Book 2 – Page 37

[barawn]

We didn't give Parson flak for it, because it seemed like it was the right idea. Here, I give Tramennis flak for it because, knowing what we know (that Parson expects a parley), it seems like it's going to prove disastrous rather than helpful.

Knowing what we know, not what Tramennis knows. You can't give him flak for not being psychic. Just like you can't give Parson flak for the empty-hex trap that completely failed.

I'm hoping I'm wrong, because I do like Tramennis. I hope he ends up as a good CW. However, that's got to be measured by the results he brings - not by actions that seem reasonable but end up walking right into Parson's trap.

I completely disagree here. It's possible to be an absolutely crap leader and still have fantastic results - if you've got overwhelming force and a monkey could win, your ability doesn't matter all that much. Likewise, it's possible to be an absolutely brilliant leader and fail dramatically. Book 1, page 124. We know Parson plans a trap during a parley. But a trap could have been equally set against a direct strike. Criticizing Tramennis for not being able to anticipate all of Parson's moves is a high, high bar.

[Atomic]

The more I see of Stately, the more I like him... Now, before you crucify me, I want to plead my case!

What I see in Stately is a man who had some (in my opinion, terrible) ideals and who stuck to 'em; through thick and thin. Not saying he wasn't a jerk (jerk being a very broad term to describe everything bad about him... hah) before tBfGK, or that he isn't a jerk now... But at this point in time, the king I see talking to Tramennis is grasping for straws. His mandate from the Titans has been questioned by non-Royals, he just had his life saved by a Barbarian turned Royal and now he's finding out his only son wants to talk to Charlie, a sworn enemy of his side. Switching gears, I'm not saying he's right in the way he treats Jillian (my strong dislike of her notwithstanding), but if you look at things from his point of view, it really does make a lot of sense.

Every passing minute we see more and more of his ideals slipping away... His two "best" sons both failed to stop the usurpers from Gobwin Knob, he's now stuck with his "weakest" son as Chief Warlord, and if that weren't bad enough, Tramennis disagrees with him on just about everything. Oh, and he was wrong about Charlie. All of this to say, I'd bet a few shmuckers he actually sees some truth in what Tramennis is saying/trying to do, but just doesn't want to admit it. He's made it this far with his Titanic Mandate, so why change now? --- Of course, that's all just random speculation. I'm probably far off on my guesses!

Now it's time to slip into something more comfortable... Like a tin foil hat!

My constantly changing, bi-weekly prediction for the battle:
All of the Dwagons/Warlords/Wanda/Jack have landed with mixed results (even if Wanda doesn't have to land, it's a poor decision to leave her alone in the sky above Jetstone)... To be honest, I doubt we can *really* predict which units of Gobwin Knob are going to make it and which aren't, but the ones that survived will probably be butchering Jetstone's troops due to the clever tactic Parson's about to pull. Stately's gonna get trapped in his tower with enemy units closing in; and that's when he realizes he's booped and makes a decision worthy of his crown... and for the good of his side, nonetheless!

Stately sacks the capital and uses the shmuckers to appoint Tramennis as heir... Immediately following, he tells Tramennis to take the (four) casters and (four) Warlords to hop on the (nine) Unipegataurs their side has, and sends 'em out of the city. Probably to Dhyrstone. Following that, he pulls a Queen Bea: disbands all of the units in the city then books a one way ticket to the Magic Kingdom. Quasi-victory for Gobwin Knob, but Jetstone lives to fight another day!

Also, we need some witty/clever term to describe the act of killing yourself, a la Magic Kingdom-Portal. Playing Russian Roulette with a loaded gun? Taking a splash in an electrified bathtub? Choices, choices, choices...

[BLANDCorporatio]

Call me an existentialist cynic, but in most cases an ideology is generally an external justification for doing what you would have done anyway.

And call me a true cynic, but that sounds like a fashionable justification for moral weakness. Slately would have hired Charlie, for example (he already did in tBfGK), but principle- and experience- stepped in.

It's also inaccurate that Jillian is the ruler with the least casualties. That ruler is Charlie. Because, had a certain Charlie-powered spell not been there, Jillian would have needed to fight a proper opposing force. Had Charlie not intervened and messed up the Jitteratti defense strategy, that would have gone a lot worse for the safely isolated, external funding receiving Faq. It's not even funny how much of what Faq is, is due to the propping of powerful non-Faq forces. Jillian is more like a bimbo with two sugar daddies.

That's the most deep character you see in Erfworld? Deep?! She wants Wanda, she makes her an offer she didn't even take the time and think about. Rejected, oh well, Ansom's there for the taking. Also, I really have trouble imagining Jillian coming up with Parson's "holy war or boopholes croaking each other" insight. There's no precedent that she ever bothered thinking much, and fled from the one kingdom that offered her the occasion.

That her motives are personal is not, in itself, a bad thing. Personal responsibility is a viable ideology too; but not when you're a ruler! She supposedly grew into the role of Queen. How?! And while her motives are personal, really they're just so spur of the moment impulsive that she may be an amoeba following the chemical trails of Wanda, Stanley and Ansom. You can tell what her drives are, and she's fairly predictable. The less of her, the better.

[raphfrk]

How about this theory: Time doesn't stop in a hex unless your Ruler is croaked. But time in battlespace and other movements does SPEED UP, to the point that sides doing something like fighting or scouting could reasonably take a lot of time to do what they want. Time might even be sped up proportionally to how much move you have left or some other actions. Then at the end of the action/turn, BOOM they're down to normal time speed again. That way you could have a consistent day/night time rate for everybody in Erfworld, while people in battlespace can still use time at different rates.

Ansom was able to abuse the turn system by using the dwagon relay. What needs to happen is that there is a specific order in which things happen. This would still allow the rate of time to be different everywhere.

So, Ansom wakes at 6am and GK is first. He gets on the dwagon and starts moving. As he travels time passes. If he leaves a hex at 7:15am, then when he enters the next hex, that hex will be at 7:15am.

However, when he gets to a hex which has other units in it, then his time jumps to the time for that hex. The hex with the 2nd dwagon would be at 6am, since Stanley has given it no other orders. This means that when Ansom enters, for him, the time jumps from noon back to 6am. For units in that hex, Ansom would arrive immediately at dawn.

I am not sure that I see it as really different rates of time. I think it needs to be more discrete. When you enter a hex, the time in that hex jumps to match yours. However, that would make things hard for lookamancers. They could set it up so that the time taken to consume all your move is much less than the time your side has to operate.

Another option would be that the time in a hex is determined by the proportion of Move used. The unit with the lowest proportion of move used counts determines the time. Mounted units are not considered but time doesn't change if you dismount, it only changes if you change hex. Non-allied units have zero move so they don't count.

So, assuming that the day goes from 6am to 6pm and there is only 1 side in the battlespace.

Ansom wakes and gets on his dwagon

Move:
Ansom: 10/10 (0% used)
Dwagon: 52/52 (0% used)

Time: 6am (0% used)

Ansom then travels 26 hexes (@ 1 move each)

Move:
Ansom (mounted): 10/10 (0% used)
Dwagon: 26/52 (50% used)

Time: noon (50% used)

Ansom travels 26 more hexes and arrives at the next dwagon

Ansom (mounted): 10/10 (0% used)
Dwagon: 0/52 (100% used)
Dwagon2: 52/52 (100% used)

Time: 6am (0% used)

Maybe if there are 5 sides in battlespace, then each gets 1/5 of the time and everything is rescaled.

This would mean that each unit would have a do-nothing action that consumes move.

Alternatively, each unit might have a move total and a time total.

[HailGreen28]

How is her version of leadership "totally callous" or any different from any other RULER on Erfworld?

She doesn't take advice from or listen to any of her warlords. In not actually ORDERING Trem to not parley, Slately is actually being more open minded and tolerant than Jillian-Sue is.

Slately is, of course, right to be distrustful of Jillian, but he distrusts her for all the wrong reasons.
He distrusts her because she's a jumped up barbarian mercenary and he expects her to take orders and get croaked as if he'd paid her.

Agreed

She's not, she's a ruler who can make and break alliances as she pleases. Where his outrage at Dickie, who would have let JS fall if he hadn't had an Archon's finger put to his head?

It was Charlie's finger pointed at his head. The reason Slately wasn't that concerned with Dickie is because Jetstone was under threat of being wiped out regardless. "He knew what Dickie meant to do. Haggar had surely sent her armies not as rescuers, but as scavengers. He knew it, but he did not fear. Why give a care for a horsefly, when the horse is charging? http://www.erfworld.com/book-2-archive/?px=%2F2010-01-09.png He and Trem still make plenty disparaging remarks about Dickie and Haggar.

But Dickie is a royal so that conduct is acceptable, heck, Staley would have done the same if the positions were reversed.

Wrong, remember Trem's mocking Prince Sammy at the bridge? It's pretty clear what Jetstone thinks of Haggar's actions.

Slately's prejudices will be the end of him. One of the causes of the current situation is that Slately couldn't accept a non-royal ruler in the game of territorial conflict and set out to utterly destroy GK as a message to any other stabber who might get ideas above his station.
He judges people by who they are, not by what they do. Charlie is a toolist because he is attuned. Jillian is a no good barbarian even though she saved his ass. Don is a royal, so it's ok he hasn't committed a single unit of his own to this fight. Dickie is a good chap because he's a proper royal like him, so nearly getting stabbed in the back is part of the game.

Now you're just making stuff up. Slately and the Royals aren't talking to Charlie and think he's a Toolist because he screwed them over at GK. Jillian is a no good barbarian that took the power Charlie gave her, and almost turned to sack Jetstone rather than save it. Anybody's ass being saved was done by Charlie powering the "kingworld", otherwise Jillian Sue was good as dead or surrendered. The link I posted, Slately was angered by TV's lack of commitment, and Dickie's imminent betrayal.

He's not an idiot, he's a sad little man who gets littler with each passing turn. The impact of seeing Ossomer could destroy what's left of his pretensions; remember what happened when Queen Bea saw the decrypted that had once been her heir? I feel sorry for him, he's witnessing the end of the world as he knows it.

LOL, you're salivating so much over his impending doom, you aren't sorry one bit. Actually, I'm looking forward to Slately's world being overturned also. But not because he called the Jillian Sue what she was, but because he is part of the old order that sustains constant war and suffering in Erfworld. Still doesn't mean that a character that actually tries to hold to principles bigger than himself, (duty, country, honor), even if not steadfastly, isn't more sympathetic than a "me-me-me" barbarian.

And that would be why the side in this conflict suffering the fewest losses in combat so far would be...?

Pretty easy to avoid casualties when you don't fight. Because Jillian Sue only used her forces to get her boytoy, and once again used her units as a meatshield to do that but this time the odds were well in her favor. She also left Jetstone out to dry except for Charlie's "Kingworld". Her present reputation as a trustworthy ally should be about where Charlie's was after GK.

As that small time mercenary she may have worked for a number of sides each with their own ideology for which they went to war, and maybe she saw that really they are no different and all sides behave equally badly no matter how superior they believe themselves to be.
Having no ideology does not make you irresponsible, quite the opposite; if you have no higher cause to justify your actions then you are ultimately responsible for them, you and no-one else.

Fighting for pay, first for her Father, then to survive, leaves her as the only character with no illusions: there are no great causes, it really is all personal. That's what makes her as frightening as those who believe utterly in their Fate.
She was reluctant to become queen, to become that idealized figurehead, but it sees that she gets criticized for actually acting like a queen, and putting her own wants ahead of her 'clients'.

Her motivations are personal, and unlike everyone else, (except possibly Charlie) she doesn't pretend otherwise. That's what to me makes her the most multidimensional of all the Erfers.

Total selfishness is "multi-dimensional"? Wow. Jillian-Sue is a great character, to me a great character to root against.... but multi-dimensional?

Live Ansom, and the Royals, for all their faults, have demonstrated a willingness to sacrifice themselves for what they think is a greater good. Ansom taking on the GK wall himself, and Jetstone getting involved though GK didn't attack them, for examples. That they are mistaken in perpetuating the constant warfare of Erfworld, doesn't change the fact they think what they're doing is best for Erfworld. In a world where people are popped with specific roles preprogrammed, this is understandable. To put Jillian Sue, who as you just demonstrated only has personal interests in mind, as more responsible than the Royals...... wow.

I bet in the end, Jillian Sue joins a group, say Parson/Stanley/GK/Janis/Charlie/Vinnie/TV? in a cause for changing the world order for the better. But don't pretend she's shown any awareness of a cause (dare I say ideology?) and what it would mean. The closest she's come is telling Wanda "Hook up with me in my hermit kingdom of FAQ where I'm boss and nobody dares mess with us! Yay!"

[throwingrocks]

I really like the way Tremennis thinks . . . there are very few generals who question the basis for their war in the middle of it. Trem is wondering just WTF is really going on here? There are just WAY too many strings being pulled, and he's going to get it puzzled out if he can, before initiating combat. Which means, of course, that his parley with Parson is going to epic verbal warfare, on a most civilized level. And that Slately will somehow cock it all up . . .

Don't forget Stanley. Stanley and Slately getting involved between Trem and Parson would make the Erfworld Magic 8-Ball come up with "Continue reading to the end to see if Explosive Runes were prepared this morning."

[HailGreen28]

<snip very logical fleshing out of theories>

I bow to your logic. Maybe some of the issues raised applying what you describe to actual action in Erfworld is handwaved, like Sizemore basically saying (paraphrasing) "So the lookamancer sees units moving faster in one hex than in another hex. So what?"

http://www.erfworld.com/summer-update-2009-archive/?px=%2FE029_JoeZuniga_DrunkTime.jpg

Their conversation basically hammered that Erfworld mechanics don't have to make sense in our world.

But your theories on this have trumped mine.

[Glome]

Now you're just making stuff up. Slately and the Royals aren't talking to Charlie and think he's a Toolist because he screwed them over at GK.

Not really, Charlie didn't screw over the RCC any more than he normally screws over his clients. Maybe the one exception being that he offered TV his archons at a much higher rate than normal because getting Parson's predictions was more valuable to him, But honestly there were plenty of more likely scenarios for this than Charlie being secretly in league with Gobwin Knob. Especially when you consider that Charlie lost more at the battle of GK than any other side in the fight except perhaps Jetstone.

It takes a specially type of ideological blindness to believe Erfworld's most well known mercenary leader is working with a dimwitted former-piker to subjugate royalty. I mean, it is one thing to tell other leaders that to scare them into allying with you, but here we see he actually believes it to be truth with no real evidence to back him up. Anyway, Slately comes off as being as bad a leader as Stanley not because he is dumb like Stanley, but because he refuses to accept anything that contradicts his world view.

[Intruder]

And call me a true cynic, but that sounds like a fashionable justification for moral weakness.

I'd rather call you a bit presumptuous. Having an ideology means you believe in something but that isn't always to the believer's credit. An ideology doesn't necessarily make you right or just, and it definitely doesn't have to mean that you value other people as ends unto themselves rather than just tools to be used. It's awful, awful hard to give Slately much moral credit for following an ideology that appears dedicated to keeping the Kings on top of the food chain. Likewise Don seemed to come around to Slately's way of thinking only after it seemed like his own power base was starting to erode around him. His meritocracy only lasted as long as they gravy train kept on rolling. It's all rather transparently self-serving-- the path to being a true believer in this case was paved with gold. Personally, I don't like Jillian much either, but she certainly isn't any worse than the Royals. Yet.


With that said, I get a strong sense that I don't dislike King Slately as much as a lot of other people on the forums do. I wonder if it's a fundamental attribution error thing. A lot of people seem to be explaining King Slately's actions entirely in terms of his personality with relatively little discussion being given to the context. While I agree that he's probably a bit of a pompous li'l git in the best of times, I suspect we're mostly seeing a situation where he's been recently elevated to his level of incompetence. He's simply not equipped to deal gracefully with a situation where all of his best laid plans have already gone awry. I doubt he can be completely incompetent given that he successfully maintained a Kingdom strong enough to act as the core of the RCC, after all. It's only after he delegated to Ansom and the world got turned on its head that we've seen him, so perhaps we're just seeing all his frayed edges and assuming that it's par for the course.

[Oberon]

We didn't give Parson flak for it, because it seemed like it was the right idea. Here, I give Tramennis flak for it because, knowing what we know (that Parson expects a parley), it seems like it's going to prove disastrous rather than helpful.

I'm hoping I'm wrong, because I do like Tramennis. I hope he ends up as a good CW. However, that's got to be measured by the results he brings - not by actions that seem reasonable but end up walking right into Parson's trap.

By that measure, Parson is a failure also. He had an early success with the assault on the siege, and then failure after failure until the tri-mancer volcano success. As Parson himself said (paraphrased to avoid archive diving): You try stuff that seems like the best option at the time. Sometimes it works. If it doesn't, you try something else. That's what Trem is doing, and he is being called a loser in advance, why? Because Jack told Parson that Jetstone would parley before the attack, and Trem is acting according to prediction? A bit harsh, is all I'm saying. In chess, often times your opponent knows exactly what move you're going to make, because it is the best move on the field for you. And that doesn't necessarily mean that making that move is stupid.

[gazes_also]

Call me an existentialist cynic, but in most cases an ideology is generally an external justification for doing what you would have done anyway.

And call me a true cynic, but that sounds like a fashionable justification for moral weakness.

I'm not going to get into the whole Jillian debate yet again but I can't let that comment slide.

Ideologies are pre=packaged belief systems that insist that you buy into whole package when in reality you might agree with some ideas, but not all. Once you get on board you don't have to think anymore, all those moral dilemmas will be neatly sorted for you - that's moral weakness. Eventually defending the institution of the ideology becomes more important than it's principles and evil is done in the name of good, war is waged in the name of peace, and innocents are sacrificed to protect the guilty. Ideologies give moral certainty to the hard of thinking.

[JustDoug]

Ideologies give moral certainty to the hard of thinking.

Only by your definition of what ideology is- and I don't think it means what you think it does. The picking of nits begins here.

Don't confuse a particular form of ideology for all of them. All an ideology is a system of ideas, ideals and beliefs with nothing said of what those components are specifically. Some ideologies directly contradict the examples of what an "ideology" is that you've given, with a few extant back here in the "real world" that expressly exhort the questioning of the ideology itself. "Question Authority" didn't arise from a vacuum.

I think you're looking for a morality or ethos rather than an ideology; more the specific makeup of a single one rather than the concept itself.

[Menlo Marseilles]

That's what Trem is doing, and he is being called a loser in advance, why? Because Jack told Parson that Jetstone would parley before the attack, and Trem is acting according to prediction? A bit harsh, is all I'm saying. In chess, often times your opponent knows exactly what move you're going to make, because it is the best move on the field for you. And that doesn't necessarily mean that making that move is stupid.

Besides - and I mentioned this already - he's not acting according to the prediction. He isn't planning to offer "surrender terms"; he's planning to talk. Already things aren't going quite as planned.

[zbeeblebrox]

I'm beginning to get the impression that Xin really likes Red with Gold Trim ;D

[build6]

Besides - and I mentioned this already - he's not acting according to the prediction. He isn't planning to offer "surrender terms"; he's planning to talk. Already things aren't going quite as planned.

indeed... something unusual could well come out of this.

on the other hand - Parson is Parson, and from what he's said so far he's not the type to e.g. let the single critical enemy unit stay alive when they've got her. He sees what needs to be done and doesn't get distracted; ruthlessness isn't something he needed from that sword he threw away. That's gonna be some fine talking on Tramennis' end for Parson to stay his hand...

[ParsonIsOP]

How is her version of leadership "totally callous" or any different from any other RULER on Erfworld?

What Jillian lacks, and other rulers on Erfworld have, is an ideology. Here's the key to your answer.

Slately, Don, Wanda- all of them servants of Royalty or Toolism. Even Charlie has a similar preoccupation- market forces. Other rulers, like Dickie and the Jitterati, too little information to tell but presumably they've got their own philosophies. Leaving only Jillian and Stanley as the odd ducks out. More on that comparison later.

Ideologies may get a bad rap, what with blinding people to the obvious and such, but they mean that one is aware of and following some transcendent purpose. Something beyond themselves, that they believe is worth it, worth communicating and persuading about, some shared ideal that will go on if/once they get croaked. I'd say this is true even of Wanda.

What this also means is playing by some rules and paying attention to consequences. I expect no ruler to care about the welfare of each piker, or about the welfare of warlords as more than means to an end; Earth rulers are much the same. But good rulers would pause and think before risking even their lowly pikers.

Besides, all the ideology you need is the welfare of your side to be a good ruler. Royalty/Toolism and all others are extensions of that, theories on how to build the fittest Side, or better environment for Sides, in Erfworld. The Magic Kingdom also has several ideas about that, which I'd like to hear more about. Where's Sizemore Titans Damn It?!

In contrast, I suspect Jillian's mind does not reach that far. It is simply not capable of an attention span beyond that of a goldfish. All her actions were either dictated by other parties or, more recently, driven by selfish goals of getting at least one toy back and then getting back at Stanley. She does NOT care about the reputation nor presumably welfare, of her side. I have yet to see evidence of any real character growth on her part. She was reluctant to embrace the role of Queen, and still behaves as if she were a small-time mercenary.

Stanley is much alike. The difference is that the story admits Stanley is an idiot, while no such honesty is allowed for Jillian. Where Stanley is a fool caught way above his level of competence, Jillian is a fool for whom fate shines again and again. So while Stanley is a tragic figure- in the classical sense even- Jillian is simply obnoxious.

This is probably a belated response, but I simply cannot agree.

If Jillian had been popped in Jetstone, she would have been Slately's beloved daughter; she'd have the same ideology and everything. If she had then lived out a prosperous life as Jetstone's heir, I just think she would have been much like Slately or any other Royal. She'd be an arrogant and bloodthirsty Royalist.

But instead, she's the princess of a fallen kingdom and loves a Croakamancer that Royals would look upon with disgust. This places her solidly as an outcast. You could put any other warrior-prince in her shoes and you'd end up with much the same result: Just some bloodthirsty idiot who likes thwomping heads and isn't given over to introspection.

I'd also note that Parson doesn't have an ideology either. Nor is it the thing that really redeems him. Tremannis's nominal status as a "Royalist" doesn't mean he's a party hardliner. Again, ideology isn't what redeems that guy either. In both cases, both Parson and Tremannis genuinely care about knowing about the world around them, rather than accepting prepackaged answers.

That is, both characters actually have a human conscience. Tremannis himself proves this when we learn about his philosophical views; he thinks that the "system" allows for unjust suffering and pain and isn't willing to simply dismiss it as part of some Grand Plan.

I think the irony here is that Jillian is forced to learn this for herself, rather than getting an easy life as a Royal where all the answers have been manufactured for her.

[DevilDan]

Given our "modern" sensibilities, we probably would find most monarchs and military leaders in earth's history highly repugnant.

[Glome]

Given our "modern" sensibilities, we probably would find most monarchs and military leaders in earth's history highly repugnant.

I find a good deal of our modern politicians highly repugnant, and I would gladly have a Ptolemy or Emperor Frederick II instead of some of the douchebags that we do get in power. If our modern politicians had power in a political system with as little accountability as in the past, I'm sure you would see just as many abuses of power from them.

[multilis]

If Jillian had been popped in Jetstone, she would have been Slately's beloved daughter; she'd have the same ideology and everything. If she had then lived out a prosperous life as Jetstone's heir, I just think she would have been much like Slately or any other Royal. She'd be an arrogant and bloodthirsty Royalist.

I disagree. She did *not* fit in where she popped, so she easily would also not fit in if she popped somewheres different.

I also disagree in Stately... he is not that gullable. He knows the flaws in himself and his side, he wishes he was better man.
http://www.erfworld.com/book-2-archive/ ... -02-12.png
http://www.erfworld.com/book-2-archive/ ... -01-09.png

(He buys into an ideology of nobleness that is similar to ours, he admits he does not live up to it. He sees other sides as being even less noble than his... more backstabbing/treachery. In his world view he has evidence to back that perspective, from Jillian seeming ready to betray him to Ansom killed by treachery in a parley, Charlie had driven him to brink of bankrupcy and crippled attempt to wipe out Stanley, and Stanley coming to power under very suspicious circumstances.

As far as magic goes, Healomancy would seem more "noble" than "croakomancy" to him)

How would you react if your son wanted to have detailed discussion with a known member of klu klux klan or nazi wanna be or pedophile? Stately thinks he sees a "menace" that threatens to wipe out the entire world he lives in, and turns its victims into slaves. Compare that to Girl Genius comic where wasps turn humans into slaves for the "Other" and as result some "noble" humans fight against the "Other" and warn to have nothing to do with her "poison".

Yes Stately is narrow minded here, but he does what he can with his own admitted weaknesses, and he *will* let his son who he trusts override him.

[DevilDan]

If Jillian had been popped in Jetstone, she would have been Slately's beloved daughter; she'd have the same ideology and everything. If she had then lived out a prosperous life as Jetstone's heir, I just think she would have been much like Slately or any other Royal. She'd be an arrogant and bloodthirsty Royalist.

I disagree. She did *not* fit in where she popped, so she easily would also not fit in if she popped somewheres different.

It depends on whether you think she rebelled against Banhammer just for the sake of rebellion or because she probably had the same martial urges that most nobles and royals of Erf probably have. She would have probably been a smashing success in Jetstone or GK under Saline or any other kingdom save for the peaceable kingdom of Faq.