Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 034

[0beron]

Also possible...just not one I want to be true, because if that's the big mystery Erfworld is building up to, I will be sorely disappointed.

[drachefly]

Well, the mystery could be how Fate's stranglehold is broken, but up to this point it was in full effect.

[Whispri]

W don't know the "IV" in Saline's name indicates the number of preceding Salines. His name simply may have been "Saline IV". Erfworld naming conventions can be strange that way.

Quite so.

Another possibility is that he's the survivor of a Side destroyed during Haffaton's advance.

No its not... just because Wanda refused to leave Stanely when she had the chance does NOT make a solid link her to faq's fall. Fact of the matter is Jillian has no idea HOW faq fell, she does not know that it required betrayal from within as there are otherways the city could have fell; hell even with the idea that there was betrayal at work, it could have been the work of another, like a certain shockamancer who was shunned by everyone else. In fact, Jillian got her explanation for why Wanda refused to leave stanely when wanda told her about the fate of the tools. Its even possible that during on of her many "Secessions" with wanda, that wanda could have already fed her a cover story about how the city fell.

No, there is a difference on relying on predictmancy to make your moves and believing that fate is unavoidable. Goodmitten also had a predictamancer, and the king relied on her council to make his moves, but in the end he was no fatalist... he did not believe that fate was written in stone and could not be fought.

In fact if you look at Jillian's conversations you can see that she is not a big believer in fate. Hell, in this latest update we find that even after Marie said with conviction that Faq would fall by haffaton, Jillian STILL tried to fight for an alternate plan; she was essentially arguing against fate. In her conversations with wanda in the previous book, Jillian seems to have little respect for fate; afterall wanda's entire toolist point of view and all of her actions are based on fate; she even says that their fates are intertwined... if Jillian was a fatalist she would take the path of least resistance and simply join Gobwinknob, but no, she would rather do things her way than follow fate. However she does seem to understand how fate effects the way a person thinks; she knows from dealing with her father's court that you can't argue against a fatalist, and thus knows the best way to convince a fatalist to do things your way is to try and find a loop hole in the prediction that fits both your views... hence why jillian would try to keep the tools together by bring wanda and charlie together through faq, as a way to convince wanda to go with her while she still plotted Stanely's demise. Really if Jillian were a fatalist she'd probably even think that croaking stanely was impossible since he is a wielder of one of the tools

And like i suggested early, the events of these prequels may even lead to jillian having reason to think fate can be fought against. Marie predicted that haffaton would cause Faq to fall and yet jillian will come to see Haffaton fall first thus spoiling the prediction; though what jillian didn't know and never realized is that the prediction hadn't come to fruiition because marie's prediction was misleading. Hell, when they believed that haffaton would cause them to fall, they started preparing for a back up plan, but when destruction finally did find them, Faq seems like it was completely unprepared; that would suggest that even faq itself might have thought marie's prediction was wrong because she said haffaton would cause the fall, not wanda.

You realise of course, that Stanley was bonded with the Arkenhammer at the time of Faq's destruction? And that Jillian knows this? Fact is, Faq was mysteriously detected by unknown means and Wanda's right there, fighting willingly for Stanley. And of course, her role in Faq's destruction was prophesied and Jillian knows that too.

The Overlord of Goodminton disregarded the utterances of his Seer because she lied to him. And betrayed her own Predictions to the enemy. She couldn't be trusted for those reasons. And what's fatalism or lack thereof got to do with it? Why should an optimist be incapable of accepting prophecies as real?

Again, relying on Predictamancy to keep her Side alive, then dismissing it out of hand as soon as she's told of the speed and weight of the Elephant charging at her is simply illogical. It doesn't matter if she tries to fight Fate or not. Fate came to pass. Her Side died, destroyed by Wanda in accordance with the prophecy. And as this update made very clear, Jillian is well aware of Wanda's involvement in that prophecy.

Marie's doom laden Prediction was proven true when Faq fell, providing vindication if that prophecy had been doubted. As for Faq's lack of preparation when the end came, I'm thinkin' that was Wanda's doing. She managed to send Jack to the wrong City for example. Although it should said that (providing no word of the Battle reached her via the Magick Kingdom) it's possible that Jillian did indeed establish a successor Side in accordance with her Father's orders, then abdicated and flew off in search of adventure.

[Nnelg]

W don't know the "IV" in Saline's name indicates the number of preceding Salines. His name simply may have been "Saline IV". Erfworld naming conventions can be strange that way.

Parson explicitly said it "Saline the Fourth" though, so it would have to be a very strange convention...

[cheeseaholic]

I always thought that if a ruler died and there was no heir that the side lasted until the end of their turn. There was really no evidence when I thought that up and it was just one way things could go, but now that we know the huge number of casters that FAQ had it seems probable that they escaped through the portal after the king was killed and uncroaked by Wanda. I suppose she could have captured the thinkamancer and lookamancer herself and the king ordered the rest to stay in the magic kingdom via Maggie instead of ordering them back to kick ass with their awesome caster powers (assuming that's where they were - else they would have been noticed in the battle I think, even by Stanley), but that seems a bit unlikely.

I'm fairly confident that a side doesn't die until it's not its turn. It can't be until next turn beginning as Wanda was on the road when her ruler croaked and her side ended then.

[wrecan]

W don't know the "IV" in Saline's name indicates the number of preceding Salines. His name simply may have been "Saline IV". Erfworld naming conventions can be strange that way.

Parson explicitly said it "Saline the Fourth" though, so it would have to be a very strange convention...

Erfworld has very strange naming conventions.

[MarbitChow]

I'm fairly confident that a side doesn't die until it's not its turn. It can't be until next turn beginning as Wanda was on the road when her ruler croaked and her side ended then.

From Parson's Klog: If the overlord dies, his side's units in cities freeze immediately, and units outside of cities disband. That seems pretty definitive. Wanda would have ended immediately on the road if she wasn't promoted to Heir right before her father died. Her side didn't end at that point - she just went barbarian, like Jillian.

[Oberon]

Wanda would have ended immediately on the road if she wasn't promoted to Heir right before her father died.

Or, perhaps she was cloned by a dittomancer. Because it seems likely that Original Slately has died, and the Jetstone Side did not end only due to a dittomancer clone having just been created of him.

[Nnelg]

Well, technically I think becoming barbarian is a symptom of the side ending, but...

We've already seen one side have a resurgence, perhaps if/when Wanda captures Spacerock she can defect from GK and refound Goodminton?

[Whispri]

Yeah, I'm hoping she does indeed rebuild Goodminton at Spacerock. Parson ordered her to stay alive at any price, perhaps that will trigger it?

I always thought that if a ruler died and there was no heir that the side lasted until the end of their turn. There was really no evidence when I thought that up and it was just one way things could go, but now that we know the huge number of casters that FAQ had it seems probable that they escaped through the portal after the king was killed and uncroaked by Wanda. I suppose she could have captured the thinkamancer and lookamancer herself and the king ordered the rest to stay in the magic kingdom via Maggie instead of ordering them back to kick ass with their awesome caster powers (assuming that's where they were - else they would have been noticed in the battle I think, even by Stanley), but that seems a bit unlikely.

I'm fairly confident that a side doesn't die until it's not its turn. It can't be until next turn beginning as Wanda was on the road when her ruler croaked and her side ended then.

Unaroyal was destroyed the moment the monstrous Bea stepped into the Portal to the Magick Kingdom.

[0beron]

I suppose [Wanda] could have captured the thinkamancer and lookamancer herself and the king ordered the rest to stay in the magic kingdom via Maggie instead of ordering them back to kick ass with their awesome caster powers (assuming that's where they were - else they would have been noticed in the battle I think, even by Stanley), but that seems a bit unlikely.

No offense, but there are so many things wrong with this;

• FAQ had no Thinkamancer, Maggie is a GK unit.
• FAQ's Lookamancer was Orwell, a male. GK's Lookamancer was Misty, a female.
• The casters WERE noticed by Stanley, most if not all of them (besides Jack, Marie, and Wanda) WERE defending the city from the Tower, and they killed several Dwagons on Stanley's approach.

I'm fairly confident that a side doesn't die until it's not its turn. It can't be until next turn beginning as Wanda was on the road when her ruler croaked and her side ended then.

Sides end instantly on Ruler death. Wanda became Ruler the instant her father croaked, and then became Barbarian the instant the Capital of Goodminton was lost. There's no delay, and it doesn't matter when these events occur, they still trigger the effect immediately.

• Ruler croaks without Heir > all cities instantly become neutral and units in field disband.
• Ruler croaks with Heir > side remains the same.
• Side loses Capital , regardless of Ruler status > all units become Barbarian (and must rely on command units' Purses for upkeep)

[GJC]

Ruler croaks with Heir > side remains the same.

This seemed a bit weird, though. When Wanda's father croaked, she was in the field, leading an army. But as far as I remember, her entire army disbanded, except for those units in her stack.

Stanley, on the other hand, didn't appear to lose his entire Dwagon force when Saline IV croaked, since he'd probably have needed quite a few Dwagons to retake GK from the Gobwins.

Inconsistency, or something I'm not getting?

[Glome]

Ruler croaks with Heir > side remains the same.

This seemed a bit weird, though. When Wanda's father croaked, she was in the field, leading an army. But as far as I remember, her entire army disbanded, except for those units in her stack.

Stanley, on the other hand, didn't appear to lose his entire Dwagon force when Saline IV croaked, since he'd probably have needed quite a few Dwagons to retake GK from the Gobwins.

Inconsistency, or something I'm not getting?

Stanley had the hammer though, he could have tamed as many dwagons as he needed after GK fell. Also I should point out that there is still a lot we don't know about what really happened concerning the overthrow which might affect how Stanley took back GK. There is a good chance the overthrow was staged by Stanley, Wanda or someone else so that Stanley would win against the Gobwins, Stanley possibly even had allies on the inside.

[Nnelg]

• Side loses Capital , regardless of Ruler status > all units become Barbarian (and must rely on command units' Purses for upkeep)

Actually, we know that at least uncroaked units without a croakamancer (or a warlord? It wasn't clear if Wanda had any uncroaked warlords besides Tommy) disappear, while those with an uncroaked warlord and a croakamancer who was also the ruler stayed. Personally, I think the criteria for barbarianship is being stacked with a commander or in a city, but who knows? It could be only casters and the faction ruler and/or his heir that count.

EDIT: Double Ninja'd!

[0beron]

Ruler croaks with Heir > side remains the same.

This seemed a bit weird, though. When Wanda's father croaked, she was in the field, leading an army. But as far as I remember, her entire army disbanded, except for those units in her stack.
Stanley, on the other hand, didn't appear to lose his entire Dwagon force when Saline IV croaked, since he'd probably have needed quite a few Dwagons to retake GK from the Gobwins.
Inconsistency, or something I'm not getting?

Wanda's army disbanded when her SIDE ended (ie, when the Capital was captured). Because they were not stacked with a Command unit, they disbanded.

[Whispri]

Ruler croaks with Heir > side remains the same.

This seemed a bit weird, though. When Wanda's father croaked, she was in the field, leading an army. But as far as I remember, her entire army disbanded, except for those units in her stack.

Stanley, on the other hand, didn't appear to lose his entire Dwagon force when Saline IV croaked, since he'd probably have needed quite a few Dwagons to retake GK from the Gobwins.

Inconsistency, or something I'm not getting?

Well for a start, Saline may have been killed to make Stanley Overlord. In that case, person or persons unknown were conspiring in his favour.

When Wanda became Overlord there were probably less than a dozen Units left in the Garrison, leaving her with scant seconds to react. Saline may have been survived by scores or even hundreds of soldiers who were fighting in his Capital's Garrison, buying Stanley the time to merge his Dwagons into one huge stack.

Wanda's purse was empty at the time of Goodminton's fall. Stanley's may have been full (of what use is an heir who can't survive your death?). And that may have influenced the number troops who stayed his.

Stanley may have ended Turn in a City the day before the Gobwins launched their attack.

Speaking of which, we don't know what happens when a Side loses its Capital and Ruler, but retains Cities for the heir to inherit. Goodminton had been reduced to a single City, Gobwin Knob must have been far larger.

Dwagons pop in the wild, Uncroaked do not, that alone may well have resulted in a different result to being left Sideless.

Finally Gobwin Knob may actually have had a spare Capital Site at the time of Saline's death. After all, we don't know when Stanley took out the Milquetoast (assuming they were a Capital Side) and he was off on a secret mission at the time.

[GJC]

Wanda's army disbanded when her SIDE ended (ie, when the Capital was captured). Because they were not stacked with a Command unit, they disbanded.

Humm. But why? From what we know, if a side loses all its cities, the side's field units go barbarian. And it's not like barbarian units survive only as long as they have leadership. During book 1, we saw Jillan separate from her Gwiffons multiple times, most prominently when she got captured. But her gwiffons were there to meet her when Wanda set her free.

Wanda in book 0 wouldn't have had the shmuckers to pay for unit upkeep anyway, so it's not gameplay-significant, it just seems weird.

Edit: And while Wispri does make some good points in regards to consistency, I'm still not sure it makes sense overall.

[Saladman]

Speaking of which, we don't know what happens when a Side loses its Capital and Ruler, but retains Cities for the heir to inherit. Goodminton had been reduced to a single City, Gobwin Knob must have been far larger.

Glossary to the print Book 1 says of Capitals only that they represent their side and a side needs a Capital to have a Treasury. A parsimonious guess then is that sides with a ruler and cities but no capital function more or less as normal, except for being pretty well booped by having to cover upkeep out of city income every turn, then probably losing any excess.

[0beron]

Glossary to the print Book 1 says of Capitals only that they represent their side and a side needs a Capital to have a Treasury. A parsimonious guess then is that sides with a ruler and cities but no capital function more or less as normal, except for being pretty well booped by having to cover upkeep out of city income every turn, then probably losing any excess.

This could actually be an interesting strategy for a side with a Moneymancer....operate with no Treasury....

[drachefly]

Could be that the transition to a barbarian side is what disbands everyone not stacked with the heir - not simply being barbarian.