these posters at a bus stop and wanted a picture for my lecture on organ donation (as part of my ethics of public policy).

 

This isn't actually the one I saw originally. I didn't have my camera on me then, so I went out specially to get a photo today and it had gone. Thankfully, I decided to walk along to the next stop on the route and found what I was looking for there.

I previously blogged quite a bit about organ donation here, as part of a project that I was running in Stirling. I don't know whether my work had any impact on the recent changes - probably not demonstrable impact anyway - but I'm glad to see this change at last.


Wednesday, November 25, 2020

Boris Johnson on lockdown and freedom

An interesting section of Hansard (22nd September 2020 - vol. 680, column 814) that was brought to my attention today:


I thank the Prime Minister for his statement. He is right to say that it is the co-operation and good sense of the British public that has seen the spread of this difficult outbreak curtailed. My constituents will continue to do exactly what is required of them, but the truth is that Cornwall has a very low rate of covid-19, and that has been the case throughout. What message of hope can the Prime Minister give to teenagers going to schools and colleges who are being asked to wear face masks when not in class, to churchgoers who have been blocked from freedom of worship, and to businesses that have yet to open and are continually frustrated from doing so?

Churchgoers will continue to have freedom of worship under the proposals. We want life, as far as we possibly we can, to keep going as normally as possible. We want the economy to keep moving. The best hope I can offer my hon. Friend’s constituents, for whom he fights so valiantly, is that we get this virus back under control, take the country forward and keep the economy moving. That is the best prospect for our country.

Does the Prime Minister think that the reason Germany and Italy have far lower covid rates than us, with life continuing more or less normally, might be that they have locally and publicly run test and trace services that actually work?

No, I don’t, and I think the continual attacks on local test and trace and what NHS Test and Trace has done are undermining and unnecessary. Actually, there is an important difference between our country and many other countries around the world: our country is a freedom-loving country. If we look at the history of this country over the past 300 years, virtually every advance, from free speech to democracy, has come from this country. It is very difficult to ask the British population uniformly to obey guidelines in the way that is necessary. What we are saying today is that collectively—I am answering the right hon. Gentleman’s ​question directly—the way to do that is for us all to follow the guidelines, which we will strictly enforce, and get the R down. That is the way forward.


This semester, I've been teaching freedom (as part of our introduction to political theory module) and will be teaching about pandemic responses (as part of my ethics of public policy module). This exchange is relevant to both.

Tuesday, November 24, 2020

Winter is Coming...

 I wouldn't say I'm a big fan of autumn in general, but the colourful trees do look nice.


The woods are getting pretty muddy now though, so - along with the shorter days - I guess we won't get as many of these walks in as we have been over the summer.

 

Monday, November 16, 2020

Did she die in vain?

 Via a friend in Nottingham, I see this story of a bookshop that's resisting the lockdown, citing Article 61 of the Magna Carta.


For the record, it seems this doesn't justify a general right to dissent - certainly not for everyone and not one that's still in force today either.


Still, I've been discussing lockdown protests with some of my students, so this is another nice example for the file.