William Lane

I prefer Warhammer Fantasy as a setting, and I think I remember Khorne as the big bad in Mark of Chaos and Nurgle in Vermintide 2, but mostly you get some form of chaos undivided as the main villain.

As you say Slaanesh is pointedly absent aside from in Total War: Warhammer.

Interesting, I mostly played 40K stuff as a teen in the 2000/2010s, so I remember Khorne as the big bad in Dawn of War, then Nurgle in Dawn of War 2.

I think there were bloodletters in Space Marine 1, but I haven't played 2.

Is Tzeench that common? I always remember Khorne being the default chaos villain in games, then Nurgle got more popular later

But I definitely agree with your overall point, and Orks often have their kookiness and humor potential foregrounded, while their more homicidal tendencies take a back seat

(One & Two intrinsically understand that not being able to explain why the answer to life, the universe and everything is 42 does not put them in a great position vis-a-vis the public who expect something grand and visionary)

'It is quite difficult to defend what you didn't build' is exactly why giving someone else's presentation never works as well as it should.

Explaining why an answer is right is *at least* as important as being right in the first place. Douglas Adams understood and parodied that back in the 70s.

There's a really notable distinction within the Souls Fandom between players who like the games because of the world, lore and themes, and those who like them because of the combat and boss design.

Most fans do like both, but lean towards one of the two ends of the spectrum.

I (perhaps controversially) broadly agree with this.

There's always been a disconnect in Gaming culture between those who enjoy games as primarily a narrative form vs those who enjoy games as primarily a form of play.

This is very obvious in discussions around games like Dark Souls or Morrowind.

@markpackuk.bsky.social you might enjoy this bar chart.

I've been sent this absolutely *criminal* bar chart from back down in Surrey, there's so much wrong with it I could make a list.

Interesting also that the Conservatives are putting out squeeze messaging on Reform voters.

Not gonna lie: much less exciting story than the headline made it sound

you are not prepared for the soundtrack

The parties here are different, but the overall effect is similar, and even greater in this case due to the main parties having an even looser grip on British politics than they did in 2022

The Greens aren't going anywhere

It reminds of a higher profile version of Lib Dems winning the Tiverton and Honiton by-election in 2022, in that they proved that their rise in the South wasn't a fluke, and that they had the chops to take even extremely safe Tory seats

That solidified the LDs into a serious political force again

This is an excellent and serious reponse to my earlier thread on the Greens

One thing I didn't make clear then but will now, is that that the Gorton and Denton by-election is clear proof that the Greens have 'arrived' as a major party in British politics. Whatever happens next, that isn't changing

(Also thank you for the compliment :))

In a word: Yes

It could barely cope in the 1920s when we had three major parties, now we have 5 (GB wide) and 7 (including S & W nationalists).

There are other problems, but the that's one of the biggest. We are in bloc politics territory without a bloc politics electoral system.

I think ultimately the Greens (and Lib Dems) need a credible, joined up policy agenda on the economy before they can start looking at taking the top spot from Labour.

It's not impossible that either one could do that, but I think the LDs would find it easier than the Greens.

So I do actually think the Greens can (and somewhat are) having the same trajectory as Reform.

My issue is that that's the same trajectory as the Alliance and 2000s Lib Dems, which so far hasn't proved sustainable.

Times are changing, so it might do this time.

Labour still has another 2/3 years to go on the clock, they have time to turn things around.

And that's far easier to do when you're in power vs opposition.

(No guarantee they will of course).

So I'm pretty mixed on Reform becoming the main right wing party (see below).

As to why I think the Tories are in far more trouble than Labour (even now!)

1. They're institutionally moribund in a way Labour isn't

2. They can't defend their record

3. They're not in gov, so can't change things

(There is also a parallel history here of growing Lib Dem strength in the prosperous South East from the early 1990s onwards, as those middle class liberal voters who moved from the Liberals to the Tories in the 1920s started moving back. It's an understudied but very important development)

(FWIW this is also partly why the Tories could cannibalise the LD vote in 2015)

Brexit smashed that perception, and the Tories morphed into a populist, isolationist, illiberal party that had nothing to say to the South of England beyond 'beware Jeremy Corbyn'

Once he was gone, the bottom fell out.

I've said it before, but growing up in Surrey in the 2000s meant that my perception of the Tories was as what I'd now call a 'National Liberal' party, pro-free trade, free markets and accepting the social change of modern Britain.

I never voted for Cameron, but he got what was going on there.

It is still painfully male, and it's something I notice often at policy events/networking.

Charities/NGOs are the exception, there's a lot of women in policy/public affairs roles there.

My position remains that we are seeing the British left (and British politics more broadly) enter bloc politics, which Labour remains unused to.

Barring Labour's collapse I think we will continue to see regional fragmentation of Left parties, which Labour's tactics are accelerating.

Finally I come back to base electoral principles, in that there are swathes of seats in the Midlands and North of England where neither the Greens nor Lib Dems have any viable campaign infrastructure.

Barring an absolute collapse Labour really is the only option there for the left bloc.

Admittedly the political situation is *a lot* more fractured now than it was in the 80s, but we also shouldn't forget that the Alliance got 50% of the vote in one poll in 1981.

If/when Labour change leader, that really could pull a lot of Lab/Grn (and Lab/LD) voters back.

I'm reminded of @stephenkb.bsky.social's point that the Lib Dems tend to surge around election time, and then fall away afterwards, and that the fact they haven't done so this time is encouraging for them.

Polanksi's background in the 2010s Lib Dems may end up being more relevant than expected.

I've been thinking a lot recently about David Steels' "go back to your constituencies and prepare for government" line.

Running up big voting %s and by-elections didn't work for the Alliance back in the 80s, and they were more credible as a governing force than either the Greens or 2020s Lib Dems.

I don't want to pour cold water on the hope and joy I'm seeing from Green supporters, but there is genuinely a massive difference between riding a wave of left wing anger at Labour to victory in a by-election, and replacing them as a party of government.

And UK politics has been here before.