Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Page by page discussion of the comic.

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby 0beron » Sun Sep 15, 2013 9:39 am

Hmmm I think you're misinterpreting my position. My stance in most cases in general is just to keep the options open. I'm not necessarily assuming the loophole exists or saying the rules are unclear. I'm saying that because the events following Saline's death have not been recounted in enough detail, we can't conclude the loophole doesn't exist. Lacking the evidence to disprove something isn't the same as proving it, and that's pretty much always my approach to speculating about Erfworld. Does that make a little more 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: 3192
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
Location: Morlock Wells

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby raphfrk » Sun Sep 15, 2013 11:05 am

0beron wrote:This might be an apples and oranges comparison, hence why I chose Saline's case instead. I am suggesting that because the 'Tool Wielder survived in Saline's case, the units attached to it survived. Wanda's uncroaked were not created by a 'Tool.


Another option is that, since dwagons are not commanders, Stanley had to have them all in his stack, in order that they were led.

The 8 unit per stack limit is just the point when the bonuses stop.

Also, Gobwin Knob (the side) didn't actually end when Saline was killed, as long as they had other cities. Stanley became overlord of the remaining cities.

I think the loss of the last city (irrespective of its status as capital) was the reason Wanda lost all her other units. The loss of the last city meant that Goodmington ended, and Wanda switched from being Ruler to barbarian commander.
raphfrk
Erfabet Supporter!
Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 828
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 10:38 am

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby 0beron » Sun Sep 15, 2013 11:19 am

raphfrk wrote:Also, Gobwin Knob (the side) didn't actually end when Saline was killed, as long as they had other cities. Stanley became overlord of the remaining cities.
Capitals Sides need a Capital. When they temporarily lost GK city, the side ended and the remaining cities would go Neutral or Barbarian.
"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: 3192
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
Location: Morlock Wells

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby Lilwik » Sun Sep 15, 2013 12:09 pm

0beron wrote:Lacking the evidence to disprove something isn't the same as proving it, and that's pretty much always my approach to speculating about Erfworld.
That's a dangerous policy when speculating about anything. That will lead you down a garden path into the deep jungle of all the things we can't disprove. That jungle is literally endless. It starts with things like tools protecting units from disbanding and keeps on going past Stanley and Charlie being secretly the same person and Parson being God.

All I'm saying is that it's not fair to say that it's unclear whether tools protect from disbanding when we have been given a perfectly clear rule that all field units disband. It is clear that tools don't protect anyone, just as clear as it is that humming Eye of the Tiger doesn't protect anyone, just not technically proven yet. The unclear things are the things which have been hinted at in the story but not stated explicitly, and as far as I'm aware it's never been hinted that tools protect people from disbanding.

A better thing to call unclear would be whether being heir protects people from disbanding when the capital is lost. Considering that Wanda was apparently promoted to an heir just to protect her from disbanding, it seems likely, but we've only ever actually seen rulers survive in the field because heirs tend to become rulers moments before their capital falls. If Overlord Firebaugh had been taken alive, would that have killed Wanda? It makes me wonder why Overlord Firebaugh died while Delphie and seven other Goodminton units were still alive in the garrison, almost as if he killed himself instead of allowing his soldiers to protect him when the battle was lost.

0beron wrote:Capitals Sides need a Capital. When they temporarily lost GK city, the side ended and the remaining cities would go Neutral or Barbarian.
Book 1, Page 79, Sizemore: "When the capital fell it wasn't the end of our side."
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1326
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby raphfrk » Sun Sep 15, 2013 4:59 pm

0beron wrote:Capitals Sides need a Capital. When they temporarily lost GK city, the side ended and the remaining cities would go Neutral or Barbarian.


I assumed that you need a capital site to create a capital. A side without a capital site would have no capital. There would probably be penalties.

Parson says that if they lose their capital, they lose the entire treasury. A side without a capital might have problems paying for units. The treasury might have to be made up from gems stored in their main city. Alternatively, each city might have its own treasury and units would have to be linked to a particular city. This would mean that without a capital the Ruler has to put a lot more effort into city management, rather than it all be managed from the capital. There could also be penalties to city production etc.

0beron wrote:Capitals Sides need a Capital. When they temporarily lost GK city, the side ended and the remaining cities would go Neutral or Barbarian.
Book 1, Page 79, Sizemore: "When the capital fell it wasn't the end of our side."


Maybe GK had a second capital site city, but there was never any indication. If this were a game, the most reasonable rule would be that the side continues but with some penalty for not having a capital.

In the original version of Civilization, if you captured another side's capital and it was large enough, it might split into 2 sides (and trigger a civil war).
raphfrk
Erfabet Supporter!
Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 828
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 10:38 am

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby Sir Shadow » Sun Sep 15, 2013 7:08 pm

That's a good point, it's possible that Capital sites automatically switch.

Remember, Slately wasn't concerned with switching the capital to safe Jetstone, he wanted to switch it to trap Parson.
Demon Lord Etna wrote:Looks like I have to resort to the politician's golden rule: "If they can't prove it, deny, deny, deny."
User avatar
Sir Shadow
 
Posts: 326
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:53 am
Location: When you reach the border of hell, turn right. Can't miss me.

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby 0beron » Sun Sep 15, 2013 8:07 pm

Lilwik wrote:All I'm saying is that it's not fair to say that it's unclear whether tools protect from disbanding when we have been given a perfectly clear rule that all field units disband.
No, it is perfectly fair and in all candor, you're being obtuse. The details surrounding Saline's death and the following events are incredibly vague, and that is all I am stating. We can't draw any conclusions from it, so don't try.
Lilwik wrote:Book 1, Page 79, Sizemore: "When the capital fell it wasn't the end of our side."
You're making a classic mistake that has been discussed before. Sizemore is speaking figuratively. The side still could have mechanically ended, but because it was so quickly refounded, it's not really the "end of the side" from a narrative perspective.
"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: 3192
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
Location: Morlock Wells

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby Lilwik » Sun Sep 15, 2013 9:08 pm

0beron wrote:Sizemore is speaking figuratively. The side still could have mechanically ended, but because it was so quickly refounded, it's not really the "end of the side" from a narrative perspective.
I agree that Sizemore could have been speaking figuratively except that we know from Book 0 that sides actually don't end when they lose their capital. Faq is still Faq with or without their capital; it still had Banhammer who never stopped being its ruler, able to use Natural Thinkamancy to order people around. When you combine that with Sizemore's statement, it makes no sense to doubt that the side continued without the capital. It makes no sense to have a ruler without a side.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1326
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby 0beron » Sun Sep 15, 2013 9:25 pm

Lilwik wrote:We know from Book 0 that sides actually don't end when they lose their capital. Faq is still Faq with or without their capital; it still had Banhammer who never stopped being its ruler, able to use Natural Thinkamancy to order people around.
False. FAQ has a capital now since they captured Efbaum, that's why Banhammer is a Ruler.
"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: 3192
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
Location: Morlock Wells

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby Lilwik » Sun Sep 15, 2013 10:06 pm

0beron wrote:False. FAQ has a capital now since they captured Efbaum, that's why Banhammer is a Ruler.
I don't follow that reasoning exactly. If you suppose that Faq ended as a side and Banhammer stopped being ruler briefly before capturing Efbaum, then why exactly is Banhammer ruler now instead of any of the other people who were there when Efbaum was captured? Jillian was more responsible for the capturing of Efbaum than anyone, so couldn't she have become ruler of the new side that started when Efbaum was taken from Haffaton? I mean this entirely hypothetically because we know that Banhammer never stopped being ruler of Faq, so it's not really an issue, but I'm curious to understand your reasoning.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1326
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby Althernai » Sun Sep 15, 2013 10:20 pm

0beron wrote:False. FAQ has a capital now since they captured Efbaum, that's why Banhammer is a Ruler.

But it was still FAQ before they captured Efbaum. Banhammer was still a ruler (he was giving binding orders) and Jillian remained his heir. In fact, Jillian explicitly says this:

“Banhammer lives. Do not turn,” said the jester. Then the beam of sunlight brightened, and he faded away.

She stopped crying. She was all here now, sober. Lying in the mud in the enemy’s lovely garden. She sat up, and with sudden clarity said, “But...Faq didn’t fall.

Jillian heard Lady Firebaugh make some kind of stifled sound.

“Faq, Otoh, and Kibo are Haffaton cities now,” said Dame Branch evenly.

“I’m not a Ruler,” said Jillian. “My father escaped, didn’t he? He finally got off his huge keister and moved!”


EDIT: Emphasis is mine.
Althernai
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 10:08 am

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby 0beron » Sun Sep 15, 2013 10:28 pm

Okay you guys are extrapolating waaaaay too much and being far too rigid in your thinking. A Side cannot persist without any cities, never mind without it's capital. Clearly the Ruler and Heir retain something of their respective specials, but the side does not continue to exist in the classical definition thereof.
"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: 3192
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
Location: Morlock Wells

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby Lilwik » Sun Sep 15, 2013 10:49 pm

0beron wrote:Clearly the Ruler and Heir retain something of their respective specials, but the side does not continue to exist in the classical definition thereof.
I'm not aware of any classical definition of "side." All I know about is what Erfworlders say and do, and they talk and act like Faq was still a side without cities. Olive said that "Faq" was in the battlespace as though Faq still existed (Episode 56), Banhammer gave orders (Episode 57 and others), and Wanda even turned to Faq (Episode 62), all while Faq had no cities.

Wanda: "On orders from my Ruler and with my full personal consent, I hereby pledge allegiance to the side of Faq, and its Ruler, for all the rest of my turns."

Erfworlders don't seem to be aware of the classical definition of "side".
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1326
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby 0beron » Sun Sep 15, 2013 11:51 pm

Lilwik wrote:I'm not aware of any classical definition of "side."
Then what pray tell is a Capital Side? Which are exactly what FAQ, GK, ect are all stated to be, with Natural Allies being a marked departure from? Whatever FAQ was while city-less, it was certainly not 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: 3192
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
Location: Morlock Wells

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby Lilwik » Mon Sep 16, 2013 12:27 am

0beron wrote:Then what pray tell is a Capital Side?
I expect that a Capital Side is a side that has a capital city. Faq started as one, then stopped being one when its capital was captured, then becomes a capital side again when they take Efbaum. It seems clear that Faq must be called a barbarian side during the time between the loss of Faq (the city) and the taking of Efbaum, since we know that Jillian became a barbarian the next time Faq is conquered.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1326
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby ftl » Mon Sep 16, 2013 3:09 am

Lilwik wrote:
0beron wrote:Then what pray tell is a Capital Side?
I expect that a Capital Side is a side that has a capital city. Faq started as one, then stopped being one when its capital was captured, then becomes a capital side again when they take Efbaum. It seems clear that Faq must be called a barbarian side during the time between the loss of Faq (the city) and the taking of Efbaum, since we know that Jillian became a barbarian the next time Faq is conquered.


I don't think that's clear to me (that FAQ must be called a barbarian side during that time). I see a fairly significant difference.

The first time FAQ is conquered, it just retakes a new capital city and continues as before. As you pointed out, even when they didn't have the city, Wanda could "turn to FAQ". And then they retake the city and it's still FAQ, and so on.

But the next time, at the time when Jillian retakes her original cities, she's no longer counted as being FAQ - she has a free choice of what to name her new side. When people allied with Jillian, nobody ever allied "with FAQ", and so on.

I think there are three distinct types here:

1) Capital sides.
2) Sides without a capital, no treasury.
3) Barbarians? (Barbarian sides? We've never heard anybody refer to a "barbarian side". Whatever Jillian was during TBfGK 1).
ftl
Erfabet Supporter!
Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 5:15 pm

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby Lilwik » Mon Sep 16, 2013 4:11 am

ftl wrote:I don't think that's clear to me (that FAQ must be called a barbarian side during that time). I see a fairly significant difference.
Jillian does act like Faq is entirely history for her by the start of Book 1, but it's not clear why that would be. Mechanically it doesn't seem like there is any difference between the first fall of Faq and the second one. I suspect that since she doesn't have any subjects to rule aside from some gwiffons, Jillian has simply chosen to abandon the idea of Faq. The gwiffons certainly don't know they are supposed to be subjects of Faq, so it was probably an easy idea to slip away from.

ftl wrote:But the next time, at the time when Jillian retakes her original cities, she's no longer counted as being FAQ - she has a free choice of what to name her new side.
We have no evidence that Banhammer wasn't free to change the name of his side at any time. I suspect that if he wanted to say that they were no longer Faq and had become the People's Republic of Banhammer, no one would tell him that he was wrong. It seems easier to suppose that than to try to figure out a rule that would explain why Jillian would have been forced to give up the title of ruler of Faq.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1326
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby raphfrk » Mon Sep 16, 2013 10:58 am

0beron wrote:Okay you guys are extrapolating waaaaay too much and being far too rigid in your thinking. A Side cannot persist without any cities, never mind without it's capital. Clearly the Ruler and Heir retain something of their respective specials, but the side does not continue to exist in the classical definition thereof.


Why is Jillian still connected to Banhammer? If the side ended, then she is a barbarian warlord surely?
raphfrk
Erfabet Supporter!
Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 828
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 10:38 am

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby ftl » Mon Sep 16, 2013 12:03 pm

Lilwik wrote:
ftl wrote:I don't think that's clear to me (that FAQ must be called a barbarian side during that time). I see a fairly significant difference.
Jillian does act like Faq is entirely history for her by the start of Book 1, but it's not clear why that would be. Mechanically it doesn't seem like there is any difference between the first fall of Faq and the second one.


Well, yeah. That's my point. Jillian acts like FAQ is entirely history; so I conclude there must be some game mechanic that we're missing to account for this.

There is one big difference between the first fall of FAQ and the second one - in the first fall, the ruler escaped, and in the second fall, the ruler was croaked.
ftl
Erfabet Supporter!
Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 5:15 pm

Re: Epilogue 10 - Message to the Tool

Postby drachefly » Mon Sep 16, 2013 12:24 pm

FAQ being history could simply be that Jillian didn't want to think about it anymore. In both cases, there was a ruler - Jillian was an heir.

And the 'I'm not a ruler' comment is quite clear that she expected to be a ruler upon the death of her father.

Lilwik wrote:
0beron wrote:When Saline croaked and brought about a similar situation, Sizemore made no mention of Stanley losing his dwagons, and I'll bet they weren't ALL in a single stack.
When Overlord Firebaugh croaked in what seems to be exactly the same situation, Wanda lost all the units that weren't in her stack. See Book 0, Episode 26.


Goodminton had no cities left at all. It's not exactly the same situation.
User avatar
drachefly
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 1647
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:36 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Reactions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 13 guests