Book 2 – Page 50

[Tiger]

Wait, what? Are you saying that being a good diplomat somehow makes you able to predict that your opponent is about to exploit a loophole in the rules of the world in a way that nobody has ever thought of before? Because this whole "Tramennis is stupid" thing is becoming very tiresome. The only person who saw this coming was Charlie, and he gave Tram nothing but a nonspecific warning about how clever Parson was. Even Jack, who knows Parson and his way of thinking better than anyone else in Erfworld (including a certain warlord who learned of Parson's existence less than half an hour ago) had no idea what Parson was about to do until he got his orders. Parson thinking in ways Erfworlders don't, coming up with strategies Erfworlders can't, is arguably the entire point of the comic. Tramennis cannot in any reasonable sense be blamed for not realizing that Gobwin Knob could do anything other than S-bomb unimportant targets. If you take a moment to understand that you, the reader, have a privileged perspective that characters in the comic do not have access to, you'll realize Tram's actions are perfectly sensible for the situation he (and everyone else in the comic) thought he was in.

You aren't getting the point. He (or we) isn't saying that he's holding the idiot ball because he can't see the impossible. First, i suggest you read the definition of "holding the idiot ball" from Oberon's link. Holding the idiot ball and being a moron is different. Second, Tram DOESN'T NEED TO PREDICT THE IMPOSSIBLE. No one's blaming for him. All that's being said is, a character that's portrayed as a smart diplomat failing at the first diplomatic action means that he's holding the idiot ball. He could have stopped this mess and started a real parley easly, and then showed us his diplomatic skills. But he didn't. He had the choice, but he didn't.

Seriously? That's your argument? That because he's been established as a skilled diplomat, the fact that he failed to negotiate a truce before Parson did something that you admit he could not possibly have foreseen means he's carrying the Idiot Ball? That if a character who is described as skilled at something doesn't automatically and instantly succeed whenever they do that something, they're an idiot? Words fail me, not least because you've completely misunderstood what the Idiot Ball means. This isn't even an example, let alone the "very definition". A slightly more accurate trope to link to would be Informed Ability, but even that doesn't fit.

[name lips]

Erfworld mechanics may also not necessarily "take the body". It's been said that after harvesting, rations simply pop next turn. What if Parson has managed to break the mechanic, and we get both a decrypted unit and a pop of rations? Now that would be game-breaking.

This. I kind of did a whole spiel on upkeep, provisions, etc. in my first post, but this was not something I had considered. It would mean you could have your cities pop whatever can be harvested... "mostly heavies and mounts, nothing that can speak language", but then harvest them for Warlord/troop rations and still have the decrypted units with no upkeep. Okay, sure, sure, you could decrypt the soldiers so they'd have no upkeep too..... but then they'd all be fanatical puppets, so who wants that? Probably no story point to this line of speculation at all, since the impact would be small though......

This is the most interesting bit of speculation in this thread.

I can just imagine the scene... the next day...

Maggie: "Um, Lord... 10,000 units of rations have popped in Spacerock. The decrypted dwagons are eating them."
Parson (distracted): "Great, yeah, thanks for the agriculture update... OK, now next we need to conquer Transy..... waitafuckingminute... what did you just say?"

[chaine_maile]

Anyone else notice Jack was the one who said "In the middle by the red dragon"? Also note that the middle by the red dragon is where all the arrows are going. Did he serve a double purpose by sending the wounded enemy leader into friendly fire?

[wraithben]

Lots to read and I've only managed to skim most of it, but one point to make.

Someone said a few pages ago that Parson wouldn't travel to JS if Wanda was up and decroaking - in fact the opposite is true. Parson clearly states on screen a couple of comics ago that Sizemore would be off the hook re travelling to Portal Park and then onto JS if Wanda is croaked. From this I read that if she is croaked it's not worth going, if she's up and decrypting then the next stage of the plan goes into effect and Parson is coming to JS.

[BLANDCorporatio]

Jesus Huckleberry Christ, the year's off to a great start for forum wrestling! Looks like we'll wine and dine on Trem's skills (or lack thereof) for many reaction threads to come.

Funny thing is, there's some common ground even between the most acrimoniously separated debaters here. I'll try and sketch such a middle position here.

"Is Trem a competent Warlord?" is a red herring. There are shades of competence, and Trem is outmatched. Not because he didn't see Parson's plan (and people, don't start throwing comparisons with the Zombcano thing, which actually was way out of left field for Erfworlders), but because he didn't react (I'd say, at all) to control the "tantrum".

"Is Trem a competent Diplomat?"- again, shades of competence bla-bla, but let's agree that competence gets results, or, if it fails, it's because of some external, uncontrollable factor. Like, for example, the opponent not wanting to parley. BUT, wait, maybe there's something you can do to at least tilt the odds in the favour of parley. Trem should know that Royal Sides, when perceiving themselves in positions of power, will extend "parley" as an insult. Therefore, he should (have) move(d) to dispel this notion as quickly as possible.

Instead, Trem spends his first lines of dialogue on insults, which is completely in-character. We know since his first appearance that he's a joker. Ribbing on his discussion partner is just how he rolls, and just couldn't resist doing it this time too. Maybe this allows him to "get the measure of the man/woman", maybe it works, most of the time. Didn't happen to work now.

Now, I for one thought the character was annoying on the first encounter, and seeing him gimp his attempt at diplomacy through being annoying is a satisfying story development. But that's just me.

What may be more widely agreeable is that Trem's failing now is the result of his character since ever (and if he's holding an Idiot Ball now, then he always was- thank you for finally noticing!- shades of mere competence, like the bridge mop-up, notwithstanding).



So to sum up, this encounter is not going Trem's way. We must all agree to that.

We may also agree that Trem didn't do all that he could to improve his odds.

Finally, we may agree that whatever he did do, was befitting his character as previously established.

[BLANDCorporatio]

Seriously? That's your argument? That because he's been established as a skilled diplomat, the fact that he failed to negotiate a truce before Parson did something that you admit he could not possibly have foreseen means he's carrying the Idiot Ball?

What I'm amazed at is why everyone in this debate (including me) feels the need to churn out walls of text when the underlying arguments are incredibly simple.

No, that's not zilfallon's (or Oberon's) argument. It's this, and I subscribe:

Since Royal sides have a reputation, when perceiving themselves in a powerful postion, to not offer honest parley, since there's reason for Parson to think royal side JS thinks themselves powerful, since there's reason for Trem to know that Parson may be under this impression, Trem, wanting an honest parley, should inform Parson, or whoever calls the shots in GK, as soon as possible.

Or, spelled out in tedious detail,

Spoiler: show

1) Royal sides have a reputation for not offering honest parleys when they perceive themselves in a position of power.

2) GK's flying group is off turn above a hostile city with strong air defenses. Important units (like Wanda) are in mortal danger.

3) 2)=> Parson thinks Jetstone perceives themselves as powerful right now.

4) {1), 3)}=> Parson does not think Jetstone will offer an honest Parley.

5) We'll take as a given that Trem is a competent diplomat, and a fine connoiseur of the Erfer spirit.

6) King Slately was not after an honest parley.

7) {1), 6)}=> Jetstone, at least in Slately, perceives themselves as having the upper hand. (Bit of bending strict propositional logic here, I'll admit, since I assume that a Royal side that perceives itself weak will offer honest parleys)

8) {5), 7), 1), 2)}=> Trem knows that Parson does not expect an honest parley.

9) We'll take as a given that Trem, in fact, wants an honest parley.

10) {8), 9)}=> Trem should (have) move(d) to inform whoever makes decisions for GK that an honest parley is sought.

[Kyrt]

A smart diplomat, having come to the reasonable decision to parley honestly rather than in the typical royal "insult to injury, then attack" fashion should have been able to come to the conclusion that no worthy opponent, much less the "more than perfect warlord" who Charlie strongly urged Tram not to parley with at all, would have allowed his units which could attack to be killed without getting that bit of damage in before they died. The GK attack was inevitable, unless some effort was taken to convince the GK leader that Jetstone did indeed intend to go against their SOP and offer up some real terms.

They held a parley...which necessitates a cessation of hostilities. The attack was foreseen and dealt with in an appropriate manner. You arer simply stating that Tram should have negotaiated a more formal ceasefire as a pre requisite tot hge ceasefire that wioudl ahve to take place for the parley to take place. Of course, these talks about talks would, in turn, have required a ceasefire and parley to be arranged to discuss them.

I simply do not see how Tram could have negotiated or communicated his stance without first arranging a parley (and the accompanying ceasefire) by default. Parleys require a cessation of hostiliites for the sides to meet and if one side is going to break it seconds after the talks begin, its not going to matter one whit if they formally agree to a ceasefire beforehand.

Tram's idiocy was not necessarily in failing to foresee rules-bending tactics (there is no rules bending or breaking going on here, to be perfectly clear. Parson is only applying known rules in an innovative manner)

In a manner for which they are not intended. The very nature of an exploit.

Tram's idiocy was in intending to hold an honest parley and then opening that parley with a lot of insults and useless bluster. His window of opportunity to stop a GK "tantrum" was small, to be sure, but not only did Tram apparently fail to understand the inevitability of such a "tantrum", but he made no effort to prevent it.

Completely missing the point of what a parley actually is. Parleys, by their nature, require the cessation of hostilities you think Tram should have asked for. Moreso, if GK was going to attack, then askign for a formal ceasefire as part of the conditions for parley wre not going to stop him. If he would abide by a formal request he would abide by the informal one. If he would not abide by the informal, he wouldn't abide by the formal. Asking for a formal cessation is a totally redundant state of affairs.

And when you are in the position that Tram was in, knowing that you could lose anyway and hoping for an alliance as your best means of halting a total war, that failure was pure idiocy.

He's looking for a non-aggression. Not alliance. And ultimately, the point is that since GK couldn't move or attack, the fact that the yellows could bomb the atrium was essentially meaningless. The only way Tram could prevent that would be to shoot down the yellows. If he did that before the parley...there'd likely be no parley. What would you have him do? Open fire on the yellows and hope that GK would hold still? Ask Ossomer very nicely not to attack during the parley - something he'd be expected to do anyway?

[BLANDCorporatio]

They held a parley...which necessitates a cessation of hostilities. The attack was foreseen and dealt with in an appropriate manner. {snip}

I simply do not see how Tram could have negotiated or communicated his stance without first arranging a parley (and the accompanying ceasefire) by default.

Here's one way- when approaching Ossomer, immediately communicate one of the terms you are after, and choose one that is favourable to GK.

In fact, try and sketch the terms as soon as possible.

THEN, if there's a "tantrum", start shooting- and no "just the yellows" funnybusiness. Keep shooting, reminding Ossomer to thinkamancy back the terms, that will be valid once the "tantrum" stops.

[Kyrt]

First, if Charlie knew Hamster could make a volcano nuke, would've he deployed so many valuable archons on their airspace and just let them sit there to watch the fireworks instead of taking the garrison himself?

You're right. Charlie very likely didn't foresee that. That's a long way from stating Trimancer links are a cheat.

Nope, Hamster won Book 1 by cheating the game, and he will do so again.

No...he won by using the existing game rules. He was imaginative...yes. But he wasn't using an exploit. He wasn't gaming the system. And he wasn't cheating.

Thats a key difference here. Here, at JS, he is using an exploit. GK is helpless. Most, if not all of that airgroup will die. If they were on the ground, GK would have options. But they aren't and off turn movement restrictions means they can't land.

Parsons exploiting the harvest mechanics from the supply rules. If he can't land, he'll harvest his mounts and simply initiate a forced fall.

Again, Trems himself plans to get Wanda and the pliers at any cost. Hamster knows that. How would that benefit GK exactly?

By letting GK gain a secure border, and keep an airgroup, a Master Foolamancer and several warlords they would otherwise have lost.

As it is, whether or not GK would have agreed is irrelevant. JS stands to gain a lot from a parley and it costs them exactly nothing. In that case...where is the harm in actually parleying? if they can arrange a deal...great. If not..so be it, GK gets wiped out. But JS does have a powerful bargaining chip with Jack, those warlords and the dwagons.

[Kyrt]

When time is of the essence

Tram literally has all the time he wants or needs. He has until JS turn is over. JSs turn won't be over until someone says "End turn".

And with regards to "inevitable tantrum" and "unimportant targets": An act is only inevitable if you take no action to prevent it.

Nothing Tram could do would prevent it except attack and that would ruin his chance for parley.

And calling the atrium and the troops within it unimportant is like calling shmuckers and time unimportant. To repair the atrium will cost shmuckers, and to replace the troops will cost time. Neither being resources that Jetstone has in plenty right now.

And yet, ultimately, these are still items of minor importance. The atrium doesn't need to be repaired immediately. JS was likely going to have to disband something at the end of the turn.

[Smoker]

Tram could have avoided (or at least delayed, with a reasonable chance at avoiding) all of this if his opening line to Ossomer was:

"Put me through to your Ruler, I wish to negotiate an alliance."

There's a whole bunch of really good reasons why Trem didn't open up with that line, but ultimately the evidence speaks for itself: he should have. Does this fit a particular definition of "holding the idiot ball"? eeh, I dont really care. The point in itself is pretty much a fact: Tram made a blunder. Maybe it wasn't his fault, but it was his responsibility.

Now we can all judge him in line with our personal values and expectations of a person in a leadership position - some of us will forgive (I certainly do) and some will not.

If Tram had walked up and said "Hello, Ossomer. Father and I have talked it over, and we've decided to surrender and convert to Toolism. Where do we go to get our new black uniforms? By the way, yours looks really good on you!," everything else would have played out exactly the same except that Ossomer would have had even fewer lines. He'd have just sat there in slack-jawed wonder as S-bombs started falling onto the Atrium roof behind him.

Warlords can command units in their stacks mentally. All Ossomer had to do was "re-stack" into a stack of Archons, then mentally command one to open a thinkagram to Maggie/Parson - it would have made it in time.


Aaaand also:

As far as Plan 1 goes, I still don't understand why Tram positioned his ground forces in atrium, then ordered them to evacuate as soon as the battle started. Why intentionally put troops in the line of fire if you plan to retreat the instant they take fire?

But the more important point is for Plan 2. Namely, what happens when they "die." Everyone knew dead bodies fall out of the Airspace zone, so why is everyone other than Parson so insistent that you can't move between zones out of turn?!? Sure, for mundane units it probably won't matter unless the ground force is massively outnumbered, but we all know Casters are anything but mundane.

Unless Jetstone was overwhelmingly certain that they could kill Wanda without killing her mount, there was *always* a chance that she'd survive the fall and wreak then havoc on Space Rock. Yet it sure seems like that possibility had never even occurred to Tramennis (or anyone else, for that matter) until he saw Wanda on the ground.

Nobody thought the Atrium could be broken. Or if they did, they didn't think Parson would target it. This means that all the bodies would have fallen outside of the garrison zone, so even if they did survive, they'd just be stuck in a different zone with nowhere to go. Wanda can decrypt as much as falls her way - Jetstone just gets to farm the xp from them twice.

[Kyrt]

As far as Plan 1 goes, I still don't understand why Tram positioned his ground forces in atrium, then ordered them to evacuate as soon as the battle started. Why intentionally put troops in the line of fire if you plan to retreat the instant they take fire?

They weren't in the line of fire....they were sheltered. Tram didn't seem to want them involved at all. It also partially explained why his assumption GK was having a tantrum makes some sense...they were using their only method of attack to cause damage to units which couldn't hurt them and which forced JS to kill the yellows. It was simply causing hurt for the sake of causing hurt.

But the more important point is for Plan 2. Namely, what happens when they "die." Everyone knew dead bodies fall out of the Airspace zone, so why is everyone other than Parson so insistent that you can't move between zones out of turn?!? Sure, for mundane units it probably won't matter unless the ground force is massively outnumbered, but we all know Casters are anything but mundane.

Because you can't cross zone boundaries off turn. Parsons harvesting mechanic bypassed that and did so in a manner which let a large number of GKs forecs get to the ground at the same time - providing cover for the survivors who would normally have been croaked. However, deliberately initiating a fall would also seem be problematic. Harvesting the mounts allowed GK to bypass all these restrictions.

Unless Jetstone was overwhelmingly certain that they could kill Wanda without killing her mount, there was *always* a chance that she'd survive the fall and wreak then havoc on Space Rock. Yet it sure seems like that possibility had never even occurred to Tramennis (or anyone else, for that matter) until he saw Wanda on the ground.

Wanda on the ground without a large GK force to protect her was toast. She'd not be able to decrypt enough to make it a concern. Parsons plan also provided cover for her and gave her fodder for her magic.

Hell, even that assessment is being generous. Even if Jetstone was CERTAIN they could pick Wanda off, they knew Jack was in the zone, too. Given that we know of Foolamancy, that means JS would have had to bludgeon their way through every rider, then every other mount before it could be certain Wanda was safely dead. Yet not only did we never see such orders mentioned, we actually saw Tramennis order his archers to target the Yellows directly.

Wanda was protected by screening stacks. Were the yellows? As it was, Tram couldn't be sure they'd kill Wanda or Jack easily. But at the same time, they woudl get most, if not all, of the force and any survivors who survived the fall would not last long in the city itself.

JS could have won the battle fairly easily. But once Parson took over, their only chance was with Wanda dead.

[Oberon]

No, if Tram had done everything right he'd be discussing terms with Parson now, instead of trying to figure out what is happening to him. If he had even tried, I'd give him a pass. But he didn't even make an effort to be diplomatic.

There is nothing he could do to make Parson discuss terms with him. Parson was never interested in a discussion because he correctly assumed that any of Jetstone's offers would be less than what he could take by force. Jetstone would never let Gobwin Knob walk out of this with the Arkenpliers and Parson (who knows this) would never give them up so long as other options remained.

For what it is worth, I agree with you for the most part. But I have the advantage of knowing that Parson would never have allowed Wanda or the 'pliers to be giving points in a GK bargain. Tram apparently did think that asking the Toolist side to forfeit a tool was a possible option. Yet another case of idiocy, but many have defended that he doesn't have the readers vision and can't be blamed. But attempting to strike a bargain and failing would have been a whole lot better than opening a discussion with insults and failing to even attempt to prevent the attack by the yellows or to convince Parson of Tram's sincerity. I also think that Parson would have been happy to listen to a sincere offer of terms, even if they broke down over the specifics. But Tram made sure that Parson never got to decide to listen or not, by running his mouth insulting Ossomer and Stanley instead of playing like a smart diplomat and tending to the most important business first.

And yet, ultimately, these are still items of minor importance. The atrium doesn't need to be repaired immediately. JS was likely going to have to disband something at the end of the turn.

I really love the circular method of argument...
The atrium doesn't need to be be repaired immediately --- The atrium wouldn't have been damaged and in need of repair if Tram was a smart diplomat.
Jetstone was going to have to disband some units anyway --- Tram expected to sue for "reparations", why not just ask/demand the shmuckers you need to, you know, not have to disband some units in the next turn?

[Kyrt]

Holding the idiot ball and being a moron is different. Second, Tram DOESN'T NEED TO PREDICT THE IMPOSSIBLE. No one's blaming for him. All that's being said is, a character that's portrayed as a smart diplomat failing at the first diplomatic action means that he's holding the idiot ball. He could have stopped this mess and started a real parley easly, and then showed us his diplomatic skills. But he didn't. He had the choice, but he didn't.

Fine.

How?

[BLANDCorporatio]

Fine.

How?

You might choose to ignore some of your more, ehm, polemic opponents. Fine. But so far, on this very thread, the very pictures of moderation (Smoker and dareIsay, myself) have answered that question. Twice.

Tram could have avoided (or at least delayed, with a reasonable chance at avoiding) all of this if his opening line to Ossomer was:

"Put me through to your Ruler, I wish to negotiate an alliance."

There's a whole bunch of really good reasons why Trem didn't open up with that line, but ultimately the evidence speaks for itself: he should have. Does this fit a particular definition of "holding the idiot ball"? eeh, I dont really care. The point in itself is pretty much a fact: Tram made a blunder. Maybe it wasn't his fault, but it was his responsibility.

I agree, that was my assesment in a recent post as well. He opened in-character, but this time it didn't work.

[Oberon]

The very TV Tropes page you cite to describes "holding the idiot ball" as an act of incredible, willful stupidity that exists only to drive the plot in some way.

Why, yes. You have grasped my point exactly. The kind of willful stupidity that has a character who is described as being the smart diplomat, who has made more shmuckers for Jetstone than any other Prince due to his keen diplomatic skills, who has the respect of Ossomer "Do you ever tire of bring wrong" and his father for those skills, has this character when finally presented with a situation where he could have acted like a diplomar instead acted like a prat and fail to accomplish the very thing he said he wanted to accomplish: Forge an alliance with GK. Not only fail to accomplish it, but failed to even try because he somehow saw more value in needling Ossomer than making sure his opponents knew that he intended to bargain in earnest. All because the plot needed Parson to attack Jetstone, or we couldn't have had GK men raining down from the Jetstone sky in a story entitled "It's raining men", yes, that is a fine example of driving the plot by having a character act in a manner that is directly opposite of what they have been said to be all along.

[BLANDCorporatio]

Meh. I'd say the insult was in-character. He greeted Ansom the same way, it sort of makes sense for him to just can't help it being witty.

Should he have foregone that natural impulse? Oh yes, and how. But what he did is, given the established character, plausible.

[atalex]

Since Royal sides have a reputation, when perceiving themselves in a powerful postion, to not offer honest parley, since there's reason for Parson to think royal side JS thinks themselves powerful, since there's reason for Trem to know that Parson may be under this impression, Trem, wanting an honest parley, should inform Parson, or whoever calls the shots in GK, as soon as possible.

When exactly should Trem have communicated this strange message of "We really, truly want to parley, cross our hearts and hope to die, so please don't assume we're being disingenuous and kill us all through some arcane means I can't even imagine right now"? The start of parley was the signal for Parson's stratagem to begin. There's no evidence at all that Parson was even paying attention to what was being said during parley.

Based on what Trem actually knew of the situation prior to parley, it is inconceivable to me that he would have thought he was under any serious time constraints at all, let alone that it was vitally important that he communicate his sincerity to Lord Hamster as soon as possible in order to save his side from disaster. If he had displayed such insight into what GK was planning, I'd have called him a Mary Sue and considered it a jump the shark moment. BTW, that's two TV Tropes in one sentence. Do I get a prize for that?

[BLANDCorporatio]

When exactly should Trem have communicated this strange message of "We really, truly want to parley, cross our hearts and hope to die, so please don't assume we're being disingenuous and kill us all through some arcane means I can't even imagine right now"?

The message should have been "tell your Chief Warlord that we are looking for parley and here are our terms <insert GK-favourable term here>".

The start of parley was the signal for Parson's stratagem to begin. There's no evidence at all that Parson was even paying attention to what was being said during parley.

What's worse, is that there's no evidence of Trem wanting to make Parson listen.*

(EDIT: * gosh, where my English at?)

Which is exactly what he should have been doing.

And no, there are no prizes.

[Kyrt]

Here's one way- when approaching Ossomer, immediately communicate one of the terms you are after, and choose one that is favourable to GK.

In short hold a parley. Which was happening.

THEN, if there's a "tantrum", start shooting- and no "just the yellows" funnybusiness. Keep shooting, reminding Ossomer to thinkamancy back the terms, that will be valid once the "tantrum" stops.

In short, destroy his own bargaining hand.

Look - all your arguments are based on one one overwhelming premise....that Tram had one opportunity to talk and that there was a time limit.

There wasn't. Tram could have talked all year about the weather and then still have been able to discuss terms before deciding on whether or not to wipe out GK. No time pressure means all the time in the world needed to discuss terms with Parson. The only thing he needed to prevent immediately was attack by GK forces...which he did when it became an issue. The only reason Trams probing of Ossomer is deemed to be an issue is because Parson didn't wait to see how the talks would develop and his plan meant Tram had a deadline he wasn't aware even existed. The idea that his opening words would be "DONTATTACKIREALLYWANTTOARRANGEADEALWITHPARSON" is somewhat far fetched. NO diplomatic dialogue begins this way. Nor is there any consideration to be polite. Indeed, in many stories a certain degree of bravado and one upmanship and insults during such negotiations is expected....the "emissaries" engage in a verbal war of words. And in RL....you'll get the usual pleasantries and hellos and yes, you'll even get the pointed snubs and subtle insults...the hand not shaken, the photo opportunity turned down, leaving the room to avoid a toast.

Your idea that Tram, speaking from a position of strength, with a powerful bargaining hand, with a need and desire to probe his brother and get whatever info about Parson he could and with no time limit or any degree of urgency and at a time of mutual ceasefire would feel a need to immediately declare that this parley would not be a sham and forego the usual "diplomatic insults" is soemthign I don't quite understand.