Book 2 – Page 67

Page by page discussion of the comic.

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby Feyrauth » Tue Jul 19, 2011 4:35 am

Oberon wrote:
Feyrauth wrote:But, meta-thinking more than is healthy, why did Rob start Parson at such a low level, despite him being the ultimate warlord? There's got to be a reason, which will be made clear in time. Until then, Parson can't "level like crazy".
Because levels (a pure mechanical advantage, such as Ansom and Ossomer have/had) isn't the equivalent of canny, a pure non-mechanical advantage which Parson has been expressing all along?


Just so. But the "perfect warlord" would be high level as well as clever, surely? Unless there's a good reason for him to be low level.
Feyrauth
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 9:25 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby MarbitChow » Tue Jul 19, 2011 7:28 am

Feyrauth wrote:
Oberon wrote:
Feyrauth wrote:But, meta-thinking more than is healthy, why did Rob start Parson at such a low level, despite him being the ultimate warlord? There's got to be a reason, which will be made clear in time. Until then, Parson can't "level like crazy".
Because levels (a pure mechanical advantage, such as Ansom and Ossomer have/had) isn't the equivalent of canny, a pure non-mechanical advantage which Parson has been expressing all along?


Just so. But the "perfect warlord" would be high level as well as clever, surely? Unless there's a good reason for him to be low level.

Because level is a function of training + killing, and training is a REALLY slow way to level. Parson's never killed on Earth, so he can't be a high level yet. A "true" perfect warlord might start exceedingly high in level, but Stanley mucked with the spell a bit by throwing on a whole bunch of unnecessary conditions (snack on gwiffins, eat marbits for breakfast, etc.), so he got Parson instead.
User avatar
MarbitChow
 
Posts: 2510
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:41 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby Kreistor » Tue Jul 19, 2011 10:52 am

GaryThunder wrote:That liquid is not gunpowder, nor is it simply burning oil. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redox]Did you check that sound effect?
The redox reaction of whatever two substances Sizemore's golem poured together (a fuel and an oxidant of some description, most likely)


A redox reaction can be oxidation (combustion) or reduction. A reduction reaction would be the combination of a two part explosive, the opposite of oxidation.



No, there is no direct link between the Redox effect and fire. Redox happens in Frame 5, with no fire produced, and the golem walking away with no evidence of carrying any product with him. The oil is shown to be passing through corpses, but the Redox has no corpses near it, so there is no evidence that it is in the path of the oil. At no point do we see what created the fire... it may have just been a torch. Why waste a complex substance on something a torch can achieve?

It *might* be true that the Redox reaction is in the path of the oil. It also might be true that the Golem is merely setting up two traps in the same area.

Which proves that Sizemore can wield fire, but not through magic - through chemistry.


At no point does Sizemore demonstrate any participation in the creation of oil, the creation of the Redox reactants, or the ignition of the Fire. At no point does he claim to have created any of these.

The man knows his physical sciences as well as his geology, and so does Rob.


At no point does Sizemore claim any such knowledge. You see only a golem obeying orders, not the fabrication of these three substances, nor the specific use of any of them.

Further, the creation of things is Stuffamancy. We have seen no claim that Dirtamancy creates substances the way Stuffamancy does. The opportunity to state that Dirtamancy can create Stuff occurred in the Summer Updates when Fabrication was explained to Parson, and it was declined. The only school that creates stuff is Stuffamancy, and we are told that Sizemore has no capacity for magics outside Dirtamancy. It is far more likely that Wanda created this Stuff, since we know that she has great capacity outside Croakamancy.

But what we do know is that Fabrication is Natural Stuffamancy, and can create non-magical things. Since no magic is cast on any of these substances, no magic is required for their production, and that puts these firmly in the realm of Natural Stuffamancy. Since we already know that Twolls have Fabrication, and never see Sizemore claiming Fabrication as a special, or that he can create such substances, we can explain the entire event without Sizemore's participation, except in ordering the golem how to create either one or two traps, which is a known Dirtamancer ability.

Basically, Occam's Razor comes down. We can explain the entire trap with the known and proven abilities of units without conferring any new powers to anyone. You are adding a new ability to Sizemore in your explanation that no one has mentioned (even when the opportunity to arose), nor has any direct image appeared to support -- that Sizemore has a Natural Stuffamancy special similar to Fabrication.
http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/TBFGK_1 Here you can find all comic pages written as text for convenient quoting.

http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/Erfworld_Mechanics The starting page for accessing all known Erfworld "rules".
User avatar
Kreistor
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:59 pm
Location: K-W, Ontario, Canada

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby Lamech » Tue Jul 19, 2011 11:38 am

Further, the creation of things is Stuffamancy. We have seen no claim that Dirtamancy creates substances the way Stuffamancy does. The opportunity to state that Dirtamancy can create Stuff occurred in the Summer Updates when Fabrication was explained to Parson, and it was declined. The only school that creates stuff is Stuffamancy, and we are told that Sizemore has no capacity for magics outside Dirtamancy. It is far more likely that Wanda created this Stuff, since we know that she has great capacity outside Croakamancy.

http://www.erfworld.com/book-1-archive/?px=%2F038a.jpg
Sizemore's a flavor of stuffamancer mate. "Saying dirtamancy can't do that because its s stuffamancy ability, makes no sense."

We don't know the major classes interact with the specific disciplines well yet. We know that a [major-class] caster can use the more specific abilities. (Janice and flower power.) We know that Sizemore could ding master-class with a insight into his major class. We don't know on the other hand if there are generic stuffamancy powers. Furthermore we don't know if one needs to be a stuffamancer (as opposed to a specialist therein) to use them either if they exist at all.
Lamech
 
Posts: 1450
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 9:23 am

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby Kreistor » Tue Jul 19, 2011 11:48 am

AH, whoops. My apologies. I thought Stuffmancy was a School, not a class. Rescinded. (But not editing away. I take responsibility for my mistakes.)
http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/TBFGK_1 Here you can find all comic pages written as text for convenient quoting.

http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/Erfworld_Mechanics The starting page for accessing all known Erfworld "rules".
User avatar
Kreistor
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:59 pm
Location: K-W, Ontario, Canada

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby jah77 » Tue Jul 19, 2011 12:30 pm

Guys, Parson was brought to Erfworld in part as a solution to the Charlie Problem. This was revealed in an extra page in the print book. On that page, Maggie suggested that the GMTTA reveal the Charlie problem to Parson, but they rejected that idea. Now it seems they are changing their opinions.

The next few pages will reveal Charlie as the ultimate foe and then recenter the story as a fight of Parson vs Charlie.
jah77
I am a Tool!
I am a Tool!
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 1:26 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby gameboy1234 » Tue Jul 19, 2011 3:26 pm

jah77 wrote:The next few pages will reveal Charlie as the ultimate foe and then recenter the story as a fight of Parson vs Charlie.



Actually, I don't think that'll happen for a while yet. Issue 2 has to end soon, and I don't think Charlie will be the big-bad at the end of it. Parson's going to need his own reasons for going after Charlie, and a group of 6 or so Thinkamancers having a problem with him isn't going to be it. I think Charlie is going to make himself a problem for Parson sometime early in issue 3.
"Do it?" Dan, I'm not a Republic serial villain. Do you seriously think I'd explain my master-stroke if there remained the slightest chance of you affecting its outcome?

I did it thirty-five minutes ago.

Avatar hoarked from PS238.
User avatar
gameboy1234
YOTD Supporter!
YOTD Supporter!
 
Posts: 498
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 10:04 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby CaptainPlatypus » Tue Jul 19, 2011 4:00 pm

Could this be Janis trying to pull one over on Marie? After all, we didn't see any caster-glow or anything like that - it seems possible to me that she's just giving Marie a way to do a subconscious end-run around her own morality and help in a way she normally wouldn't. Not like she hasn't shown herself to have a flair for the (slightly, at least) devious.
CaptainPlatypus
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 7:00 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby GaryThunder » Tue Jul 19, 2011 4:28 pm

CaptainPlatypus wrote:Could this be Janis trying to pull one over on Marie? After all, we didn't see any caster-glow or anything like that - it seems possible to me that she's just giving Marie a way to do a subconscious end-run around her own morality and help in a way she normally wouldn't. Not like she hasn't shown herself to have a flair for the (slightly, at least) devious.


I don't think Marie cast anything since we've seen her, but...Predictamancer. She could have made that Prediction this morning and is only now vocalizing it. That seems like the sort of thing she'd do.
GaryThunder
 
Posts: 356
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 10:10 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby GaryThunder » Tue Jul 19, 2011 5:25 pm

Kreistor wrote:A redox reaction can be oxidation (combustion) or reduction. A reduction reaction would be the combination of a two part explosive, the opposite of oxidation.


Then what we saw was likely a reduction reaction that created the explosive, that later underwent the oxidation reaction when it burned up Jetstone.

Kreistor wrote:No, there is no direct link between the Redox effect and fire. Redox happens in Frame 5, with no fire produced, and the golem walking away with no evidence of carrying any product with him. The oil is shown to be passing through corpses, but the Redox has no corpses near it, so there is no evidence that it is in the path of the oil. At no point do we see what created the fire... it may have just been a torch. Why waste a complex substance on something a torch can achieve?

It *might* be true that the Redox reaction is in the path of the oil. It also might be true that the Golem is merely setting up two traps in the same area.


The "Redox" sound effect was (probably) a reduction reaction, as you have correctly identified, that created a chemical liquid of unknown composition. I have so far assumed that the liquid then flowed down towards the gate we see another golem opening in Panel 6, and creeping its way down to the Jetstone troops. I don't think that Rob would have composed those panels in that way if they weren't causally linked in some fashion. Sizemore probably either lit it (from a distance? with a torch? with juice? unknown) or directed its flow towards Jetstone.

Hmm...it did flow right towards them, didn't it. The tunnel must have been sloped in a particular fashion to provide a downhill path to Jetstone's position. Either that, or Sizemore can make liquid flow uphill (or retool the angles of the tunnels to create a downhill path to Jetstone on the fly). Those are both pretty scary powers, but we have no evidence for either.

Kreistor wrote:At no point does Sizemore demonstrate any participation in the creation of oil, the creation of the Redox reactants, or the ignition of the Fire. At no point does he claim to have created any of these.


It's his golem setting off one of his traps. He dug that entire tunnel system and created all the golems, is it that much of a stretch to believe he also had a hand in setting up those traps?

And if not Sizemore, then who? Wanda? Maggie? Stanley? Jack? Any of the various Uncroaked warlords or Twoll/Hobgobwin troops? Who else in Gobwin Knob before Parson arrived (or even since then, he doesn't seem like a chemist) would have had any reason to know anything about the tunnel's trap system?

Kreistor wrote:At no point does Sizemore claim any such knowledge. You see only a golem obeying orders, not the fabrication of these three substances, nor the specific use of any of them.

Further, the creation of things is Stuffamancy. We have seen no claim that Dirtamancy creates substances the way Stuffamancy does. The opportunity to state that Dirtamancy can create Stuff occurred in the Summer Updates when Fabrication was explained to Parson, and it was declined. The only school that creates stuff is Stuffamancy, and we are told that Sizemore has no capacity for magics outside Dirtamancy. It is far more likely that Wanda created this Stuff, since we know that she has great capacity outside Croakamancy.

But what we do know is that Fabrication is Natural Stuffamancy, and can create non-magical things. Since no magic is cast on any of these substances, no magic is required for their production, and that puts these firmly in the realm of Natural Stuffamancy. Since we already know that Twolls have Fabrication, and never see Sizemore claiming Fabrication as a special, or that he can create such substances, we can explain the entire event without Sizemore's participation, except in ordering the golem how to create either one or two traps, which is a known Dirtamancer ability.

Basically, Occam's Razor comes down. We can explain the entire trap with the known and proven abilities of units without conferring any new powers to anyone. You are adding a new ability to Sizemore in your explanation that no one has mentioned (even when the opportunity to arose), nor has any direct image appeared to support -- that Sizemore has a Natural Stuffamancy special similar to Fabrication.


I'm not suggesting that Sizemore created the chemical traps from whole cloth through using juice. Nor am I suggesting that intricate knowledge of chemistry is somehow inherent to Dirtamancy. But Sizemore, being a Dirtamancer and a rather thorough one (when you dig and build golems out of poop for a living, you tend to get really good at the details of such work), has probably done a study on such things. Possibly at the Magic Kingdom. There's no evidence, direct or inferential, to support the idea that there is an entirely separate chemist in GK who we've never heard of, and Occam's Razor comes down to Sizemore being the likeliest possible unit to have created those traps.

Did he directly deploy them? No, but he's not a direct combat caster. Could the "Redox" merely have been a referential sound effect for a magical occurrence rather than an actual chemical reaction? Makes sense, like "4chan" or "Crypsis" (spell word, but Jack really doesn't seem to be using some kind of biological camouflage mechanism like a chameleon's). Either way, though, it doesn't make sense for anyone but Sizemore to have set up those traps. When would Wanda have the time, given Stanley's constant nagging pre-Parson?
GaryThunder
 
Posts: 356
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 10:10 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby GaryThunder » Tue Jul 19, 2011 5:27 pm

Feyrauth wrote:
Oberon wrote:
Feyrauth wrote:But, meta-thinking more than is healthy, why did Rob start Parson at such a low level, despite him being the ultimate warlord? There's got to be a reason, which will be made clear in time. Until then, Parson can't "level like crazy".
Because levels (a pure mechanical advantage, such as Ansom and Ossomer have/had) isn't the equivalent of canny, a pure non-mechanical advantage which Parson has been expressing all along?


Just so. But the "perfect warlord" would be high level as well as clever, surely? Unless there's a good reason for him to be low level.


Heroes that are too powerful break stories and quash conflict. If Parson had bonuses like Ansom and could just muscle his way to victory, what fun would that be? It's the very fact that his bonus is so low that forces him to use his greater strength of strategy, which he wouldn't need nearly as much at a higher level.
GaryThunder
 
Posts: 356
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 10:10 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby oslecamo2_temp » Tue Jul 19, 2011 6:39 pm

GaryThunder wrote:
Feyrauth wrote:Just so. But the "perfect warlord" would be high level as well as clever, surely? Unless there's a good reason for him to be low level.


Heroes that are too powerful break stories and quash conflict. If Parson had bonuses like Ansom and could just muscle his way to victory, what fun would that be? It's the very fact that his bonus is so low that forces him to use his greater strength of strategy, which he wouldn't need nearly as much at a higher level.


Some other key points:
-The spell tecnically doesn't summon the perfect warlord, it summons the best possible to your needs. Like Wanda said way back in book 1, "As good as they come".
-Hamster's sword did aparently greatly improve his combat stats, but even if he became as strong as lv 10 Parson, Hamster still wouldn't foolishly charge into the middle of the enemy horde. That's what Parson did, and that costed him dearly. The only time Hamster swinged that sword at something, he did 1-hit kill a siege beast.
-Altough tecnically a strategy genius, Hamster's still a young fat dude whitout much actual battlefield experience or war training. Reading books is all fine and dandy, but if he wants levels, he'll have to get his hands dirty on the frontline or do some extreme workout over hundreds of turns like Artemis.
Formerly oslecamo2, unable to acess old acount.
oslecamo2_temp
 
Posts: 223
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:08 am

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby Beeskee » Tue Jul 19, 2011 6:53 pm

It seems like Parson 'popped' at a level greater than 1. His bonus is 2, which means his level is either 2, 3, or 6, depending on which units he was talking about in that update. This is based on what we learned later about warlord and chief warlord bonuses and how they relate to unit levels. Edit: Oops, he's level 2. I found the relevant comic.

I'd be very interested to know whether native Erfworld units can pop at levels greater than 1. I imagine all units 'built' by cities pop at level 1, barring some sort of special feature we haven't heard about yet, but units popped by ruins may be greater than 1. There's no way to be sure based on our current info tho.


Parson himself said he didn't know anything about combat other than "pointy end away from user" but he has a wealth of tactical imagination and experience in other combat systems, it could be that his actual level or effective level (if such a thing exists) is higher. Parson is also classed as "Special" so that may muddle the calculations too.
User avatar
Beeskee
Erfabet Supporter!
Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 485
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 4:25 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby GaryThunder » Tue Jul 19, 2011 9:46 pm

I think Parson should promote himself as far as the physics of Erfworld (and the treasury, and Stanley's implicit will) allow him to do so. He's heading into combat, after all, he's gotta set himself up as good as he can get. Field unit is great, but is that as high as he can go?

I doubt that units can gain levels through the expenditure of Schmuckers (though that raises an interesting question as to the true meaning of "promoting...units to full"), because otherwise it would seem to be standard practice to promote all Chief Warlords as high as feasibly possible immediately upon attaining the position to secure the higher side-wide bonuses. But there's gotta be some other way Parson can boost himself.

Beeskee wrote:I'd be very interested to know whether native Erfworld units can pop at levels greater than 1. I imagine all units 'built' by cities pop at level 1, barring some sort of special feature we haven't heard about yet, but units popped by ruins may be greater than 1. There's no way to be sure based on our current info tho.


Dwagons. Taming three dwagons in one turn wouldn't be impressive if they were lowly Level 1 units, and if wild dwagons are indeed Level 1 but fearsome even then, then high-level dwagons would be way more powerful than they have been portrayed thus far. Also, if wild dwagons are Level 1 and have stats comparable to regular Level 1 units, then how in holy heck did Stanley rock Faq's house with more than half of his forces being wimps?
GaryThunder
 
Posts: 356
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 10:10 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby Moik » Tue Jul 19, 2011 10:58 pm

I'm totally in the Marie fanclub now. Serene and friendly but action-oriented and decisive despite that. I'd hit it.

Also, on the point of potential combat prowess of a predictamancer, the previous Minority Report clip displays the defensive powers of avoidance well, but the same mechanic can be applied to offense by eliminating opposing avoidance. The Dungeons & Dragons d20 SRD has "True Strike*" at the first-level of Divination spells which gives a person an additional 20 points of accuracy on their next attack. Given that the game's randomization range only spans 20 points, that basically means if you previously had a chance to hit the target at all, the spell just made it automatic. Someone at the top-most tier of Divination casting ability would be able to cast an entry-level spell like that almost at-will. Each chance Parson would have at taking a swing would possibly cut down a normally-unarmored and normally-frail caster.

As another example, if Lady Artemis had been the recipient of such a "trivial" spell, she would have likely foreseen her arrow being deflected by the rock and waited a fraction of a second to have a clear firing lane. Right now, in that scenario, Lady Sylvia could be dead again, with all the implications against the success of the tower siege that carries.

Predictamancers have the potential to be pretty powerful in combat just by rigging the accuracy and evasion games. Gotta bring some of that delicious Area Effect damage if you wanna face off against them. Not sure Thinkamancers would have much of that.

* Ignore the RAW, this is an analogy. Assume the spell can be cast on an ally.
Moik
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 2:26 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby The.Healing.Mage » Tue Jul 19, 2011 11:39 pm

What I assumed from the get-go was not that Sizemore directly used his magic to set off the trap. Instead, I read into him having lots of tangential knowledge allowed set up the trap, triggering by some horribly distorted version of the Physical Laws of Stupidworld. A Redox reaction could heat up to the point where it would ignite the oil, allowing for a delayed trap (one that might let the golem get to safety, for example.) I trust Sizemore to be actually very practical, and if a torch would have accomplished the job better, he would have thrown a torch. Why do I trust him like that? As he and Wanda said waaaaay back at the beginning of book 1, they're opposites. She could use lots of paths to achieve her ends, being facile with many. Instead, she only cares about Croakamancy and falls in love with her ideas so much that she personifies them as the will of the Titans. (She could also be right about that, since it's Canon that the Titans of Ark actually do exist and actually can have an influence on the world, but I don't think it's their hand guiding this story.) My guess is that Sizemore gets the most mileage out of his Dirtmancy because of his well-rounded education. Rock Golems? Volcanoes/terrain as quasi-living entities? Dirtamancy is not just about dirt, and Sizemore seems to know that better than anyone we've encountered.

As to the issue of Dirt being Stuff, Isaac created the Stuff the Thinkamancer Playground. So if one non-Stuffamancers can make Stuff, it seems to follow that others (such as the well-read Sizemore) can too.

FAQ got rocked by Stanley because their core defense was in not being found. Most of their soldiers were more like clerks. The real mercenaries were away at the time, and Wanda led Stanley right to the city.
The.Healing.Mage
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri May 20, 2011 6:39 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby Kreistor » Tue Jul 19, 2011 11:54 pm

GaryThunder wrote:There's no evidence, direct or inferential, to support the idea that there is an entirely separate chemist in GK who we've never heard of, and Occam's Razor comes down to Sizemore being the likeliest possible unit to have created those traps.


Gary, I hae recinded on Dirtamancy being Stuffamancy and so it can potentially can create Stuff.

However, what you state here is a gross violation of Occam's Razor. We do not *NEED* a chemist at all.

Fabrication is stated to have the capacity to create non-magical Stuff, which would include two-part explosives and oil. Those with Fabrication do not *need* to study anything, since they inherently know how to make whatever is asked of them. Please review Parson's request for thinner paper. The Twolls didn't need to study how to make thinner paper, they just made it. It's Natural Stuffamancy, which precludes any need to understand what you're doing in making it.

Occam's Razor says that the solution that introduces the fewest new elements is the most likely answer. You are introducing TWO new elements -- Chemistry and Sizemore having the capacity to create substances. No matter how many hoops you jump through, there is no direct evidence for either. You assume that Sizemore must create these substances because you ignore that Fabrication can create ALL non-magical substances. There is no need to invent the Special "Chemistry", because Fabrication does that job, and GK has units with Fabrication -- Twolls. So far, we know that Fabrication covers Tailoring (can make Clothes), Smithing (Armor and weapons), Basketweaving (Picnic Basket), and Leatherworking (Saddles), at the very least. Since one Twoll is assigned to the Kitchen, maybe even Cooking. Why do you think that such a broadly applicable Special excludes "chemistry"?

With the Twolls making the "chemicals", no New elements are needed at all, and that satisfies Occam's Razor. Even though I have accepted that Sizemore could potentially have created the oil and explosives thanks to Dirtamancy being a Stuffamancy, there is no direct evidence that Dirtamancy can create that particular type of stuff. The Twolls, which can,, still satisfy Occam's Razor better than Sizemore in this case.
http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/TBFGK_1 Here you can find all comic pages written as text for convenient quoting.

http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/Erfworld_Mechanics The starting page for accessing all known Erfworld "rules".
User avatar
Kreistor
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:59 pm
Location: K-W, Ontario, Canada

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby Lamech » Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:05 am

On the tunnel traps: I for one suspect Sizemore produced the stuff with his magic. The twolls making it too might work, but I don't think it fits. Regardless whoever made it would have just needed to wave their shovel/hand do some magic and call it a day. No knowledge of chemistry or anything else required. Nor do I think there is a good way to choose between dirtamancy/fabrication and the magic/non-magic details of the traps.
Lamech
 
Posts: 1450
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 9:23 am

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby GaryThunder » Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:06 am

I'm not saying Sizemore directly conjured the Stuff. In fact:

GaryThunder wrote:I'm not suggesting that Sizemore created the chemical traps from whole cloth through using juice.


I'm saying he created the traps, the end results. Even if he has a couple Twolls on retainer to fabricate the base components to his traps, it was still through his ingenuity (or possibly a natural feature of his discipline) that he arranged them into finished products. If Zhopa is representative of a typical GK Twoll, the Twolls aren't making anything more complicated than the heaps of gritty powder the Dirtamancer told them to make.

And yes, Sizemore doesn't necessarily have to know the chemistry at work here. It could just be like mixing a bit of bat guano and a pinch of sulfur to launch a fireball - it doesn't really make sense, but that's what causes the effect, so you do it. But Erfworld casters (at least those of moderately high level, such as Sizemore seems to be) have repeatedly been portrayed to have highly nuanced understandings of their craft, so it seems a bit silly to assume that he wouldn't know the fine details of his work. I mean, he put friggin' lights down there and beams for shoring and everything. While having a conversation with other people, and very nearly successfully misleading them into not realizing what he was doing. The man knows his crap.
GaryThunder
 
Posts: 356
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 10:10 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 67

Postby Beeskee » Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:39 am

GaryThunder wrote:Dwagons. Taming three dwagons in one turn wouldn't be impressive if they were lowly Level 1 units, and if wild dwagons are indeed Level 1 but fearsome even then, then high-level dwagons would be way more powerful than they have been portrayed thus far. Also, if wild dwagons are Level 1 and have stats comparable to regular Level 1 units, then how in holy heck did Stanley rock Faq's house with more than half of his forces being wimps?


Remember dwagons are heavy flying units, some of them siege-capable. A level 1 heavy is still a heavy. But yeah, we don't know what level wild units pop at. It might be random. Stanley also found a LOT of dwagons while heading to Faq for the assault. He was finding them in almost every hex along the way. He pretty much said in one text update that his initial force would have been wiped out. Instead he arrived with several times the number of units he needed to win. He also gives leadership bonuses, and artifact bonuses due to the hammer.

Also, units may not have identical stats even if they are the same unit type and level. Ansom described the tweed.. er, treed dwagons as weak types but strong individuals. (I'm not sure if I described it right but that's close.)

Dwagons may or may not be glass cannons, but low HP doesn't matter if they don't get hit. We did just see a bunch of dwagons get pwnzored by some experienced knights led by a reasonably high level commander tho.

Capable commanders seem to stack their units appropriately. They use 'screening stacks' to absorb damage and keep their better units alive. Stanley (who IS a capable commander, just not a very capable overlord) probably stacked the weaker or less useful dwagons in front as meat shields. Those would be the dozen units he lost on the approach.
User avatar
Beeskee
Erfabet Supporter!
Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 485
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 4:25 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Reactions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 9 guests