Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Speculation, discoveries, complaints, accusations, praise, and all other Erfworld discussion.

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby Lilwik » Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:49 am

Shai_hulud wrote:Except if you're Croatian?
No, surely Goodminton must have continued to exist until Wanda turned to Haffaton. If the death of Banhammer would have made Jillian the ruler of Faq with no cities and no other units, no matter how Banhammer died, then surely Wanda must have been ruler of Goodminton even without cities.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby wih » Mon Mar 10, 2014 6:09 am

Lilwik wrote:
Shai_hulud wrote:Except if you're Croatian?
No, surely Goodminton must have continued to exist until Wanda turned to Haffaton. If the death of Banhammer would have made Jillian the ruler of Faq with no cities and no other units, no matter how Banhammer died, then surely Wanda must have been ruler of Goodminton even without cities.


I'd be in agreement with this. Whether Wanda retained her status in relation to Goodminton might be related to the thoughts on if Ansom kept his Heir status when decrypted...though I find it less likely than that.
wih
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 5:07 am

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby drachefly » Thu Mar 13, 2014 1:09 pm

What if being an overlord increases your upkeep, but allows greater flexibility for managing units?

When Banhammer lost his treasury, he kept his overlord status because he could afford it; but Jillian (eventually) demoted herself to regular warlord to save on upkeep.
User avatar
drachefly
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 1648
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:36 pm

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby Lilwik » Thu Mar 13, 2014 5:56 pm

drachefly wrote:When Banhammer lost his treasury, he kept his overlord status because he could afford it; but Jillian (eventually) demoted herself to regular warlord to save on upkeep.
There might be something like that going on, but Jillian still needed to have a side and be the ruler of that side in some technical sense. Maybe she could have just been a potential ruler without being an actual ruler, if a demotion like that is even possible. The reason is that when Faq captured Efbaum Banhammer was the ruler as Faq suddenly became a Capital Side again, but what would have happened if he had stopped being the ruler before capturing Efbaum? There would need to be some mechanism for deciding which of the commanders in the city got to be the ruler. Faq still being a side and Banhammer still being its ruler takes care of that nicely. Perhaps Banhammer was technically a barbarian chief rather than a ruler.

Also, there was Wanda's brief time as a barbarian after the fall of Goodminton. She had a whole stack of units, including at least one warlord, but she was clearly the ruler of that stack, and surely all barbarians need some sort of command structure when they want to work together. It would seem to be contrary to the spirit of Erfworld to have two enemy groups of barbarians doing actual real-time war because they both move in the same turn, so surely barbarians can create barbarians sides when they want to work together, and especially when they want to capture a capital city. Even when it's just Jillian and her gwiffons, those gwiffons are still technically units and surely she is technically some sort of ruler over them.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby drachefly » Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:02 pm

Nothing you said disagrees with what I said. I just said that being an overlord opens up more options. Like, any head-of-side has a 'unit list' interface and any commander has a purse, but what makes a balance sheet possible is being an overlord.
User avatar
drachefly
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 1648
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:36 pm

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby Zippy the Squirrel » Sat Mar 15, 2014 2:39 pm

The neutral v. barbarian point brings up a question to me.

Cities that no longer belong to a side have all its units inside freeze in time until an enemy enters it, right?

But there exist in the erfworld barbarian warlords who aren't frozen, can move around, and even capture cities to form sides.

What happens to warlords who are trapped in cities when their side ends? Why can't they decide to form a side, or have it be formed by default, instead of being frozen?

Wait, it just occurred to me that maybe barbarian warlords are always Ruler or Ruler-born. Maybe that's it.


EDIT: Perhaps barbarianism is tied into Tribes somehow. Maybe a Tribe is all encompassing, and a side without cities is still bound to the Tribe in some way.
Image
User avatar
Zippy the Squirrel
Pins + Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Pins + Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 9:53 am

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby Godzfirefly » Sat Mar 15, 2014 3:10 pm

Zippy the Squirrel wrote:Cities that no longer belong to a side have all its units inside freeze in time until an enemy enters it, right?


What makes you say that?
Godzfirefly
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 12:51 am

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby Zippy the Squirrel » Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:14 pm

Uhhh... Book 1, somewhere. Gimme a sec, I'll go find it.

Edit: Found it.
http://www.erfworld.com/book-1-archive/?px=%2F098b.jpg

edit2: Oop, beaten to it anyway.
Last edited by Zippy the Squirrel on Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Image
User avatar
Zippy the Squirrel
Pins + Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Pins + Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 9:53 am

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby Shai_hulud » Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:20 pm

So what happens if Stanley is croaked? He has no heir, so our side ends. Field units disband, and this city becomes "neutral" which is not as nice as it sounds. Units here freeze in time. We can do nothing until attacked. Ansom takes a few turns to get his ducks aligned and then curb stomps us.
From here.
Shai_hulud
Pins Supporter!
Pins Supporter!
 
Posts: 700
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2012 11:57 pm

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby Lilwik » Sat Mar 15, 2014 6:07 pm

Zippy the Squirrel wrote:Wait, it just occurred to me that maybe barbarian warlords are always Ruler or Ruler-born.
Un-Tommy was a warlord in Wanda's stack when she became a barbarian. It seems that you don't need to be a ruler yourself so long as you have a side. Becoming the ruler of a new side isn't hard, since it seems Parson could have done it himself in B2P108, but having a side already must be critical to the process. Before your side ends, while your ruler is being killed, you can still split off your own side, even if it's not your turn, but as soon as he dies you become neutral which means you can no longer do anything.

I wonder about the process of splitting off a new side. It seems that any commander alone in the field can do it at any time, but a lone unit would be in a pretty bad situation. If you do it while in a stack then surely you would instantly be seen as an enemy and your stack would kill you. It seems that making a new side would be a very delicate process where you either order each of your units to turn barbarian and then turn to your new side after you turn barbarian last, or else you turn barbarian first after giving all of your units strict orders to turn to your new side rather than killing you. Either way you lose control as soon as the process starts because it's too late to give orders once you're not on the same side as the units you're trying to take with you. I guess it is very dangerous to attempt without the help of your ruler.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby Taikei no Yuurei » Sun Mar 16, 2014 4:14 pm

Out of curiosity, is there anything in all the books that says 'barbarian' means anything besides 'a side without cities'? Is there anything that states there are any particular mechanics behind barbarians? So far as I can remember there hasn't been anything to suggest it is anything other than a term that people use, as opposed to a mechanically enforced state. Kind of like how Homekey has a 'Cheif' Steward, but that doesn't give her any special powers. Similarly the only special power a Chief Caster seems to get is that they can give orders to other casters, and seems to be more of a term as opposed to anything mechanical.

If so, there isn't really any reason for people to call FAQ when it had no cities anything but FAQ, unless they purposefully want to point out the fact that they have no cities. Now, it might be true that mechanically they don't have a side name (which is why Jillian could rename it when she reformed it), but the world is more than simple mechanics, and if a barbarian wants to be called something particular, they can be called that. I'm not even sure if a side's name is mechanical in any way. Is there anything preventing a side from changing its name? Is there any way to figure out a side's name other than someone telling you? I suppose libraries might have some mechanical relationship to a side's name since they automagically record and print books, but other than that?
Taikei no Yuurei
Erfabet Supporter!
Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 683
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby Godzfirefly » Sun Mar 16, 2014 4:40 pm

Is there anything specific that says the word "barbarian" is mechanically different than "neutral"? Probably not. But, in Erfworld, it seems like most terms that are commonly used do have a mechanical purpose. It is a world built on mechanics, in a lot of ways.

Even your example of the word "Chief" seems to have a mechanical benefit of placing you higher in the hierarchy for purposes of Duty, which is a mechanical concept in Erf.

As for if you can figure out a side's name without being told, I think there was a suggestion that it could be seen in the same way Erfworlders could see stats. It's part of the unit's signamancy, after all.
Godzfirefly
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 12:51 am

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby Lilwik » Sun Mar 16, 2014 7:18 pm

Godzfirefly wrote:Is there anything specific that says the word "barbarian" is mechanically different than "neutral"? Probably not.
Neutrals are frozen in time until attacked, and they can control a capital city, which seems to be impossible for non-neutral barbarians since they would cease to be barbarians.

Godzfirefly wrote:Even your example of the word "Chief" seems to have a mechanical benefit of placing you higher in the hierarchy for purposes of Duty, which is a mechanical concept in Erf.
Wanda has never shown much sign of Duty to her various chief casters. As far as I've seen, Duty is strictly about doing what is best for your side, or perhaps your ruler. I'm not aware of anything that suggests there is a hierarchy of Duty.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby Godzfirefly » Sun Mar 16, 2014 7:25 pm

Lilwik wrote:Wanda has never shown much sign of Duty to her various chief casters. As far as I've seen, Duty is strictly about doing what is best for your side, or perhaps your ruler. I'm not aware of anything that suggests there is a hierarchy of Duty.

Wanda has shown plenty of Duty, just very little Loyalty. When Delphi told her not to talk, she was constrained to obey until the ruler told her to talk. And, she obeyed Olive's orders, too. That said, when she wasn't constrained by Duty, her Loyalty was to something other than her Chiefs, so she wasn't always acting in their best interest.
Godzfirefly
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 12:51 am

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby Lilwik » Sun Mar 16, 2014 8:05 pm

Godzfirefly wrote:Wanda has shown plenty of Duty, just very little Loyalty. When Delphi told her not to talk, she was constrained to obey until the ruler told her to talk.
That is Obedience, not Duty. Duty is what compels people to work for the ruler even when they aren't given specific orders. It is explained in B1K10. Now that I look it up, I see that chiefs actually have more Duty than lower-ranking units, so there is a mechanical change that way, though it may be simply a matter of Duty increasing whenever the ruler gives you more freedom from Obedience.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby Taikei no Yuurei » Mon Mar 17, 2014 11:10 am

Godzfirefly wrote:
As for if you can figure out a side's name without being told, I think there was a suggestion that it could be seen in the same way Erfworlders could see stats. It's part of the unit's signamancy, after all.

Except when Jillian ran into those haffton(?) units, she had to identify herself. They didn't simply know that she was from FAQ. And you are right about chief in the case of warlord and possibly caster (though that is slightly vague) but we have a chief steward now which has been basically stated as being purely decorative as opposed to mechanical. There is nothing that says the same isn't true of 'barbarian'.
Taikei no Yuurei
Erfabet Supporter!
Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 683
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby Godzfirefly » Mon Mar 17, 2014 11:18 am

Taikei no Yuurei wrote:And you are right about chief in the case of warlord and possibly caster (though that is slightly vague) but we have a chief steward now which has been basically stated as being purely decorative as opposed to mechanical.


Though the title was invented by the King and is not a position normally in a side, there's nothing saying it doesn't have a real mechanical benefit granting actual ability to order lower ranks around better. If Homekey has any units that are the equivalent of Gobwin Knob's Twolls, then I'd imagine she'd be the one they report to in the same way casters report to a chief caster and warlords report to a chief warlord.

In general, based on what we've seen, I'm not sure it's safe to assume any label (or signamancy) has no actual mechanical effect just because that effect isn't described.
Godzfirefly
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 12:51 am

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby wih » Mon Mar 17, 2014 12:11 pm

Taikei no Yuurei wrote:
Godzfirefly wrote:
As for if you can figure out a side's name without being told, I think there was a suggestion that it could be seen in the same way Erfworlders could see stats. It's part of the unit's signamancy, after all.

Except when Jillian ran into those haffton(?) units, she had to identify herself. They didn't simply know that she was from FAQ. And you are right about chief in the case of warlord and possibly caster (though that is slightly vague) but we have a chief steward now which has been basically stated as being purely decorative as opposed to mechanical. There is nothing that says the same isn't true of 'barbarian'.


They take first turn in one lot. That's mechanical.
wih
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 5:07 am

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby Taikei no Yuurei » Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:38 pm

Barbarians always have first turn? Can you site that? It sounds right but I can't pull that from anywhere. And I don't know that we've seen anything that suggests Jillian (as a barbarian) goes any sooner in the day than FAQ would have otherwise, since we don't have any sides to compare that to.

The only thing is that we know Haffaton went before FAQ in the turn order. Does that change after FAQ loses all its cities before capturing Haffaton's capital?
Taikei no Yuurei
Erfabet Supporter!
Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 683
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: Barbarian mechanics and book 0 ep. 52-64

Postby Lilwik » Mon Mar 17, 2014 5:18 pm

Taikei no Yuurei wrote:Barbarians always have first turn? Can you site that?
I'm pretty sure that it's just fannon that's perpetuated by one of the wiki's many uncited claims. Worse, I'm pretty sure that it is wrong (though I can't really prove it). Faq did take it's turn after Haffaton, which is proof enough for me that not all barbarians take their turn first, though Faq was never explicitly called barbarian. And I find it unlikely that all barbarians move in the same turn, since that would inevitably cause real-time wars which aren't supposed to exist in Erfworld.

I think the idea that barbarians always take their turn first originates in B1P144. But that page doesn't actually say that. All it says is that the barbarians in the Battle for Gobwin Knob all had their turn before Gobwin Knob.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Everything Else Erfworld

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Lipkin and 1 guest