Erfgame 3 (CLOSED) - Rules and Discussion

Your new games, homebrews, mods and ideas. Forum games go here.

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby Safaquel » Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:33 am

Lord of Monies wrote:The fact that most of them are low level is testament to the fact that they likely don't get into combat much, but still can and as a result they can level. That's the very simple basis of my point. Means, long term, a favourite warlord or a chief warlord can be riding the best mount available, or some of our D-class beasts can level whereas before beasts could never level.


Once again, spew-cavalry could mean the riders just as easily as the mounts, and this in no way indicates whether mounts can level or not. From the evidence we've seen in the comic, I'd say they cannot level, but can be upgraded with armor and suchlike, and possbily could have a special training (which works exactly like a single upgrade and not like levelling).

A possible course, and opne I'd prefer, would be to assign levels to riders, and to consider cavalry mounts unlevellable until proven otherwise.
Safaquel
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 11:56 am

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby Lord of Monies » Wed Sep 19, 2012 5:33 am

The riders can be any of the other units mentioned on that list, so of course riders can level. The spidews are not permanently combined with a particular hobgobwin or anything. Spidew cavalry is taking exclusively about the spidew itself. Whether it has a rider or not is irrelevant. Spidew cavalry is talking about the spidews, and it says most of them are low level, which means some of them are not, which means they can level. Beasts can level. End of.
With the dawning of each new day, my evil machinations inch me closer to world domination. And also breakfast.
User avatar
Lord of Monies
 
Posts: 445
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:03 pm

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby Safaquel » Wed Sep 19, 2012 6:06 am

Lord of Monies wrote: Spidew cavalry is taking exclusively about the spidew itself.


Not clear at all. The word 'cavalry' means by defenition a rider on a mount, and unless we're talking elephants, the combat prowess depends on the rider, without which the mount would be uncontrolled.

To argue the point that spidew-cavalry is low-level, therefore spidews are low-level, would really not be very reasonable. The logic here is flawed. It also does not follow that beasts can level just because a cavalry unit is referred to as levelled.

Spidew-cavalry is talking, therefore, of gobwins on spidews. Both. Not one, and certainly not the mount, unless you believe spidews to be main combatants in the pair. If you have horse cavalry that is high-level, that mostly means that riders are extremely experienced first, and that their horses are combat-trained second. You could have a combat-trained or just experienced horse that isn't easily frightened by gunfire, but with an inept rider the level of that particular cavalryman would be 1, tops.

So no, I'd think we have no real grounds here to rule that beasts can level independently. Besides it would be a real pain in the butt to calculate the interactions.
Safaquel
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 11:56 am

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby Lord of Monies » Wed Sep 19, 2012 6:29 am

The gobwins are listed seperately on that list which is designed to be clear about everything that's still there. If Cavalry meant the riders too then it would need to say what they are or else it's left as a vague thing which is not something a chief warlord should be receiving in a report. We've also seen spidews attacking other units, so when you say it would be complicated to figure that out, 1: that's Kaed's job, not yours, to decide so that helps your argument in no way, and 2: how complicated it may be is irrelevant to the fact that it happens, (Jillian's gwiffons have been seen locking their jaws on the neck of a dwagon!) so for the most accurate portrayal of erfworld rules in this game it stands to reason that mounts can also attack and even level.
With the dawning of each new day, my evil machinations inch me closer to world domination. And also breakfast.
User avatar
Lord of Monies
 
Posts: 445
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:03 pm

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby Safaquel » Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:32 am

Lord of Monies wrote:The gobwins are listed seperately on that list which is designed to be clear about everything that's still there. If Cavalry meant the riders too then it would need to say what they are or else it's left as a vague thing which is not something a chief warlord should be receiving in a report. We've also seen spidews attacking other units, so when you say it would be complicated to figure that out, 1: that's Kaed's job, not yours, to decide so that helps your argument in no way, and 2: how complicated it may be is irrelevant to the fact that it happens, (Jillian's gwiffons have been seen locking their jaws on the neck of a dwagon!) so for the most accurate portrayal of erfworld rules in this game it stands to reason that mounts can also attack and even level.


Mounts can attack when so directed or on their own accord in combat, that is not in dispude. Their ability to level in no way follows.
Likewise following your logic we'd see spidews instead of spidew-cavalry on the Stupid Meal list you keep referring to. That would make them beasts, like dwagons, but the word 'cavalry' has a pretty definite meaning.
Reiterating, if you were correct and spidews were mentioned, they would not be listed as cavalry, but just as 'spidews. This would be more consistent with the idea that the list had on it everything that was left, if as you suggest spidews are separate units to be listed. Please bear with me: if the list, um, lists everything available separately, then spidews would be listed as spidews, and their potential mounts by their respective classes. If that were the case, it would be logical to assume to count 'cavalry' as 'beasts' even if that didn't make much sense. But that is not the case, and we have spidew-cavalry on the list along with everything else.

Also, if you examine the meaning of the word 'cavalry' closely, perhaps you'll agree that it does not normally refer to the mount that is ridden.

We have seen mounts attacking, and they probably count as 'beasts'. However ability to level is not a pre-requisite to having actions, so we could as well conclude that they cannot level and still take part in combat.

To sum it all up, maybe beasts can level, and maybe they cannot -- this could go either way. I do not take issue with the suggestion that they can, but rather with the logic used to arrive to that conclusion.
Safaquel
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 11:56 am

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby Kaed » Wed Sep 19, 2012 8:03 am

I'm... inclined to think that beasts don't level. However... maybe instead they start with 10-20% extra points to spend? Something to think about.
UNLESS someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It's not.
Kaed
Erfabet Supporter!
Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 820
Joined: Sun May 24, 2009 4:28 am

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby 0beron » Wed Sep 19, 2012 9:16 am

Dwagons are pretty clearly beasts right? However we know that they have varying Move, even amongst ones of the same color, because Parson split them into groups by Move. So wouldn't that suggest they can level?

Either way, I'd like some kind of final ruling on this asap, since I classified my Pop-Stars as Beasts solely based on the idea that beast meant they can't be uncroaked, so it seemed like an appropriate flavor for them. If they can't level after all, I'm going to change that.
"I'm afraid I don't understand. And also afraid that I do."
GJC wrote:Two guys with basically the same name in a discussion about a character getting cloned.
There's gotta be a good joke in here somewhere.
User avatar
0beron
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
 
Posts: 3191
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
Location: Morlock Wells

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby Kaed » Wed Sep 19, 2012 9:45 am

0beron wrote:Dwagons are pretty clearly beasts right? However we know that they have varying Move, even amongst ones of the same color, because Parson split them into groups by Move. So wouldn't that suggest they can level?

Either way, I'd like some kind of final ruling on this asap, since I classified my Pop-Stars as Beasts solely based on the idea that beast meant they can't be uncroaked, so it seemed like an appropriate flavor for them. If they can't level after all, I'm going to change that.


I was only musing about future things. We have a lack of evidence in the matter so for now everything levels.

And I'm not sure I really like the tone you take with trying to swap things around just because they'd work better for you. :/ Beasts are everything that isn't a person of some kind, so your pop stars being some sort of legless rhythm bot doesn't sound like a knight. >>;
UNLESS someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It's not.
Kaed
Erfabet Supporter!
Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 820
Joined: Sun May 24, 2009 4:28 am

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby 0beron » Wed Sep 19, 2012 9:51 am

Well given that uncroaked are basically mindless and even THEY still level, can you blame me? ;p
"I'm afraid I don't understand. And also afraid that I do."
GJC wrote:Two guys with basically the same name in a discussion about a character getting cloned.
There's gotta be a good joke in here somewhere.
User avatar
0beron
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
 
Posts: 3191
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
Location: Morlock Wells

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby Safaquel » Wed Sep 19, 2012 10:53 am

0beron wrote:Dwagons are pretty clearly beasts right? However we know that they have varying Move, even amongst ones of the same color, because Parson split them into groups by Move. So wouldn't that suggest they can level?


Well first it'd be good to accompany this with a reference to the page. I, for one, missed that group split.
Second, each unit could have different amount of move within certain brackets. For example, some dragons could be lanker and more quick.
Safaquel
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 11:56 am

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby 0beron » Wed Sep 19, 2012 11:02 am

I figured I didn't have to link to major plot points -_- well, not major, but it WAS an element of Parson's first plan.

Parson's plan is outlined Here, and over the next dozen pages, you see Pinks specifically in both the A and B groups. When given a view of the Eyemancer Table, we also see dots of all colors in both groups.
"I'm afraid I don't understand. And also afraid that I do."
GJC wrote:Two guys with basically the same name in a discussion about a character getting cloned.
There's gotta be a good joke in here somewhere.
User avatar
0beron
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
 
Posts: 3191
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
Location: Morlock Wells

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby Koliup » Wed Sep 19, 2012 6:52 pm

Well, it's obvious leveling is pretty much part of Erfworld physics. Like how gravity is part of ours. Beasts can apparently level, then. Not that I had strong feelings on way or the other.

Though, I feel I should point out that Stanley probably hadn't popped ALL his dwagons. Remember that he can tame the critters, too. It is not unlikely wild dwagons would have different stats than popped ones. Hmm. If Stanly can pop dwagons, yet they spawn normally in the wild.. does that mean our beasts will spawn in the wild, too?

While we could implement a variable-stat beast spawning system. That sounds like far too much work, and book keeping.
0beron's cheese idea did get me thinking on a new special idea; Re-Croak: Units with this special cannot rise as uncroaked when croaked.

As an aside, Kaed should have my speedy vampires by now. Even if he hasn't seen them yet. Oh yes, I recently asked my best buddy if he'd like to be my Chief Warlord. What was the ruling on player warlords, though?
All systems nominal.
Koliup
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby Lord of Monies » Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:14 pm

Regular warlords will be done by the DM, much like any other non-ruler character you come across so expect nothing on that front. Chief Warlord is a matter still unanswered, I think. The idea of having another person be your chief warlord would be a whole new level of fun and paranoi, but the flip-side is that it would create double the work for the DMs as they'd have to do the details of any given turn for 2 seperate people on the same side. Solution...more DMs? Hard enough getting a second one to stay as it was. At any rate, chief warlord for any side is at least a score of turns away. People are barely about to get lvl 2 cities which take 5 turns to pop a warlord, let alone think about saving up enough money necessary to promote someone to chief warlord (20,000 shmuckers!!!). Still, if there's nothing else pressing to discuss (I still think the heavy situation needs to be finalised) then we could bring this up again.


To bring up heavy, what were we doing about that? It's a special that would cost 5 points, or something you can promote to for 600 shmuckers, and it gives +6/+4/+4, right? If all of that is the case, then I'd want to retcon my guhrons and make them heavies. I'm sure others might take similar action before it has a direct impact on the game.
With the dawning of each new day, my evil machinations inch me closer to world domination. And also breakfast.
User avatar
Lord of Monies
 
Posts: 445
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:03 pm

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby Koliup » Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:33 pm

That's true. We'll table PC Chiefs for now, then. Worst comes to worst I type out the exploits of 'his' personal warlord, and get advice on what 'he' would do.

I'd say that Heavy should be an irreversible upgrade(or really expensive to undo) saved for Knight class units(that they, mind, don't spawn with). Actual Knights, but also any humanoid being with the designation(see; humanoid specials). Whereas Beasts can buy it at creation, no need for purchasing it(once spawned).
I'd like to point to exhibit A: Spidews and Knights In Stanley's Service. We've seen Spidews are heavy units(http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/Spidew), and KISS are light, but can be upgraded to heavy. Obviously, spidews are popped that way. Simple enough.

However, the First Intermission(http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/ ... rmission_2) seems to imply Heavy units have trouble handling tunnels, and presumably buildings not made for units their size. Like towers, houses, anything not a courtyard, like Jetstone's, or old GK's, and may not enjoy forests unless forest capable. Fair warning to heavy units.

Consequently, I also have to ask about units that are beefed up until being Heavy? Do they gain an automatic +0/+4/+4 ? Or remain as usual statwise? Rounding corners, you see. EDIT: I would also like to propose an alternate Heavy buy: +4/+2/+2/+0/Tunnel Capable. If this would leave a unit below the required HP to be an automatic heavy, oh well. It's a lighter heavy. Perfect for tunnels.
All systems nominal.
Koliup
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby 0beron » Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:48 pm

Dwagons seem to have little trouble kicking butt in forest terrain, so I'd nix that element.
Also, I think any unit should be up-gradable to Heavy. Makes things simpler, and if a unit gets heavier just with a command, then it makes just about as much sense that beasts can have the same.
Agree that it's totally irreversible.
I'd say they they instantly get the full +6/+4/+4 upon promotion.
"I'm afraid I don't understand. And also afraid that I do."
GJC wrote:Two guys with basically the same name in a discussion about a character getting cloned.
There's gotta be a good joke in here somewhere.
User avatar
0beron
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
 
Posts: 3191
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
Location: Morlock Wells

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby Lord of Monies » Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:55 pm

Instant stat change, I agree. Otherwise the hobgobwin heavies at spacerock wouldn't have become a force to be reckoned with.

The idea that only beasts can pop with heavy is interesting and I very nearly agreed, until I remembered that all of gobwin knob's twolls are heavies. Nobody in their right mind can call Bogroll a beast. It is, of course, unknown as to whether twolls pop as heavy or they were all promoted as such, but I also don't particularly see why Stanley would value the twolls high enough to promote all of them to heavy status, considering the cost involved.
With the dawning of each new day, my evil machinations inch me closer to world domination. And also breakfast.
User avatar
Lord of Monies
 
Posts: 445
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:03 pm

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby Koliup » Wed Sep 19, 2012 8:02 pm

Recall that Dwagons are flight capable; they give no Battle Crap about terrain types that can't actively fight them. Or Impassables. Walkers may disagree(gumps were forest capable).
Anyway, while I'm still all for differentiating between the Heavy types(Knight and Beast), I can see the appeal to not doing so.
But it may be wise to have Heavy remain a purchasable thing. So that one can save money on it later.
Also, note the +4/+2/+2 was for having Tunnel Capable thrown in with being a Heavy.
Also, LoM. Saw your post just as I clicked submit.
All systems nominal.
Koliup
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby 0beron » Wed Sep 19, 2012 9:21 pm

Oh agreed. I was basically saying that Heavy should be purchasable with points on-pop or with schmuckers if they don't pop that way, for all units. So any Special unit could pop that way using points, and any unit period could be upgraded to it with schmukers. Make sense?
"I'm afraid I don't understand. And also afraid that I do."
GJC wrote:Two guys with basically the same name in a discussion about a character getting cloned.
There's gotta be a good joke in here somewhere.
User avatar
0beron
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
 
Posts: 3191
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
Location: Morlock Wells

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby Kaed » Wed Sep 19, 2012 10:53 pm

I thought we already decided on 5/3/3 for heavy. And I think the 4/2/2 tunnel capable is an okay alternate.

As for chief warlord cost... It's been debated that it's not very expensive. You need a level 4 capital as I recall, beyond that it's cost is mostly a triviality. Maybe 5000 tops. Probably less.

And warlords take 10 turns.
UNLESS someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It's not.
Kaed
Erfabet Supporter!
Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 820
Joined: Sun May 24, 2009 4:28 am

Re: Erfgame 3 (closed) - Rules and Discussion

Postby 0beron » Wed Sep 19, 2012 11:13 pm

Pop-Stars have been made Heavies, all of my other units remain the same.

Kaed wrote:And warlords take 10 turns.

Not anymore they don't haha. Level 2 takes 5 turns to pop them according to the present rules.
"I'm afraid I don't understand. And also afraid that I do."
GJC wrote:Two guys with basically the same name in a discussion about a character getting cloned.
There's gotta be a good joke in here somewhere.
User avatar
0beron
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
 
Posts: 3191
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
Location: Morlock Wells

PreviousNext

Return to Your Games

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest