Erfworld 135 The Battle for Gobwin Knob, Page 122

[Aquillion]

BillyJimBoBob, you're also ignoring the fact that Stanley, who actually lives in Erfworld, accuses Parson and Wanda of treason. This is as obvious a statement as we're ever going to get that it is possible for both chief warlords and high-ranking casters to commit treason, and that there is no mechanical 'ping' to the overlord indicating it.

Parson's klog is very brief, but it clearly lists Loyalty as a way for units to double-deal. The fact that we've seen chief warlords suspected and accused of treason on multiple occasions proves that this is being described as a 'backdoor' in the entire Natural Thinkamancy system; it is specifically noted, for instance, that captured casters (who count as commanders and have been shown to be subject to Duty) have a low loyalty. This would not be a problem if, as you are claiming, the "Can't withhold information, can't conspire against the Ruler" line was not contingent on a loyalty check.

But Wanda's low loyalty as a captured caster was noted specifically in the comic; her Duty has also been specifically shown. So, therefore, this leads to the vital question:

What do you think Loyalty does? Keep in mind, it allows both defection and double-dealing -- what do you think happens when a Commander fails a loyalty check?

You are claiming that Wanda is incapable of withholding information or conspiring against Stanley. (Note that this means that she can't withhold, for instance, her relationship with Jillian from him; you are implicitly claiming that he knows about it. This also means that when she knew Parson was acting on her own, she was somehow not withholding that information from Stanley.)

In fact, the low loyalty of captured and turned units in general is specifically spelled out as a reason why it's unlikely Parson would be captured instead of killed. So why is this important, if you really think that he would be absolutely, without-exception bound to serve his new leader? What do you think the comic is saying when it keeps harping on the importance of your Loyalty score?

"Can't withhold information, can't conspire against the Ruler" is merely a description of the requirements that Duty places on the ruler, in the same way "Units are compelled to obey orders" does not mean they are absolutely compelled -- in other words, Parson is describing the behavior that Natural Thinkamancy attempts to force on people. Nowhere does it say that they are absolutely bound to that standard; it merely says that acting against it would be a violation of Duty.

[NobodySpecial]

Once Wanda was Stanley's unit, you know, so much under his control that he can end her existence with a thought if he sees her before leaving GK to follow his quest, so much so that Stanley decides whether or not GK pays her upkeep, both Loyalty and Duty would forbid any such skullduggery. It is preposterous to assume that Wanda is puppeteering Stanley with anything other than her required obligation to use her initiative in his service.

I'd also add she herself has been assuming they're all dead anyways since the very first strips. Why bother controlling a ruler that you think is going to lose? I don't think it's impossible that she might try, but she's not a real Thinkamancer and obviously isn't that good at controlling anyone.

EDIT: I'd also add to the Duty/Loyalty question that Parson, who of all people would have a reason for leaving Stanley's service to commit to Charlie, outright refuses to turn and instead keeps fighting a battle that he considers booped. Is that the effect of the summoning spell or Duty/Loyalty? Wanda says the spell, but she's been known to be deceitful and withhold information, right?

I think the lack of exposition on Duty and Loyalty have muddied the waters, and I hope the writer has a good reason for things turning out the way they have.

[Whispri]

But it wasn't his turn.

...the paradox of free-willed people...

I don't think Jillian is the only person that Wanda has tortured. And even if she is, she only "liked" it because she was being magically compelled. Or maybe she liked it in the first place and it was just a convenient way to magically compel her (which is actually worse).

Beyond that, it's pretty clear that her sadistic tendencies extend beyond the bedroom (or dungeon, which in her case is a literal term). Physical violence, while objectionable, is sort of inevitable in war, and in wargaming, and in fantasy literature, but the kind of sick, twisted, emotional and psychological violence that she clearly enjoys inflicting is a whole other ballgame. And then there's the zombie stuff, which you have to admit is pretty bad. People might invoke the "neccesity of war" defense for her, but that strikes me as a double standard, overlooking morally objectionable acts by certain characters on the grounds of pragmatism but holding others (Ansom) to near-Papal expectations.

I find Wanda a fascinating character, but surely not a sympathetic one, and so far I'm very incredulous to most of the non-villainous interpretations of her actions. Erfworld may not be black-and-white, but some characters are less grey than others.



Respectfully, so many things are wrong with that sentence:

1. Saline didn't choose an heir, he was overthrown. I got the impression that it was at least implied that Stanley was behind that coup. I've no real evidence of that, but it was noted how strange it was for the gobwins to turn on the king, and it's hard to overlook the fact that Stanley benefited the most from a very suspicious string of events. Of course, that's a bit more clever than is usual for him, but even Ansom acknowledged the "occasional clever move" from Stanley (linking the casters, for example).

2. That possibility aside, what about Stanley's megalomania, his aggressive wars on all his neighbors, his obession with the Arkentools, etc? Might THAT have something to do with why Ansom and the coalition are interested in overthrowing him, because he's a murderous tyrant with delusions of grandeur?

3. Given how frequently Ansom puts his own life in danger to protect his troops (it's been established as one of his primary character traits), even to the degree of being somewhat stupid about it at times, it's really not fair to criticize him for "Sending men to die." He's doing what a military leader has to do, and on top of it he endangers himself to a disproportipnate degree.



Again, I was under the impression that preventing the sacking and massacring of HIS cities and the cities of his allies was what he was really going for there. Further, I haven't seen any evidence that he's planning on putting the women and children to the sword once the walls are down. Not saying it's not possible, just saying there's nothing to indicate it. He seems more interested in stopping Gobwin Knob's aggression.



It seems like Parson is the mastermind who cannot succeed, as his plans have all been clever but none have ever worked (not completely, anyway). ...his original plot to ambush and capture Ansom failed because Ansom turned out not to be as predictable as he thought...

Similarly, his second attempt to nail Ansom failed because he put too much faith in Wanda's magic...

In the present situation, Parson had a chance to ally with Charlie but passed it up... ...Really, Paron's actions back on page 105 were pretty dumb...


...why people object more to Stanley belittling his subordinants than to the fact that he's a tyrant, and why people sympathize with Wanda as the jilted lover and long-suffering voice of reason despite the fact that she's pretty clearly off her rocker (Wanda fans who are objecting right now might sit back and ponder how comfortable they would be with the prospect of her living next door).

First minor point: Why would whose turn it is matter? Vinnie and co weren't worried about being weak and slow off turn.

Second, well I call it 'minor' point :Only those in charge of sides have free will. That would be Stanley, Jillian, Charlie and the Don King of characters shown.



First off yer Wanda thoughts: Here is Jillian answering Wanda's question of why, 'torture' did not come up. Here is Bogroll talking about his dream job. Here is Wanda giving it to him. How is that the act of a sadist, hmm? As far as mind control goes check here for a description of the Natural Thinkamancy Wanda is affected by all the time. When people are magically bound to use their initiative on their Lord's behalf it's rather hard to blame them for actions they make. As for "sick, twisted, emotional and psychological violence" there is nothing whatsoever in the text to support that. As for your idea that Wanda has interrogated people other than Jillian, they called her 'Prisoner' and there's nothing in the text indicating that Wanda's interest in her hobby emerged prior to Jillian's first capture. And again, she can't refuse orders.



@Yer 1: Here Sizemore tells of Stanley being selected as Saline's heir. That's the only reason his side survived his death. And as described here Commanders, especially Warlords, and most especially Chief Warlords, are bound by Natural Thinkamancy that prevents them from conspiring against the Ruler. Hint: Saline was Stanley's Ruler. He is thus at the bottom of the list of suspects.

@Yer 2: What Wars? What Wars did he start? If he did start any Wars may he not have had good cause to do it? When even a man's sworn enemies don't think you has cause for war... I'll note of the deeds Vinnie mentioned that included his cause for war, that he never actually mentioned how or why those actions took place. We actually know less about them then we know about the Faq Question.

@Yer 3: He started a war, without casus belli. He forced his army to fight and die against an enemy they had no quarrel with. And more importantly he sent thousands of men into the tunnels and had them end turn there, over the objections of both the Warlord he sent to lead them and the more competent coalition leaders.

And as for the idea that Ansom is defending his own Cities, I point you once again to his conversation with Vinnie. All he lost were a few field units, and those poor buggers are forced to attack on contact when leaderless.

Re: Parson and success:

There are close to three thousand uncroaked infantry on the walls right now. The result of a major victory for Parson. Ansom stayed with the column because Vinnie persuaded him to do so.

The Spell failed because the Archons pushed at Jillian until she broke. If they'd stuck to their contract...

He was never offered a chance to ally with Charlie, just to defect. And he convinced him to end turn without taking the City, what's foolish about that?

Oh and: Stanley's no more a Tyrant than any other Ruler on Erf. As for Wanda, why on Erf wouldn't I want to live next door to her?

[Hatu]

'What have you done to it?'
Wanda clearly did something to neutralize the offensive capabilities of the 'pliers.

If that's what he meant, wouldn't he have said "What have you done to them?" Like pants, pliers are usually referred to in the plural. Ansom does so on page 22.

Jillian and Vinny did not have any reason to tell Charlie anything if he contacted them (he did just screw them over).

Until this new alliance that bothers you so much was formed, no one had the ability to request a thinkagram, either. So Charlie does not make it possible. We also have seen no evidence of Vinny et al having a hat (and why would they, they are Jetstone property after all, and they believed they could communicate through Charlie).

It's quite likely that Charlie would be willing to provide thinkogram services to anyone he is not currently fighting for the right price: he's pretty mercenary. I think this is very unlikely to have happened given Jillian's distrust of Charlie on page 81, but it is possible.

What I actually had in mind is that we've already seen Charlie eavesdrop on Parson. If Jillian or Vinny did have the means to communicate that information to someone, Charlie may have been able to listen in as well.

At any rate, I'm not saying I think Charlie does know Stanley is inbound, just that he might. In fact, it's not certain that Stanley will return to GK on the next turn anyway. It depends on how far he had to travel before turning around on his last turn.

-H

[grumbleboom]

What's with all the conjecture recently? I understand getting frustrated with the storyline or whatever, but there has been an inundation of unsupported unspoilered opinion in these threads lately.

To answer one gripe fest I read, and of course this is my opinion, but would fit the situation...

Spoiler

Show

Ansom jumped off the wall onto the carpet, thus allowing him to remount without having the archons push the carpet through the zone barriers.

So to follow my standard show up and then leave tactics... Because really, reading all the posts in this thread just annoyed me.

Spoiler

Show

Wanda gets healed by Sizemore, Ansom heads back up to the wall to keep the uncroaked from harassing the siege, Sizemore mends the cracks in the main wall until the turn ends. Last panel of the next comic is of dwagons returning and a gobwin blowing a horn. (edited my spoiler)

See how I did that? That's how you put unsupported fluff in posts.

[Aquillion]

What's with all the conjecture recently? I understand getting frustrated with the storyline or whatever, but there has been an inundation of unsupported unspoilered opinion in these threads lately.

The only reason people spoil out speculation in the OOTS forum is because Rich specifically asks for it -- he doesn't want people to think that it influences him (and, perhaps, he's worried that it might actually influence him.)

Rob and Jamie have Erfworld very meticulously plotted out in advance, though, so as I recall they've specifically stated that they don't mind... at least, they haven't asked us to spoiler out speculation here.

[CassMori]

all this talk about Stanley/Saline IV has caused me to wonder: why did Stanley not turn barbarian when Saline died, as Jillian did when King Banhammer died/Faq fell? Would it have been because GK was not actually conquered or destroyed, only the King was killed?

[DevilDan]

all this talk about Stanley/Saline IV has caused me to wonder: why did Stanley not turn barbarian when Saline died, as Jillian did when King Banhammer died/Faq fell? Would it have been because GK was not actually conquered or destroyed, only the King was killed?

For all we know he did but still retook GK. Or perhaps he was still in control of other GK cities.

I'm still troubled by how little information we really have about the fall of (presumably) all of Faq's three cities.

[fendrin]

If that's what he meant, wouldn't he have said "What have you done to them?" Like pants, pliers are usually referred to in the plural. Ansom does so on page 22.

Perhaps it should be plural. It could be a 'blooper'. I don't read the 'blooper' thread so I'm not sure if it's been discussed there or not. However, if the 'it' is not the 'pliers, what would you conjecture he is referring to? We don't see Wanda interacting with anything else there.

It's quite likely that Charlie would be willing to provide thinkogram services to anyone he is not currently fighting for the right price: he's pretty mercenary. I think this is very unlikely to have happened given Jillian's distrust of Charlie on page 81, but it is possible.

Quite a reasonable assumption, but not really practical. If someone has the capability of contacting Charlie to hire his Thinkagram services, they could have just sent their message directly to their recipient. In other words, if Jillian and Vinny could contact Charlie to send a message to Ansom, they could just contact Ansom directly.

What I actually had in mind is that we've already seen Charlie eavesdrop on Parson. If Jillian or Vinny did have the means to communicate that information to someone, Charlie may have been able to listen in as well.

Ah, but as far as we can tell, neither Jillian nor Vinny (nor anyone else with them) have any way of contacting Ansom in any way. No communication = no 'eavesdropping'.

At any rate, I'm not saying I think Charlie does know Stanley is inbound, just that he might.

He might know. He also might have another thousand archons and dancing bear just in range to pounce on GK unexpectedly. However, we have no evidence of either of these things, and the possibility of them is not really enough to make well founded speculations.

In fact, it's not certain that Stanley will return to GK on the next turn anyway. It depends on how far he had to travel before turning around on his last turn.

My belief that Stanley is returning has more to do with plot/storytelling reasons than any knowledge of the specific distances involved. The fact that it is mathematically possible for him to return does not bolster my claim, but it does keep it a possibility.

The biggest reason I think he will return next turn is that Charlie's actions have ceded the initiative to GK, and nothing would make the grumbling masses happier than seeing Charlie's plans for capturing Parson screwed up by his own actions. It just seems like a good way to write the story to me. I suspect we'll see Parson on the walls first, though.

[DevilDan]

If that's what he meant, wouldn't he have said "What have you done to them?" Like pants, pliers are usually referred to in the plural. Ansom does so on page 22.

I can think of four possibilities:

1. It's a blooper.
2. Ansom was saying "what have you done to my arkentool/weapon."
3. Ansom made a grammatical mistake.
4. Wanda's "spell" (if that is what it was) affected the carpet, and that is what Ansom was talking about.

[Surprise!]

I am unaware if this point has been made between now and page six (just too much repetition) but I am going to make it anyway.

To address the speed of plot, Wanda failing to make it to the ground before Ansom can hit the ground. Wanda does not have to expend move to move through the zones, and (IMO) therefore would always get there first in comparison to a unit that had to expend move.

And then to Ansom commanding the Archons (with no move) to fetch his carpet, I am confused by this one.

The only answer I come to is the archon's using their thinkagram power to summon it.

Just my two cents to throw on the Dragon's Hoard we have going on here.

[Suicide Junkie]

And then to Ansom commanding the Archons (with no move) to fetch his carpet, I am confused by this one.

The only answer I come to is the archon's using their thinkagram power to summon it.

I imagine that the carpet was still idling along in the airspace zone, riderless after Ansom got knocked off. It can fly, but has no will of its own so it just sits there going "putt putt putt".
Since he's not a flyer anymore, he needs somebody to hand it down to him. Then he's back in business.

[teratorn]

And then to Ansom commanding the Archons (with no move) to fetch his carpet, I am confused by this one.

You're confusing being able to move with "move," a stat which indicates the number of times you are able to cross hex borders. I suggest we use travel to indicate in-hex or in-zone movement to avoid confusion. The archons just needed to put the carpet at an height Ansom could jump on to it.

All units can travel inside their hex (or zone), and there should be a factor (speed) which indicates the distance you can travel per "round." There is nothing in this strip indicating that Ansom dived faster than Wanda, after all the golems and Sizemore also had to travel to Wanda's position. I propose in a previous post a timetable using rounds of action.

Another thing people seem to be confusing in other threads is that in regular hexes airspace and ground are not separated, just inside cities.

[DevilDan]

Another thing people seem to be confusing in other threads is that in regular hexes airspace and ground are not separated, just inside cities.

That seems to be true.

[Aquillion]

all this talk about Stanley/Saline IV has caused me to wonder: why did Stanley not turn barbarian when Saline died, as Jillian did when King Banhammer died/Faq fell? Would it have been because GK was not actually conquered or destroyed, only the King was killed?

I was under the impression that he did, then easily retook Gobwin Knob the next turn. It's hard to say, though, since we don't really know any of the rules related to that, or what Gobwin Knob's 'empire' was like at that time (did they have other cities or not? Does Stanley get to retain control of them when the capital is taken? Etc.)

[teratorn]

By the way, shouldn't the golems be brown? There are nine of them. Not sure if it's a blooper or if Sizemore can make a few golems each turn.

[DevilDan]

By the way, shouldn't the golems be brown? There are nine of them. Not sure if it's a blooper or if Sizemore can make a few golems each turn.

Maybe they all leveled.

[Altima]

As for Wanda, why on Erf wouldn't I want to live next door to her?

Noise pollution.

all this talk about Stanley/Saline IV has caused me to wonder: why did Stanley not turn barbarian when Saline died, as Jillian did when King Banhammer died/Faq fell? Would it have been because GK was not actually conquered or destroyed, only the King was killed?

There are several possibilities. One is that Jillian wasn't the heir designate. Second is that warlord-led neutral stacks are called barbarians (and Jillian hasn't told anyone--except Ansom--that she's a ruler, which is why she may be known as a barbarian). The difference between a warlord-led neutral stack and a 'ruler' led stack could be so marginal that most people call them either one.

The most likely culprit, though, is that GK still had cities left for Stanley to command after he ascended to Overlord. From what I understand, all three cities of Faq were left in ruins, leaving Jillian with no one to command and no treasury in which to rebuild.

As for Charlie and the Thinkagrams, it seems unlikely that Jillian would be able to contact the RCC using them. For once, every contact with Charlie has either been through one of his Archons, through Parson's 'hacked' eyebook, or through another Thinkamancer. The GK Thinkamancer has let us know that Thinkamancy isn't limitless and she could (and was) strained by multiple communications. Lastly, Charlie didn't have any (apparent) archons near the choke point battle, and it's possible that he doesn't know the outcome (after all, he may have called in all archons in the area around GK for his show of force) and can't tell Ansom about it. It's likely Charlie can't do anything else since his or her turn has ended.

[Lombard]

Sigh, I should have known by now that nothing significantly bad is really going to happen to Ansom. I won't be fooled again though!

[Simanos]

I can think of four possibilities:

1. It's a blooper.
2. Ansom was saying "what have you done to my arkentool/weapon."
3. Ansom made a grammatical mistake.
4. Wanda's "spell" (if that is what it was) affected the carpet, and that is what Ansom was talking about.

4 is very improbable. The panel even has a weapon fast movement (strike) effect so either the Staff or the Arkentool moves and collides with something and stops magically not following through. If 4 is even in the realm of possibility then I propose:
5. Ansom is talking about his (small according to Parson's song) penis.
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/erf0113.html
No, wait! Ansom doesn't have testies. Vinny has a small penis. Well there goes my theory. Though maybe Wanda made Ansom's penis similar to his testes :p

[Aquillion]

Sigh, I should have known by now that nothing significantly bad is really going to happen to Ansom. I won't be fooled again though!

He's been humiliated in front of his allies repeatedly, and he's going to have to live for the rest of his life with the knowledge that a good and reliable man who served under him (plus severel thousand more unnamed ones) are dead because of him.

(That might also explain why he's so hostile to Wanda about uncroaking his men -- he knows perfectly well that it's because of his pride that they're dead. With a better commander from another faction, they might have lived -- in fact, they almost certainly would have, given how close the tunnel fight was. Likewise, if he'd charged into the city at the first opportunity like his allies advised instead of trying to do it through the tunnel using only Jetstone men, he could've won easily. He blames himself, quite rightly, for the deaths of Webinar and his men, and tries to shift that blame onto Wanda as a result.)

[fendrin]

There are several possibilities. One is that Jillian wasn't the heir designate. Second is that warlord-led neutral stacks are called barbarians (and Jillian hasn't told anyone--except Ansom--that she's a ruler, which is why she may be known as a barbarian). The difference between a warlord-led neutral stack and a 'ruler' led stack could be so marginal that most people call them either one.

The most likely culprit, though, is that GK still had cities left for Stanley to command after he ascended to Overlord. From what I understand, all three cities of Faq were left in ruins, leaving Jillian with no one to command and no treasury in which to rebuild.

Well, we know that Stanley and Sizemore didn't disband when Saline fell because Stanley was Heir Designate.

Therefore, by extension, Ansom (and everyone else) must know that Jillian either was an heir (but not necessarily a royal one) or is in service to one that they simply have not ever heard about. Given her tight-lipped attitude about her past (like her tribe affiliation), they may have assumed that her overlord is in hiding and she was protecting him/her. Kind of like what Stanley was theoretically doing when he left GK.

[teratorn]

Therefore, by extension, Ansom (and everyone else) must know that Jillian either was an heir (but not necessarily a royal one) or is in service to one that they simply have not ever heard about.

Or that she was a warlord with enough schmuckers to keep going turn after turn. Maybe the difference is that being a ruler or the heir designate grants you the magic capability to run cities if you ever find one available. Royals probably have that by default.

[SteveMB]

Well, we know that Stanley and Sizemore didn't disband when Saline fell because Stanley was Heir Designate.

Therefore, by extension, Ansom (and everyone else) must know that Jillian either was an heir (but not necessarily a royal one) or is in service to one that they simply have not ever heard about. Given her tight-lipped attitude about her past (like her tribe affiliation), they may have assumed that her overlord is in hiding and she was protecting him/her. Kind of like what Stanley was theoretically doing when he left GK.

That's not clear, actually -- it depends on whether all barbarian units are former members of capital sides who survived in this manner, or whether there is some other source of barbarian units.

Or that she was a warlord with enough schmuckers to keep going turn after turn. Maybe the difference is that being a ruler or the heir designate grants you the magic capability to run cities if you ever find one available. Royals probably have that by default.

That wouldn't do it -- if the overlord of a side is croaked without an heir, field units disband (with no indication that it makes any difference whether or not some of them are warlords). So, each barbarian unit either has a ruler or heir from a former capital side, is a ruler or heir from a former capital side, or else there's some other source of barbarian units (perhaps tribes of "barbarians" exist as non-capital sides like gobwins or marbits, and survivors from a side that lost its cities also become barbarians).

[teratorn]

That wouldn't do it -- if the overlord of a side is croaked without an heir, field units disband (with no indication that it makes any difference whether or not some of them are warlords).

You're reading too much in that sentence. You don't know if that happens if the field units have some schmuckers with them.

In fact that poses the question: if Stanley was out in the field how did he pay for the upkeep at the beginning of his next turn? Did he carry a purse like Jillian ? (and as such did he plan for it?)

Could he still tap into his side's treasury, despite losing the capital? Or did a new treasury develop from the other cities still on his side?

[DevilDan]

You're reading too much in that sentence. You don't know if that happens if the field units have some schmuckers with them.

In fact that poses the question: if Stanley was out in the field how did he pay for the upkeep at the beginning of his next turn? Did he carry a purse like Jillian ? (and as such did he plan for it?)

Could he still tap into his side's treasury, despite losing the capital? Or did a new treasury develop from the other cities still on his side?

Stanley could have had money with him; it shouldn't surprise us that the heir and chief warlord of a presumably not-impoverished kingdom would have some money with him.

Jillian earns money as a mercenary, and she had a purse; obviously losing Faq did not lead to the immediate dissolution of her troops, so she had enough resources to maintain them. Or, since we don't know the rules of upkeep, they could be different for barbarians.

We also don't know what exactly happens to units whose upkeep isn't being paid; some assume that they just vanish. I think that it's at least possible that they lose their strength over time, as we would when not eating for a few days.

[SteveMB]

Stanley could have had money with him; it shouldn't surprise us that the heir and chief warlord of a presumably not-impoverished kingdom would have some money with him.

Jillian earns money as a mercenary, and she had a purse; obviously losing Faq did not lead to the immediate dissolution of her troops, so she had enough resources to maintain them. Or, since we don't know the rules of upkeep, they could be different for barbarians.

My best guess is that he could carry some funds with him, but only a limited amount (hence the point Wanda made way back at the beginning of the story about not being able to take the treasury with him if he fled GK).

[Rhuna_Coppermane]

For all we know he did but still retook GK. Or perhaps he was still in control of other GK cities.

I'm still troubled by how little information we really have about the fall of (presumably) all of Faq's three cities.

It's early in the story yet. Knowing everything in the beginning wouldn't be any fun.

[DevilDan]

It's early in the story yet. Knowing everything in the beginning wouldn't be any fun.

My point is that I expect more surprises from that corner, not that I'm annoyed by it. Clever surprises are one of the selling points of Erfworld.

[fendrin]

Or that she was a warlord with enough schmuckers to keep going turn after turn. Maybe the difference is that being a ruler or the heir designate grants you the magic capability to run cities if you ever find one available. Royals probably have that by default.

That's not clear, actually -- it depends on whether all Barbarian units are former members of capital sides who survived in this manner, or whether there is some other source of Barbarian units.

Both of you are possibly correct, but so far as I can tell we don't have any indication that either possibility is an actuality, and some evidence against.

Re: A warlord with schmuckers can survive after a ruler falls
Stanley couldn't take the treasury with him. If the overlord can't take the treasury, surely a mere warlord cannot either. Also note that Wanda does not say 'you can't take all the money', just 'you can't take the money', implying (though I admit, not proving) that money cannot be physically moved from one locale to another (but rather, it seems to have a nebulous non-physical existence, as in many games).

Re: 'natural' barbarians:
units are produced by cities, and take time to do so
Neutral cities freeze in time
Therefore neutral cities cannot pop units.

On the other hand, 'barbarians' could be a city-less side, like the gobwins. However, we have not seen any indication that there are 'human' city-less sides. Further, Jillian refers to herself as becoming a barbarian when Faq fell.

Conclusion: Assuming we have not been mislead(intentionally or otherwise) and 'barbarian' does not have two separate meanings, it is necessarily true that Jillian's side had an overlord survive.

We know that this is true (if we accept Jillian's story), but the question is whether or not Ansom (or Vinny, etc.) would know/assume that Jillian is or is serving an overlord.

EDIT: whoa, ninja'd many times over. My points remain relevant, though.