Erfworld 151 - tBfGK - 138

[kreszantas]

Ordinarily he would just issue orders and get updates through his thinkamancer, including troop locations if needed, but in theory she's not available as long as she's part of the trimancer. Can he talk to her while in that form? And if so does it present a risk of disrupting the trimancer?

Check on 26.8 & 9that Stanley can indeed get Thinkagrams via the linkup. Now question that really remains is can Maggie give the thinkagram in the 'handholding' position when she was last seen in.

[VariaVespasa]

What I want to know is: Why did the attack not succeed? What's with the *SNAG*?

It may not have succeeded for any of several reasons. It may be that there cant be any real combat during the night since, as best we know, its nobodies turn, and thus it was just a symbolic attack as an extension of her emotions, rather than a real attack. It may be that she would have liked it to be a real attack but everyone is disarmed of effective weapons during the night, and thus she didnt have her warsword available, and had to make do with the ineffective knife. It may be that it was a real attack with an effective weapon, but her attack rating with the knife wasnt sufficient, either in general, or due to a bad dice roll, to hit/harm Ceasar. There is some form of random generation in the Erf system, so no attack is guaranteed to succeed, after all.

[Antrozous]

I'm not convinced that's it, VV. Caeser and his boys are clearly entering combat in the background, so it is, as they say, "on".

Efr's roll system seems to play out in a "real" sense as well. You roll a hit, your swing's going to be good. You roll a miss, and you end up slashing air. I don't remember seeing deus ex style game mechanics.

To my eye, it looked more like Caeser blocked the blow via some passive magic.

[Wakky]

Originally Posted by Antrozous:

What I want to know is: Why did the attack not succeed? What's with the *SNAG*?

I have a theory. What if, in her enraged state, Jillian was essentially auto-attacking? Her giant sword is her special attack, which would explain why she didn't use it. This also explains why Caesar was easily able to deflect it. It's the equivalent of a boxer throwing a jab instead of an strong uppercut.

[Antrozous]

It's unsurprising she didn't have her "big sword". She's essentially a captured unit at this point. The Translv guys must have either convinced or required her to relinquish it earlier on. They'd have had to have known she'd turn on them eventually. Frankly, I'm surprised she even had the knife.

Another thought: I seem to remember Stanley saying something interesting about "real time" to Parson in regards to attacking out of turn. Didn't he say it was "Barbaric"?

[jmsl]

I haven't looked at old pages in quite a while, but checking now made me wonder about veiling. According to this page it appears Jillian only has 2 peeps left. That means, on page 126 / 114, if I read it correctly, the illusionary dwagon toasted some of her real gwiffons? Were they killed by the veiled dwagon or later in the battle, or is the illusion that strong? Obviously it's all speculation but I know a lot of people on here read this story more carefully than I do.

[Lamech]

It certainly seemed like the illusion killed some orlies. But the toasting of the peeps was done by the real dwagon; the cloud of bats was not around when the peeps got roasted. One peep died in the fire breath and three survived, so one must have died in the battle.

Now Jack maybe be able to use other kinds of magic, and kill stuff like that. He did come from the same location as Wanda. Or illusions may be able to kill stuff, or I may not have interperted it correctly.

If illusions CAN harm that has implications for hiding GK.

[abb3w]

If her side's Thinkamancer says there's no units left it's safe to say she bit the ash.

That apparently relies on the assumption Scarlet was part of one of the contacted main armies, and not part of another force, like...
some... barbarian...
mercenary...

faction...?


I believe I now have at least one clear idea how Jillian might end up with the Pliers.

[chefsotero]

Personally, I think she comprehended the meaning of life, the universe, and everything.

So if she also know the question the Erfworld must suddently disapear and be substituted by something even weirder and less comprehensible, cue book 2

But Stanley is in really a boopy place right now, how many turns can he aford on upkeep for the few troops he got left? And having 4 of then are out of reach dosen't help much.

And about Red assuming Attuned Arkentool trumps duty, it may trump other froms of natural thinkmancy, and even if Ceasar's story is corect and there is no lie (to him or by him) still she may be alive but her sides thinkamancer coulden't find her (is that wishfull thinking trumping logic?) if she attuned.

Oh Well I guess I'll just have to keep reading lovely comic.

[Kreistor]

But Stanley is in really a boopy place right now, how many turns can he aford on upkeep for the few troops he got left? And having 4 of then are out of reach dosen't help much.

He can choose to disband anyone he feels like, so if he can't get the trio back from the Magic Kingdom, they'll go unemployed. (Not sure if Barbairan is the right term for casters, but probably is.)

How long? Long enough to start a new city with fewer units than he planned initially. He can't restart in Faq, but he could restart on GK, and hide the fact using Jack. Vinnie's analysis of Stanley running out of money was before he found out about the end of RCC... he was assuming RCC would capture GK. RCC failed in that, and the volcano might have revealed new gesm, so Stanley may be able to be back in full form in relatively short order. All he neeeds to do is hide the fact, and Jack can do that for him. Of course, The trio would be a big help, if they could all be brought out conscious. Sizemore builds the city with untiring golems while Wanda builds the city with untiring uncroaked.But it all depends on how much money Stanley could take with him.

[djharr]

Actually, the real answer to the argument of whether the knife should be held blade up or blade down is to just use the most infamous fighting knife of all time, the Fairbairn-Sykes SAS Commando Dagger. Use one of these babies, and it doesn't matter WHICH way you hold it.

David

PS. Oh, and regarding the whole "Volcano was out of left-field" school of thought, I totally disagree. As others have said (but since I love to hear myself talk, I am going to say it again), I was getting really tired of the old "Ansom pulls another game winner out his ass" happening again and again and again, but the revelation that Erfworld WAS Parson's game and he was going to cheat made everything clear.

There was NOTHING in the story that was not foreshadowed over and over, even if we didn't realize at the time it was being foreshadowed. I am perfectly satisfied that the authors treated us right and dealt fairly with their audience. And that is coming from someone who was complaining BITTERLY right here in the forums about how Ansom was just too lucky for his own good after the whole dance-fighting thing.

[Moechi_Vill]

Her boyfriend just died. Attacking Ceaser was an odd choice, but a freak out was warranted.

Also: F1rst!!1!

She's a barbarian. :P

Nah, I can understand. She has a bit of a tomboy-like personality, but a lot of people might react like that under the circumstances. ... except for the whole knife thing and venting on an ally (even a rude and skeptical one)...

[Voyager_I]

Things to consider;

It's reasonably likely that the Uncroaked Volcano destroyed the city of Gobwin Knob entirely. It would probably remain a potential capital site, but would not belong to any side, and the process of restoring a capital site into a functioning city is implied to be expensive in Jillian's conversation with Ansom. Thus, it's possible that Stanley and Co. are barbarians and Gobwin Knob remains unclaimed even if Scarlett miraculously survived (and I'm not calling that one either way), because the hex she's occupying no longer constitutes a city.

It's unlikely that Jack would be sufficient to mask any attempts to discreetly rebuild, since his antagonists are abundantly aware that Stanley has the services of a Master-Class Foolamancer and would investigate thoroughly.

[chefsotero]

He can choose to disband anyone he feels like, so if he can't get the trio back from the Magic Kingdom, they'll go unemployed. (Not sure if Barbairan is the right term for casters, but probably is.)

That raises an interesting question: What if he disband one or more caster from the trimancer while they r still linked? The others are automaticaly disbanded as well? Or they just get booped by an sudden link-break backlash? Or none of the above?

I wouldn't like to see that but I got a bit curious now.

PS: And my understanding, because of this, is that if a unit is disbanded it cease to exist, kaput baby

[Kreistor]

And my understanding, because of this, is that if a unit is disbanded it cease to exist, kaput baby

Not sure what part of that comic you're interpreting that way. I don't see anything blatant, anyway. Could you be more specific?

[TamLin]

Because we were given an explanation for it. He was, explicitly, trying to cheat. Also, this was foreshadowed; we knew we had a dirtamancer, we knew it was an extinct/dormant volcano. So it wasn't out of the blue.

Yes, of course, it was explicitely trying to cheat, I realize that. I was commenting less on the comic itself more as I was analyzing the fan reaction. Back when Ansom was "cheating" and pulling solutions to plans out of nowhere and working around the rules, many people complained bitterly about the use of "Deus ex Machina" and attacked the writing, but there's no such criticism when the characters they like do something even more absurd. Again, not being critical (not at this part anyway), just observing.

Uh, this stash was shown way back when she was torturing a certain PoW. This wasn't "convenient", we knew she had it.

Looking back at the comic now, you're right, we do see her grab a sealed tube off of a shelf, and looking back at an even older comic we see the exact same sort of tube is what holds the Summon Warlord spell, so yes, we can discern that she does indeed have a library of scrolls. But come on, that was a single panel that appeared in a strip YEARS ago, which had no obvious importance at the time, and which you had to reference an even older comic to understand, bloody well nobody rememberd that or thought it was important. In fact...oh ****ing hell, I can't believe I'm actually going to say this, but that was Chekhov's gun, wasn't it? Son of a bitch...

When the Archons fragged everything in the courtyard and started up the giant DDR display, people complained "We didn't know they could do that, is that allowed in the rules?" Well, we didn't know that Wanda could whip up a perfect veil anytime she wanted either. The difference, of course, is that this time the fans like the character who benefited, so there's no criticism of the writing this time. Just to be clear, not neccesarily criticizing people's reactions, but wanting to understand them.

Uh, what, exactly, was innocous about Wanda? Ever? She's a necromancer.

Well, in the begining of the comic we see the various casters doing only small, low-level kind of stuff. Wanda uncroaks a few Warlords, enchants Jillian, etc, Sizemore puts together Golems, Maggie just sends Thinkagrams, etc. As the battle becomes more and more intense, they start doing bigger and bigger stuff, and we find out they have powers far beyond what we imagined. This isn't terribly unusual, since more desperate straits call for more desperate measures, but again, notice the fan backlash whenever the Archons were revealed to be more powerful than we previously believed.

Not to mention the link-up was incredibly powerful, in-comic, and was explicitly noted to be such.

So, seriously, this isn't something you can really complain about.

I didn't say anything about the link. Well, I said that "Uncroaking the volcano" was kind of a silly concept, but that's not about the link itself.

Um, he could do that for foreshadowed reasons - the place was riddled to the point where it had so many tunnels it was on the verge of collapse. This was explicitly stated.

True, I had forgotten that.

Also, its not like crap golems are weak or anything. And they're free.

But like I said, it's all part of the power progression throughtout the comic. Characters start off doing small-scale, marginally impressive things, and unleash God-like power later.

Thing is, while they're obstensibly the good guys, they really aren't very good. Jillian is a very, very violent woman, and Ansom is a condescending jerk who believes he's better than everyone else. They were really parodies of the usual "good guys"; Jillian was the berserker warrior with a heart of gold, except missing the latter part; Ansom was the paladin, except missing the redeeming features such people have and having absolutely zero humility.

How is Jillian any more violent than any other action hero? Aren't violent heroes "in" these days? Wolverine, Solid Snake, Dirty Harry, nobody has a problem with the good guys being violent. And she's revenge-driven, which is a big plus, everyone digs a revenge flick. If anything, you could say that Jillian is really quite a cliche, but as is often the case in Erfworld, I suspect that might be intentional, or a way of playing with tropes. As I noted after Ansom's death, his arrogance isn't any different than that of any of the action heroes I've listed above, the only difference is he talks like D'artagnan. Everyone called him a "Prick" for his "Royalty is overrated? I think not," speech, but if he had said "Go ahead, make my day", that wouldn't be being a prick, that would be being a "badass". There's nothing "wrong" with these characters that isn't wrong with the majority of pop culture heroes.

And besides, people will look past the flaws of really vile characters like Stanley and Wanda to see the depth and sympathetic qualities they have, so why can't they do that for someone like Ansom? The only thing that makes the GK characters more sympathetic than the coalition is that they're on the same side as our protagonist.

Now it's no secret that the comic creators set this dynamic up on purpose. They create a conflict where one side is the historical aggressor but has now been put in a highly vulnerable defender position. They populate that side with "monsters" such as goblins, trolls, and dragons, but then weave a few sympathetic characters (who are very put-upon) into the mix, and then they give us a couple of characters who are pretty repulsive but include some hints that there might be more to them than meets the eye (for example, what is Stanley really IS the Chosen One? Would that excuse his megalomania?). On the other side we've got traditinal "good guy" kinds of characters, helped along by "good" fantasy creatures, elves, griffons, treants, and such, but then suggest that those characters might have ulterior motives, and on top it they bicker and politic in a rather petty way (I always liked Vinny for the presense of the anamalous "vampire" amidst all the cutesy fantasy beasts). Then, just to throw the balance totaly out of whack, they put our hapless hero on the "bad" team and then throw the whole thing together and watch what happens.

The idea was to create a conflict where both sides were sympathetic and reasonably easy to identify with, where the reader wouldn't neccesarily be sure who they wanted to win and where fans could debate the "correct" outcome. To a degree, that worked, but for the most part fan support on the forums was a landslide for Gobwin Knob. But, as I've pointed out, a distinct double standard is often employed to that end. Cheating is "okay" for Parson but illicits rage when his opponents did it. Arrogant behavior from some character is acceptable but off-putting in others. How to account for this discrepancy? My theory is just that it's an issue with the fan base instead of the comic itself, that certain pop culture trends (which I've babbled on about at length in the past), the nature of the kind of fan who posts on message boards, and the kneejerk reaction to side wth the main character unbalanced the equation. But I'm open to the idea that there's something in the comic itself that accounted for it. What that might be I don't know, but I'm sure someone out there is willing to chime in.

The other possibility, that I've mischaracterized Mr. Balder's writing entirely and that we were meant to hate the RCC, has been suggested, but I don't really believe it. That old "Let's make the good guys into the bad guys and then we'll seem edgey!" schtick is old hat and a little amateurish for Erfworld, which has proven to be a surprisingly layered and complex story.

Lalala, he's not listening...

Pardon me? I'm trying to be polite here, you could do the same. Furthermore, as I've already pointed out, I'm actively courting other people's opinions. Hence all the question marks in my post.

Sizemore was working with crap golems because Stanley barely paid attention to him and crap and money is about the limit of his attention span revealed so far. "hey, whats the turd guy doing in here?" Blame Stanleys orders, not Sizemore.

But all of these casters seemed only marginally impressive to begin with and all turned out to be Slumbering Giants ready to lay divine-level smackdown, which for some reason their current ruler never asked them to do. But then, he isn't terribly bright, so I suppose you are correct, that's not terribly strange at all. But as I was just discussing with Titanium Dragon, people seemed VERY unwilling to accept huge jumps in apparent power from certain characters but were quite welcoming to see it in others. If some RCC character, let's say Red, since she's on everyone's mind, had suddenly turned out to be an epic-level badass who turned the tide of the battle, that would have illicited some complaints, to be sure.

You note that Parson was basically slave to the enchantment (and Wanda confirmed as much just before joining the trimancer), and yet you somehow think that he really had the option to surrender??

Well, it's ambiguous, isn't it? Parson's job wasn't neccesarily to win the battle, just to do everything possible to win the battle. Would he have been disbanded if it had turned out that surrender was the only feasible option after all other resources had been extinguished? It's not clear.

But ah, you might say, we know thanks to the outcome of the battle that victory was NOT impossible (and in fact, Parson could have "won" the way he did pretty much anytime he wanted to, or at least anytime after he had a rudimentary grasp of how Erfworld magic worked). But we also know that Parson basically cheated to win (or at least abused the rules. This volcano trick is the sort of thing that would get banned from competitive play if Erfworld were a real game). But the enchantment was something that operated within the rules. Would the enchantment then punish him for not trying to cheat to win? It seems unlikely, but then, I suppose it's possible, since Parson's very presence in Erfworld shows that the Summon Perfect Warlord spell does not work the same way normal spells do, so who knows what crazy **** it might do.

So it wasn't a sure thing one way or the other. But this is less about what Parson did or did not have to do and more abot how he felt about it. As I've mentioned, the story clearly offers a moral crisis, but Parson never seemed to let that matter cross his mind, even when he saw Sizemore struggling with it. Misty's death impressed on him the very real consequences of "gaming" in Erfworld (btw, is it obnoxious when I keep using quotation marks like that? It feels like it might be), but even thereafter he never seems to think about the consequences of his actions, the people who die as a result of his orders. Of course, as is always the case in war, pragmatism and a "Them or me" mentality pushes him to act regardless of how he feels, but I would think that he would at least once be depicted hesistating, weighing the consequences, showing something resembling remorse or regret. Normal people aren't built to handle the horrors of war or the terrible responsibilities of command, they often strain and snap when faced with the irrevocability of death. But Parson doesn't.

This is all just observation. The important part is to consider why this matters (or if it does. I gather from your post that you might say it doesn't, which is your entitled opinion. But it doesn't make for much to discuss, so I'm going to go ahead with my point of view). We might conclude that Parson shields himself by thinking about the war like it's a game (which of course it is). This plays into what I consider the major themes of Erfworld, namely, that way that entertainment skews our perception of violence (hence wargaming, dance-fighting, "booping" censorship, etc), and the matter of free will and ultimate responsibility. Most characters in the comic, from Stanley right on down to the lowliest RCC foot soldier, believe that they're acting on the orders and behalf of some kind of higher power, be that the Titans or their immediate commander. Some characters are slaves, some are conscripts, some have been enchanted, some are following orders from a king or a military commander, some believe they're fulfilling their divine destiny, while others are slaves in a more abstract sense, to their ambition, to their past, to their view of the world, etc. And some are just mindless Uncroaked. In one sense they're all people with free will, but they're also just pieces in a game (with Loyalty scores no less) being moved around by higher powers. Do these characters bear real responsibility for their actions?

And what about Parson? Is he a part of the game, a pawn just like the others, or is he one of the higher powers (notice the ambiguity of whether he is or is not Erfworld's creator via his homebrew wargame)? Does he lead the fight because he's forced to, because it's his competitive nature, or because he's the Chief Warlord, and he's filling his role in the game just like anyone? Does one interpretation or the other change our perception of the morality of his actions? These are the kinds of questions that Erfworld poses on a thematic level.

Moral questions/tricked-horrified. Um, exactly how many english courses have you taken? I'm thinking... lots. Too many, in fact. It may be that a cigar is just a cigar and youre trying to read waaaay too much into it?

I have been accused of overanalysis in the past (shock of shocks, I know). But as I've endeavored to demonstrate here, Erfworld is pretty sophisticated, thematically speaking. I think there's a lot of complexity there and I think it's intentional. The complexity has kept me reading even when I objected to some of Mr. Balder and Mr. Noguchi's material.

You object to a bubblegummed elf, but find key-lime pie humorous. You know, the line said by the guy with the closeup shot of a CROSSBOW BOLT IN HIS FACE? You're very.... selective. Oddly selective.

Surely you concede that there's a difference between a violent act that's being used a punchline and a violent act that's simply violent? That there is a line, for example, between Wile E. Coyote falling off a cliff and between, say, an actual coyote falling off of an actual cliff? In one sense they're both the same thing, but one is quite funny and the other is really not. Early in Erfworld, violence was used as a gag. Later in Erfworld it wasn't. Even you must agree that that was a conscious decisions on the part of the writer, and therefore must mean something? The simple explanation is that they wanted the comic to become grittier and more intense as the finale approached. I acknowledge the validity of that, but I also think that Erfworld is pretty intelligently written and there must be something that Mr. Balder and Mr. Noguchi want to say with it, and the violence, being such a key element, must be an important part of that. You might (and I suspect do) disagree, but I stand by my theories.

Its that even when shown to be basing his opinion on a falsehood he didnt revise his opinion at all, but kept right on using his original opinion to "stimulate debate". Classic trolling.

I was wrong about the tunnels, which I've admitted, but that doesn't invalidate the rest of the argument. I never criticized the conceit that the casters become more powerful when linked, so everyone pointing that out doesn't do much to undermine it either. Other than that, I can't recall what "falsehoods" you're talking about, most of the conflicts seem opinion-based. My comment about stimulating debate was in response not to criticisms of my opinion but to kreszantas' assertion that I was looking for other people to "make up my mind" for me. Apparently he thought I was asking questions because I was helpless to interpret anything on my own.

Seriously, we understand, and understood all that time your "tongue was held" that you didn't like the comic. That's ok, we understand, taste is a relative thing. Personally, I thought the uncroaked volcano was made of 100% pure awesome.

But don't bother trying to justify it, or to find it to be some fault of the creators. Particularly in numbered paragraphs. You just look like a prat doing it.

If you don't like it - and you made very clear, well before this, that you dont -then stop reading.

On the contrary, I like Erfworld. Would I keep reading and commenting on it if I didn't? You can be critical of something and remain a fan (many people on this board have "hated" on the comic in the past).

You're not a "glutton for punishment" by coming here, telling people that you don't like, and then responding to everyone else trying to prove you're right for not liking it. You're just a troll in that case.

Why can't I have a disagreement without being a "troll"? Why can't we be critical of the material, in every sense of the word? Why can't I try to discuss conflicting points of view? What else are these forums for? If someone posits an opposing idea or opinion, am I barred from responding? Would that be "trying to prove that I'm right"? Is webcomic discussion like a duel, both parties fire one shot and then it's over? I did make a point this time of trying to be a little less explosive and a little more measured with my comments, and I went actively hunting for other people's input. Am I then expected to roll over and accept that solicited viewpoint unquestioningly for fear of "trolling" if I offer a counterpoint?

I think you missed that this is a wargame, not RL war. Yes Parson could have surrendered and PARSON would have lived, but all his units would have still been killed.

Imagine if in RL, if you knew that surrender just means an end to the fighting, it doesn't mean survival for the troops. Turned units have low loyalty, so non-specialist units are NOT turned, they are killed. Capturing is usually reserved for valuable casters. Everyone else on your side dies.

But didn't he just kill everyone on his side except the casters anyway? I may be wrong, but it seems that that volcano wiped out his few remaining troops just as thoroughly as everything else in the hex (something else he doesn't seem to mind).

TamLin's complaint about why no one's complaining now - I'm going to expand on what Titanium Dragon said, not only were we told beforehand that Parson was deliberately trying to break the game (something hinted at in his klogs before as well), we now understand the nature of the game, and the nature of why Ansom always lucked out. I'd wager most of the people who were pissed off about Ansom's plot armour are now satisfied, given that we have the explanation for it. Hence why no one's complaing about Parson's plot weapon.

Again, less a complaint than an observation, but yes, I suppose I see your point. I still wonder whether it doesn't have more to do with people just liking Parson and therefore being more accepting of things that work in his favor (some people made this argument back during the periods of most heavy criticism as well). Would we like it if Parson has gotten toasted, even if it was done in a way that explained everything and made sense? I suspect that would be an unpopular ending.

To those few who seem to still believe that Jillian's actions are uncharacteristic, and, as someone always says, "bad/poor writing," I have just a few points to make.

When Webinar doubted her loyalty, and called her a traitor, Jillian...drew her sword and came very close to decapitating him. She held her grudge against him, sending him away so he couldn't do anything against her.

When Stanley (supposedly) conquered Faq, Jillian...searched him out, as part of a personal vendetta, and vowed to hunt him down. And that's when, as she says, he took something of hers (the cities of Faq) that she didn't even WANT.

I agree, self-control clearly has never been this woman's strong suit. And this has got to rank right up there with just about the worst day she's ever had, neck and neck with when her city got destroyed. Really, it's amazing she didn't get more violent.

In the strip, however, Caesar is merely reporting a fact: Ansom is dead. Jillian's response of 'No' should lead to depression, not her going for the throat. Her attacking Caesar is from a new line of thought beyond denial of Ansom's death and - as a favor to the reader, lets say - it requires more expressive, and accurate, diction.

I don't think Jillian is really the depression type. Anger isn't an uncommon reaction to shock and grief (especially not in entertainment, where it's a lot funner to watch than wallowing in misery).

I really feel that this was unjustified. Calling someone a hater and a troll just because you don't agree with them is hardly the best way to represent your position.

Thank you.

The question of the significance of the lives and deaths of the people of Erfworld is something that's interested me from the start, and considering the fact that Parson doesn't know if all this is part of his comatose imagination, and how badly he was affected by Misty's death, I expected a little more... reluctance to take life on such a huge scale. Otherwise, he becomes far more of a villain-protagonist to me.

I was thinking the same thing. Since I'm also interested in the fan response, which was weighted heavily in favor of GK, I would pose this question too:

Does Parson's indifference to the fates of the RCC characters also account for the board fans' indifference?

Like I said earlier (waaaaay the **** up there), it seems like the urge to identify with Parson just outweighed all the other factors in the majority of people's minds. So does the spill over into these thorny moral questions too?

Now of course, I realize that by analyzing people's reactions I'm playing with fire more than usual. Someone is going to respond with a "Hey, I don't care about Ansom and the Coalition because they were douches and because I just like Parson, why is that so ****ing hard to understand?" And yeah, people's individual reactions and opinions are of course subjective and ephemeral. But this is less about individual people and more about the broad trends and the marked popularity of some characters over others. When a majority of people overwhelmingly feel one way instead of the other, there's got to be a reason for that. "Ansom was a douche" doesn't account for it, because, well, so was Stanley, but Stanley seems the more popular character, so why?

First, Parson was granted ruthlessness through the magic of Erfworld. Second, we don't know what was going on inside Parson's head when he ordered uncroaking the volcano. Third, loss of life on a huge scale is not exactly unusual in war, but I suppose that according to your criteria, Eisenhower was a "villain-protagonist". [shrug] Finally, as has been discussed, in Parson's situation there wasn't much of a choice, no happy ending that would have preserved GK's forces.

Oh right, the ruthless thing, I forgot about that. Still, that doesn't clear up everything, we have no idea what that even meant. Was it some kind of spell? What was the extent of it? Is it something every Warlord has? Does it work the same for everyone, or does it have something to do with the subject's base personality? These questions dont' seem to have any answers, the point is just that intentional ambiguity was left in the comic.

You're right that none of this is unusual in the context of war, but war isn't something Parson is used to. A lot of people in his position would have done the same thing, but most of the would have felt worse about it than he seems to.

One final thought: Unless the pliers weird magic has caused them to fly or teleport to some unexpected locale (which wouldn't be that surprising), they're shortly going to be buried under a quarter mile or so of lava rock. Probably gonna need a good Dirtamancer to find them and dig them out again...

[Muzzafar]

Hmm, now that I think about it I'm wondering how Jillian is paying for her troops. She has been earning cash through mercenary work, but I'm wondering how she's carrying it around, since it was a significant point in getting Parson summoned that Stanley couldnt run off with GK's treasury? I'm guessing that she, and thus presumably all overlords, have a small inate money-carrying capacity, but a note to that effect (and explaining what the limit is) in the book might be nice.

Page 83, last panel
Jillian mentions her purse that contained a little more than 1700 shmuckers she spent on a Thinkagram to Ansom.

[DevilDan]

Why does it surprise anyone that the hotheaded barbarian warrior princess responds by pulling a stabbing implement? She seems to be overreacting; but maybe it's more about lashing out or simple denial.

I don't think that there's any question that there were no survivors: all field units lost simultaneously in a "trap" covering multiple hexes. RCC thinkamancers would have had more information if there were any surviving units from those that were in GK. Caesar specifically said that this was not the case.

Presumably the pliers are indestructible, but they are likely well buried. Yes, the redhead could have miraculously survived, but it isn't what I'd bet on. She would have had to move incredibly rapidly and have a lot of luck to make it out of the inner courtyard and, basically, off the whole mountain.. I don't think anyone makes it out "alive," even golems.

I think the city is completely obliterated: Parson did make it impossible for GK to be taken, though it meant wiping it off the face of the table. Parson made his stand and did his duty. He saw it through to the end. Whatever else happens, despite the same twists and turns that did to him what he was going to to as a GM to his players, he found his Kobayashi Maru escape.

(Now I'm trying to figure out a clever way of thumbing my nose at all those who been complaining that casters are overpowered so long ago... haha)

(The cast page is gone?)

To whoever asked if the casters become "barbarians" or not, that is precisely the terms that Parson used here.

[kagato23]

Why does it surprise anyone that the hotheaded barbarian warrior princess responds by pulling a stabbing implement? She seems to be overreacting; but maybe it's more about lashing out or simple denial.

I don't think that there's any question that there were no survivors: all field units lost simultaneously in a "trap" covering multiple hexes. RCC thinkamancers would have had more information if there were any surviving units from those that were in GK. Caesar specifically said that this was not the .

He did mroe then that. He said the coalition was disbanded. The coalition did not disband when Ansom died, and that was before the volcano.

Disbanding of that nature means only one thing: There was no leadership left to keep it together. It's possible some seige units and heavies survived and were disbanded on outer hexes, but anybody who could be in charge is gone. that tells us something. Cause if the higher stat and level units didn't make it...

[boxart]

Not sure what part of that comic you're interpreting that way. I don't see anything blatant, anyway. Could you be more specific?

Hey, this is my first post, so if I end up repeating common knowledge, ignore me. To answer your question, try these two comics:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/erf0048.html
Specifically, the "Overlord sets production orders for all cities" bit.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/erf0032.html
The second panel where Stanley says, "I can end you with a thought, y'know."

Together they imply that when an Overlord directly disbands a unit, the unit in question ceases to exist rather than becoming a Barbarian. I get the odd feeling that its said more explicitly in the comic somewhere, but I don't feel like looking any further.

[PNG_pyro]

So, just found this comic; it's great.

Anyways, read most of this thread, and there's something I don't think anyone has mentioned yet.

I think that it is entirely possible that in the latest page, Jillian is not about to stab Caesar, but rather herself. The evidence is mostly ambiguous, but if you look at the picture where she's yelling, the "speed lines" seem to indicate she's rushing forward. however, if you look at her body posture, that doesn't seem to be the case. I think that this is a top-down shot of her yelling upwards.

Also, the vampires. If you look at the last panel, you may notice that in comparison to the seventh panel, Caesar seems to have moved away from the other vampires. Towards Jillian, in fact.

So yeah, weak case; but just about as good as any other interpretation, I think. Oh, and add onto all of this the fact that she was in love with Ansom, and her rather volatile personality; not evidence, certainly, but perhaps corroboration.

On an unrelated note, I think Scarlett is alive. Mainly because she is the only one not on fire in the midst of the eruption. Dunno why, but the arkenpliers seem to have some effect on uncroaked; maybe even if it's an uncroaked piece of terrain, or the damage dealt thereof.

[Fjolnir]

there are only a few sides to the RCC that can be concidered their own "side", remember, the various elf brands form longstanding alliances and have no royals or lands of their own, just like the gobwins. so they're talking about Jetstone, Hobbittm, Foxmud, Sofaking and unaroyal. (TV is not a member of the RCC anymore and I doubt charlie will be forthcoming or that they'd concider him an ally given what he did to them) He gets through to Jetstone and unaroyal calls them so he probably either talked to one other member of the RCC, either foxmud sofaking or hobbittm to get confirmation on this info

[BLANDCorporatio]

(Proud memeber of Red Isn't Dead Yet [RIDY] club?)

RIDY, phah. I'm a proud member of the Scarlet Is Not Dead Yet (SINDY) club.

Red is in the courtyard, and the courtyard is part of the garrison. So all she had to do was be alive and not move to capture the garrison.

Weeelll ... my other pet theory that I've launched here is that Parson won't be on the side of Stanley by the end of this book.

I now see two ways that this could happen: Stanley disbands Parson for wrecking GK (and for not affording him now anyway) OR Stanley disbands him because he allowed one unit from the former RCC (guess who) to capture GK thus denying Stanley the turn income.

We don't, after all, have the full picture of what happened at GK, and as I've said, until I see the remains etc etc.

[Gez]

Yes, of course, it was explicitely trying to cheat, I realize that. I was commenting less on the comic itself more as I was analyzing the fan reaction. Back when Ansom was "cheating" and pulling solutions to plans out of nowhere and working around the rules, many people complained bitterly about the use of "Deus ex Machina" and attacked the writing, but there's no such criticism when the characters they like do something even more absurd. Again, not being critical (not at this part anyway), just observing.

A big difference between Ansom cheating and Parson cheating: one of those two characters is an outsider who perceive Erfworld and its rules as a game; the other character has lived there all his life and perceive everything as fully normal; plus it's shown he has a strong traditionalist slant.

So when one thinks outside the box and come up with the unexpected, it's fully in-character for Parson but out of character for Ansom.

But this is less about what Parson did or did not have to do and more abot how he felt about it. As I've mentioned, the story clearly offers a moral crisis, but Parson never seemed to let that matter cross his mind, even when he saw Sizemore struggling with it. [...] Normal people aren't built to handle the horrors of war or the terrible responsibilities of command, they often strain and snap when faced with the irrevocability of death. But Parson doesn't.

1. Parson has never been depicted as being a nice human being. He's introduced as a lardass loser who simply doesn't care about life and would rather live in an escapist fantasy. And he gets his wish fulfilled.
2. Snapping from the strain? The easiest way to deal with having to kill enemies is to dehumanize them. That's why the military uses euphemisms such as "collateral damage" rather than "civilian deaths" or "casualty" rather than "kill".
3. The Erfling's lack of free will plays a big role. Bogroll's answer stunned Parson and was a turning point for him to get back to treating Erflings as units rather than as people.*
4. Ruthlessness.

* You commented about violence in media; you have surely noticed that it's always more okay to kill clones, robots or zombies -- people who, no matter how human they might look, aren't real humans -- than to kill normal people? That was the whole point of the Stormtroopers' voices being retconned into being the same as Jango Fett after the prequels were made, so that you'd know they're merely clones and thus not real humans so it's okay if the good guys slaughter them by the thousands.

You can bet there were much more people living onboard the Death Star than crewing the Rebel base on Yavin IV's moon. The moral choice for Luke would have to let the Empire win so that fewer people would end up orphan/widow/widower this day.

Surely you concede that there's a difference between a violent act that's being used a punchline and a violent act that's simply violent? That there is a line, for example, between Wile E. Coyote falling off a cliff and between, say, an actual coyote falling off of an actual cliff? In one sense they're both the same thing, but one is quite funny and the other is really not. Early in Erfworld, violence was used as a gag. Later in Erfworld it wasn't.

I disagree. In a very recent page, units have been croaked by a 4chan bomb. If that's not a punchline, I don't know what is. And in a very early page, you have a poignant moment with a big patchwork teddy bear mourning his dead comrade.

You've got cute little people looking like children's toys that kill each other gruesomely and it's sometime funny, sometime not. That has been there since the beginning.

[MattR]

1) I don't think it's out of character for Jillian to attack the leader of the people who seem to now be intent on holding her hostage instead of actually doing something.

2) Red isn't the new chief warlord of the Jet Stone side. In the strip it says everyone contacted confirms all units lost to a single trap action. It wouldn't be all units if a unit survived would it? If the eruption was capable of killing unit in other hexes groundzero is unsurvivable.

3) Seems like we have confirmation that only Chief Warlord's & Overlords can claim new sites. It's also confirmed there are specifically sites that are for Capitals. Capital sites and other city sites seem to be linked in some way... the way its phrased in the strip makes it sound like claiming the capital site is the most important part of it, above and beyond getting the other sites. Maybe some city sites are linked to the capital site so taking control of the capital site gives control of the others immediately too?

4) Thinkamancers seem to be more common then any other caster so far. The odds of rolling a thinkamancer randomly on a table must be slim and its clear how important a thinkamancer is to a side given the lack of modern forms of communication... i'd say it lends weight to hte theory that you can just pop a caster and order it to become a certain kind of caster irrespective of where it's true casting strengths lie.

Seems like we'll soon be discovering more details about what happened to King Banhammer etc :) Using Caesar to nudge the story in that direction makes a ton of sense given we know Jillian isn't interested in going there at all AND we know that he was skeptical about Stanley showing up.. at the time his motivation for coming was delightfully ambiguous :)

Random Speculation - I'd find it hilarious if Jillian ended up working with Parson at some point in the future, not knowing he was the one that gave the order to croak her Beau :)

[MattR]

I have a theory. What if, in her enraged state, Jillian was essentially auto-attacking? Her giant sword is her special attack, which would explain why she didn't use it. This also explains why Caesar was easily able to deflect it. It's the equivalent of a boxer throwing a jab instead of an strong uppercut.

It's not all that hard to see why the attack failed if you look closely, in the last panel there's a hand around Jillian's wrist stopping her, that'd Vinnie's.

No 'passive magic' from Caesar and he certainly didn't deflect anything.

[Curris]

Wow. Lots of discussion above. . . And furthermore, lots of Intelligent, civil discussion. I'm applauding the participants now.

Anyway, just to toss my few thoughts into the brew. . . I feel that as Parson left, he changed the nature of Erfworld, just as surely as he changed it when he entered Erfworld. . .

*** Speculative nature ahead***

What if the nature of Jillian's attempted stabbity is the beginning of Real Time combat for Erfworld?

The activation of a long dormant volcano - multihex trap - 3-caster linkup power spell is likely a world changing event. The event of Parson's desummoning, possibly also reality altering. . .
What if he broke the Turn-based conventions. . . Who better to use that to their benefit (Or discover it's existence) than Jillian?

Anyway, great comic. I'll be here all week. . . Not hitting refresh (Be nice to the servers (^_^) and getting nervous.

[Sarissofoi]

Silly question.
Uncroaked volcano. It is classified as unit or not?
I think that it is unit like any uncroaked thing or golems made from dirtomancy.
Then even if all golems and garnison units are dead and Red survived Gobwin Koob is untakable.
You must first deafet Uncroaked Volcano ot wait as it degenerated and die.
If UV is unit then Stanley still control Gobwin Koob.
And control treasury and have incom (propably small or almost zero but still).
Also until UV is dead any of Coalition unit dont have chance to take city.
This is possible I think.

Proud member Red isnt dead yet Club.

[BLANDCorporatio]

Proud member Red isnt dead yet Club.

That's cute, but can I get you to sign this SINDY Club(*) membership card?

*: Scarlet Is Not Yet Dead Club.

[MattR]

I see what you're saying, but I still disagree. Perhaps it's the way it's drawn, but Jillian seems to flip out far too abruptly for her to be reacting to a perceived kidnapping. In panel 9 she might be going for a weapon, though the art is very unclear.

Why else would her hand cross to that side of her body? that's not the normal posture of someone just taking a step forward.

But in panel 10, she is not brandishing it, and no one acts as though she's just drawn a weapon on them.

She's not brandishing it, but the hand that is holding the weapon isn't visible in panel 10 at all, which is interesting because in the next panel she has the knife in hand... considering the pose with her reaching across her body earlier on I'd say it is pretty clear she unsheathed the knife in panel 9.

Yet in panel 11, she's in full blown anime lunge mode, with dagger at the ready. What happened?

I think the problem is with your perception of time based on the panels, all the action within it took place in less then 1 min.. probably only 20 secs.

Well, in panel 9, she says shortly that what Caesar is saying isn't possible. *snip* I find that unconvincing. Violent or not, Jillian is not the sort of person who kills messengers. She kills problems, and at that moment, Caesar wasn't a problem.

Sorry you werent convinced, you are a renowned skeptic tho so im not surprised :)

Seems to me she has a problem with what he's saying... and like you said she kills problems :)

But in that case, I have serious doubts that Caesar would be able to stop her attack so effortlessly.

Why are so many people missing Vinnie's hand in that final panel? i mean its RIGHT THERE *point* lookie!

Vinnie was able to stop her because he knows her well enough to guess what her reaction would be, if this isn't enough of a confirmation that Jillian is acting in character i don't know what would be.

Read back through the comic, check http://www.giantitp.com/comics/erf0057.html She pulled a weapon on Webinar when she didn't like hearing what he had to say. Her actions now aren't a surprise at all.