Also confused as to why this was an illustrated update. Hopefully this will become clear in time.
MarbitChow wrote:I don't want my protagonist to make the smartest moves for his own survival. I want him to be a hero. Heroes do not sit in the background, letting others die at their orders.
I also wouldn't want my protagonist to try to make the smartest moves for his own survival. However, I would want *this* protagonist making the smartest moves for his side's/his peoples' survival. Parson stands accused of failing to do the latter rather than failing to do the former (I assume, not having read the forums as well as usual... if not, consider him so accused (again) now).
I guess it comes down to whether you consider Ansom's rush on the walls to be heroic. Yes, he kept a handful of units from dying (probably)... perhaps he even lead by example (in a leadership bonus sense). He kept the coalition from dissolving, but he also almost died (arguably did die if you follow the chain of events up through his having to take Parson hostage) and got his side saddled under the yolk of a crushing debt from which they still haven't recovered (I think).
I view Parson's current move as every bit as reckless compounded by the fact that he has no great reason to think his "heroics" will do any real good (unlike Ansom), short term or otherwise. He has put himself, Sizemore, and the stability of the one semi-peaceful demi-side in Erfworld in jeopardy to achieve the strategic objective of endangering his units and delaying his side's victory. Will it ultimately be for the good of Parson's side? Possibly? Should it? Mebbe, but only if Parson knows or strongly suspects something that we don't know...
Then again, in the 2nd story the protagonist often gets booped over for making tactically poor moral stands (a la Luke going after his homies in Empire Strikes Back).
Last edited by effataigus on Thu Jun 30, 2011 9:31 am, edited 239044 times in total.