Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 033

[onlyme]

We were told they are willing to not only risk their life but actually willing to end it once the day is there. Because that it what it means to prefer that the whole plan (creating Jilian, mercenary work, find a new site, resettle unter princsess there) would
not have been chosen.

Where were we told that? A plan was described where they removed themselves from any possibility of danger and left everyone to die, then reappeared in another secluded location and continued life as normal. Nowhere do I see them agreeing to end their own lives.

We were told they were against this plan (as we are told they were against the most essential step of that plan,
namely having a warlord heir).

That is not part of any discussion here. Faq (the city) will fall and Banhammer will fall. People will die. That is predicted, nothing can change that. Jilian plans means being sure that it will not be Haffaton that will cause the end and to get lots of funds. That will risk lives, not safe any in the long run.

Sure it is. Fate says the side will fall; but how that manifests is completely up in the air. You could lose just Banhammer and five men there wasn't room for on the gwiffons, or you could lose hundreds because you don't try to evacuate. Or you could take a gamble and potentially lose hardly anyone and be much safer. That gamble requires killing instead of just letting people die, and it could still end in disaster. But that is not the argument presented against it: the argument is simply "I will not take part in killing", without any conditions on what the cost-benefit situation is.

You complain the casters are against the plan of attacking Haffaton. Attacking Haffaton is the opposite of evacuation. The "I will not take part of killing" is uttered against a plan to start a giant war, erradicating
first Haffaton's captial and then many of it's cities. You might have had a point if it was a long philisophical
tractum. But it is a quick emotional statement against a specific plans. Demanding stating to which general
conditions this statement can be generatlized and to which not is atainst all realities of human communication.

Think about it this way: Orwell is saying that the lives of all units are precious; because of this opinion, he refuses to end life.

He refuses to end lives for a plan that only extends the treasury. That's where he is objecting. He might mean it more generally. But claiming that it is so for sure is just slander.

However, he is quite fine with abandoning the units on his side to death (Jillian thought of a better evac plan in 5 minutes than what was proposed; they didn't try).

Do we know it is a better plan? We never heared anyone else' opinion on that. We know it has a problem of
transporting the treasury and thus a very short range to look for a new city. This increases the likely costs
of the acquisition and has much larger chances of causing conflicts, starting wars that are likely to last
for some time. As the King's plan also does not include the death of all people (Jillian cannot take a city
alone, she willl likely take a small army with her, which will all live in the new city). So we do not know
if Jillian's first plan (which she herself did not give more than a minute thought for the details) will cost
less or more lives. (And in the King's plan it might be a long peacefull life in the captical with an aprupt
end someday, while in Jilian's plan it might be a much shorter live expectency and that consisting of
fighting all the time.).

[Balerion]

Since neither side seems to be convincing the other in this debate, I am going to call this as my last post on it to avoid completely stealing the thread

We were told they were against this plan (as we are told they were against the most essential step of that plan,
namely having a warlord heir).

That seems an overbraod description of their complaint to me; they are questioning whether FAQ can suffer the moral burden of killing to survive, not arguing that there shouldn't ever be a warlord in existence for their side.

You complain the casters are against the plan of attacking Haffaton. Attacking Haffaton is the opposite of evacuation. The "I will not take part of killing" is uttered against a plan to start a giant war, erradicating
first Haffaton's captial and then many of it's cities. You might have had a point if it was a long philisophical
tractum. But it is a quick emotional statement against a specific plans. Demanding stating to which general
conditions this statement can be generatlized and to which not is atainst all realities of human communication.

They are against that plan, while they were fine with an evacuation plan guaranteed to lead to a ton of death. It isn't the ending of lives that bothers them; it is the potential for them personally to be blamed for it. People dying because of their choices isn't something they mind if they can say it wasn't their fault. And that is where I find them hypocritical.

And I heavily disagree that this is a spur of the moment statement; all the context around it points to this being an overriding philosophy that FAQ endorses (complaints about jillian, continuing the ideals, etc).

He refuses to end lives for a plan that only extends the treasury. That's where he is objecting. He might mean it more generally. But claiming that it is so for sure is just slander.

I disagree heavily. This is pitched (in context) as FAQ's core belief system. What ideals did you think Banhammer was asking Jillian to perpetuate?

Do we know it is a better plan? We never heared anyone else' opinion on that. We know it has a problem of
transporting the treasury and thus a very short range to look for a new city. This increases the likely costs
of the acquisition and has much larger chances of causing conflicts, starting wars that are likely to last
for some time. As the King's plan also does not include the death of all people (Jillian cannot take a city
alone, she willl likely take a small army with her, which will all live in the new city). So we do not know
if Jillian's first plan (which she herself did not give more than a minute thought for the details) will cost
less or more lives. (And in the King's plan it might be a long peacefull life in the captical with an aprupt
end someday, while in Jilian's plan it might be a much shorter live expectency and that consisting of
fighting all the time.).

I would say it is a much better plan. Banhammers relies on Jillian managing to find another suitable bubble location. While making this search, she can't do mercenary work so there is a ticking clock on the treasury. Should she fail to find a suitable location, there is no option but attacking and securing a bad location, but with much less force to bring to bear than they would have in her plan. And the idea that she can find a bubble kingdom site is mostly ludicrous. Either it is occupied, and thus is somehow hiding from all its neighbors anyway and can likely hide from her, or it is unoccupied which most likely means it was raided and destroyed in the past.

The attack plan is the best shot FAQ has at being able to continue to live in support of its ideals. Both Banhammer's and Jillian's alternate plans would pretty much guarantee FAQ is no longer a bubble kingdom. Striking and removing the threat to the bubble is their best chance of continuing to live in peace.

Describing the original plan as abandoning units to their deaths is unfairly discounting the fact that the defenders were supposed to "surrender if possible" rather than fighting to the end. The Court was actually favoring life, independent of Side, over vengeance. (The invading Side might disband the defenders rather than keep the low-loyalty units, but that's their sin, not Faq's.)

From what we have seen of warfare, sides letting another even have that chance to surrender is a rarity. The only one of them who has been involved in combat recently is considering it certain doom; that should tell us something. "Surrender if possible" is an incredibly naive idea.

[cheeseaholic]

I'm surprised that nobody noticed that barbarians are being basically treated as non intelligent lifeforms here. They don't want to take out another side's units but are ok with killing barbarians? Wow.

As for the idea itself of the casters surviving while everyone else dies, having a few survive is better than no one surviving. It's quite noble to die with everyone else when you can escape. It's also quite stupid. It's also unethical, as having more people die is worse than having less die.

I suppose the most ethical thing would be if there's a mechanic to have a side absorbed within another side. End the side that way. But as that doesn't seem possible, I'm not sure what the next best thing would be. Try to force fate somehow perhaps? Move all soldiers to another city and hope barbarians hit the capital might work, then Jillian can counterattack. But then they'd need to know when the fall would happen.... We just don't know enough to make a good judgement.

[Kreistor]

On Barbarian Capital Sites:

This is not inconsistent with our previous knowledge of Barbarians. Barbarians occupy ruins, and ruins are quite obviously places cities have been, and so could arise again. Barbarian capital sites are locations occupied by barbarians that do not include a warlord that could start a new side, and so have no Leadership.

Simple enough to figure out. Nothing new here.

On Marie and Predictamancy:

And now we see just how useless and self-destructive Predictamancy is. We know that Stanley as CW of GK destroys FAQ, and with no possible connection to Haffaton. Wanda is the instigator of FAQ's demise, and while she was once a caster of Haffaton, at the time of her betrayal she most certainly was not. Calling Haffaton an "Agent" is like calling Salt the creator of oceans, merely because oceans must be salty to be an ocean and not a sea, and completely ignoring the water that makes up the greater portion. It directs the listeners to a false conclusion that should never be acted upon, and Marie sells her version only with confidence. Marie is, obviously, just as pathetic an interpreter of her own predictions as Delphie, and can create just as much damage by insisting on her Predictamancy being relevant.

We are seeing this with the benefit of hindsight, and we must not forget that FAQ lacks our clarity of vision. But with this evidence that Predictions are pathetically unreliable, and their casters are far too convinced of their superiority of interpretation, I would personally slaughter any Predictamancer I popped as creators of more harm than good, through the complete irrelevancy of their magic, and the stupidity of the casters.

And if you need proof that she lied:

Agent
noun
1. a person or business authorized to act on another's behalf: Our agent in Hong Kong will ship the merchandise. A best-selling author needs a good agent.

Nope, Haffaton is not authorized to act on behalf of GK.

2. a person or thing that acts or has the power to act.

Yes, Haffaton is this, but not the correct context.

3. a natural force or object producing or used for obtaining specific results: Many insects are agents of fertilization.

Nope. Not natural.

4. an active cause; an efficient cause.

The closest you get. But GK and Wanda are the active causes of FAQ's fall. Haffaton is, at best, an indirect cause, and indirect is inherently non-efficient.

5. a person who works for or manages an agency.

Haffaton isn't a person.

Marie LIED. Haffaton, by all definitions of Agent, cannot be an agent of FAQ's fall. Even if Haffaton survived and put the dwagons there for Stanley to capture, this is not active and not efficient, and consequently NOT an agent.

Like I said: I'd kill any Predictamancer I popped, and not just because they're stupid, but because they are stupid liars.

[Whispri]

tl,dr: Haffaton defeating Faq is not an insight she is gaining through Prediction (the magical discipline), rather it is her prediction (as in best guess about what will happen in the future) based on the facts she has available (which includes what she knows via Prediction, which is limited to Faq falling and a croakamancer, possibly specifically Firebaugh, being involved).

What reason would Marie have to consider the Foolamancy/Predictamancy/Lookmancy combo to be on the verge of failing save for the use of her powers?

Won't being wrong here just encourage Fate fighting in the future?

You play the odds; far more often then not, she will be right in this type of situation by saying Haffaton is likely to destroy them (assuming she knows Wanda is responsible for their destruction).

And declaring the Side soon to fall merely because Wanda's out there somewhere doesn't strike you as a particularly reckless gamble?

[zilfallon]

Is it just me or the caster at Marie's left side looks a lot like Maggie?

[Nnelg]

And declaring the Side soon to fall merely because Wanda's out there somewhere doesn't strike you as a particularly reckless gamble?

Here's a metaphor: if you found out that someone had actually built a working doomsday device, wouldn't you think it safe to say the world's going to end soon?

Marie had already known that Wanda was out there somewhere for a long time. But a metaphorical nuke that's just 'out there' is completely different from a nuke that's next door.

[pseudoboo]

re:destruction of faq

the prediction wasn't actually stated how she got it, she probably predicted lady firebough would destroy them. she had last seen her under a different faction and didn't know it had fallen. based on this she said it wasn't goign to be hafaton(not cause she knew that but because she knew who it would be) upon learning she was with hafaton she altered her stated prediction to say that it would be hafaton based on her assumption that they'd be coming for faq(which her previous interpretitation was the only thing reassuring her wouldn't happen previously, and its size the only thing reassuring her that it woulldn't be soon since an invader would have to go through them first to hit faq vs already bordering them) and so that would bring firebaugh there soon

at least thats how i read it. her wording isn't in itself biding, just as when the predictimancer in goodminton said that they'd get a warloard all we've actually heard was her statements not the prophecy itself.. only this time instead of lying she was misinterpreting her own prediction

[pseudoboo]

I

i think you guys are jsut overthinking ti a bit