Erfworld Thread III: As the Erf Turns

[Kornaki]

Does duty compel rulers to act in the best interests of their side (and what would that even mean at that point)? Perhaps there is a disconnect in how underlings and rulers see/experience the world because of a lack of Duty for rulers, which would explain a lot of the strife that we have seen.

[RMS Oceanic]

Does duty compel rulers to act in the best interests of their side (and what would that even mean at that point)? Perhaps there is a disconnect in how underlings and rulers see/experience the world because of a lack of Duty for rulers, which would explain a lot of the strife that we have seen.

I figure it's more like Duty is subjective to each person. Scrofula believes his plan is best for Squashcourt and so has no trouble going along with it. Dunkin believes Crush's viewpoint on such things and thus feels dutybound to help him plan a way out of it.

If I recall correctly, Parson couldn't order the casters to retreat from Gobwin Knob because he had the Uncroacked Volcano idea that he believed might just work, so duty to his side prevented him from ordering the retreat. If he didn't have that idea, I think he'd have been able to order it.

[Kornaki]

I figure it's more like Duty is subjective to each person. Scrofula believes his plan is best for Squashcourt and so has no trouble going along with it. Dunkin believes Crush's viewpoint on such things and thus feels dutybound to help him plan a way out of it.

Yes, but if there is literally zero magical compulsion making Scrofula pick certain actions (as opposed to other units who believe they can feel Duty making them do things), he might not be able to reconcile Dunkin's betrayal with the idea that this means that Scrofula might be doing something wrong. He might not understand what Duty really is on an instrinsic level, having never experienced it himself.

If I recall correctly, Parson couldn't order the casters to retreat from Gobwin Knob because he had the Uncroacked Volcano idea that he believed might just work, so duty to his side prevented him from ordering the retreat. If he didn't have that idea, I think he'd have been able to order it.

Parson isn't a ruler so this doesn't help.

As an example in the summer updates we had the one ruler who walked into the portal to prevent Gobwin Knob from turning her units into decrypted. What does Duty have to say about that? That couldn't have been "best for the side" unless that phrase literally means 'whatever the ruler wants to happen', which is probably not true because then duty wouldn't let you override a ruler's orders.

[Winterwind]

I'm guessing when a unit "betrays" the Ruler, it might be because its Duty compelled it to, or because its Loyalty was too low. In the former case, you would want to question the unit what it was thinking; in the latter, you would just want to execute the traitor as quickly as possible. Scrofula, naturally, chose to interpret Dunkin's actions as the latter rather than the former, simply because it suits him and his ego.

As an example in the summer updates we had the one ruler who walked into the portal to prevent Gobwin Knob from turning her units into decrypted. What does Duty have to say about that? That couldn't have been "best for the side" unless that phrase literally means 'whatever the ruler wants to happen',

At least the initial explanation of Duty we get in Book 1 makes it sound like Duty isn't "best for the side", it's "best for the Ruler". And it affects commanders only, anyway, which may or may not include the Ruler.

which is probably not true because then duty wouldn't let you override a ruler's orders.

That same Book 1 page makes it sound like it's Obedience that lets you do that, not Duty (then again, there are many ways how "act on own initiative" might be interpreted, so...).

Though I'm not sure if this is all fully in line with what we are told in Inner Peace. Don't have the time to go on a large-scale search through the Archives to check, though...

[RMS Oceanic]

I'm also remembering Stanley's order to Wanda early on.

"Pick the handsomest guy left and make him Chief Warlord."
"No, Lord."
"Are you refusing an order?"
"I'm allowed. I'm convinced it will lead to your destruction."

Don't think Wanda was a commander, and it sounds like Duty was the chief reason.

Eh, I could be wrong.

[HandofShadows]

Casters ae command level units. They rearly take the field (Wanda being an exception).

[Aquillion]

Casters ae command level units. They rearly take the field (Wanda being an exception).

I assume croakamancers are usually the exception, since they both give a bonus to uncroaked, and need to be on the front where the corpses are to use their discipline. And unlike the other unit-making caster types, croakamancy has few applications beyond creating units, so there's no advantage to holding them back.

(Whereas, say, Sizemore can create and lead units in theory, but he has many other uses, so there's less incentive to use him as a leader -- even if his personality was suitable for it.)

[ryuplaneswalker]

At least the initial explanation of Duty we get in Book 1 makes it sound like Duty isn't "best for the side", it's "best for the Ruler". And it affects commanders only, anyway, which may or may not include the Ruler.

The thing about "best for the ruler" is that a poor enough ruler will inevitably do things that are not in their best personal interests, in that cause wouldn't it be "Dutiful" to remove said ruler from power, put them in a dungeon so they don't end up with their head on a spike?

[Lamech]

Probably not. IIRC, from inner peace Jillian couldn't face any bared doors of the city she controlled. Trying to confine a ruler to the dungeon would just end up with a lot of disbanded units. You could go on strike like the TV warlords and Ben. Or secretly destroy an "ally" who is anything but, alla Caesar (and Vinny maybe).

Now a caster has more options. Mind Control. Long term incapacitation. (Its mentioned in some bonus material.) Putting them in a bag of holding and rupturing it so nothing can ever harm them again as they are lost forever. (I have no idea if that's remotely possible.) A caster probably could do something like the imprison for your own good.

[Kornaki]

At least the initial explanation of Duty we get in Book 1 makes it sound like Duty isn't "best for the side", it's "best for the Ruler". And it affects commanders only, anyway, which may or may not include the Ruler.

I forgot the difference between Obedience and Duty. So if Dunkin isn't a command level unit he has no Duty, and therefore is simply capable of conspiring against the ruler as long as he is not disobeying an order.

Also, from the erfwiki I just found,

Rulers may be affected by some form of Duty that makes them pop or designate heirs, an action that is good for their side but has no advantages for them (and can even be a dangerous option in some cases).

So it seems like I'm not the first person to speculate on what kind of Natural Thinkamancy a ruler may experience.

[EnragedFilia]

Being a Fool, Dunkin may have had an additional Duty to Comedy (capitalizations intentional) which specifically allowed him to do whatever he wants as long as it would be funny enough!

[Legato Endless]

We also know that one of the great minds is part of an oligarchy that directs a side, the ruler, for some reason is permanently incapacitated. The text also hints unlike the others he's still acting in his sides interests. There must be wiggle room for a commander to act for the side over the ruler, or coups wouldn't be the risk we see they are.

[Aquillion]

The thing about "best for the ruler" is that a poor enough ruler will inevitably do things that are not in their best personal interests, in that cause wouldn't it be "Dutiful" to remove said ruler from power, put them in a dungeon so they don't end up with their head on a spike?

It seems very likely. Maggie was able to mind-control Stanley when she was certain he was making the wrong choice; if she was certain that he would inevitably do something self-destructive the moment she released him from her control, it follows that she could control or imprison him indefinitely.

[MReav]

Olive Branch was able to puppet rule for some time despite poisoning her ruler and everyone who was a threat to her and her philosophy.

[Landis963]

Olive Branch was able to puppet rule for some time despite poisoning her ruler and everyone who was a threat to her and her philosophy.

Something tells me her Loyalty score was bottom-of-the-barrel. Her Int score (whatever that means in Erfworld context), on the other hand, was high enough to a) hide this fact and b) hatch the "poison-and-replace" plan in the first place.

[HandofShadows]

Bottom of the barrel? I think she hit the bottom and decided to start digging. She probably hade a negative loyalty score.

[Landis963]

Bottom of the barrel? I think she hit the bottom and decided to start digging. She probably had a negative loyalty score.

That was my thought as well, but game systems tend to ignore negative numbers except where specified.

[Welf]

That was my thought as well, but game systems tend to ignore negative numbers except where specified.

I wonder if the Arkendish can turn a unit's loyalty negative.

[Landis963]

I wonder if the Arkendish can turn a unit's loyalty negative.

That's... a disturbing thought. Actually, given how the Archons feel about him, I wouldn't be surprised if one of its secondary powers is "mess with Loyalty." Which makes Maggie's line about "[Charlie] had the world by its G-Strings" really, really creepy in retrospect.

[NEO|Phyte]

And we have the next update.

[Rob Roy]

Seems like an appropriate end for this miniseries. Unsurprisingly, no ones like Jillian.

[Yana]

Spoiler: Lord Crush Update 5

Show

Good to see that the titular warlord survived the war, though I was hoping for Scrofula to croak. That king is a worse millstone than Slately or Stanley ever was.

And now we have info on where this takes place in the timeline: post the fall of FAQ (thanks to the publishing of Banhammer's "Principles of Peace"), but prior to the Battle of Gobwin Knob (Jillian is a Barbarian, but not affiliated with the Royal Crown Coalition).

Interesting read, nice to see a campaign play out without significant use of magic or casters. I look forward to the next update.

[Porthos]

Spoiler

Show

Called it.

...

Well, partially. Figured that Prince Axe would get a hold of the plan and do something with it. Whiffed on him figuring out on his own that it was a good plan and that he might kill his king.

Though beating him to a bloody pulp is pretty close.

[HalfTangible]

Spoiler: Lord Crush Update 5

Show

Good to see that the titular warlord survived the war, though I was hoping for Scrofula to croak. That king is a worse millstone than Slately or Stanley ever was.

And now we have info on where this takes place in the timeline: post the fall of FAQ (thanks to the publishing of Banhammer's "Principles of Peace"), but prior to the Battle of Gobwin Knob (Jillian is a Barbarian, but not affiliated with the Royal Crown Coalition).

Interesting read, nice to see a campaign play out without significant use of magic or casters. I look forward to the next update.

Maybe the RCC built itself on the model of the So-be-it union?

[Fjolnir]

Certainly not, the RCC is a loose coalition of independent nations while the so be it union actually had rules beyond "You must be THIS Royal to hate Gobwin Knob" anyhow

Spoiler

Show

That book is probably the biggest gun on the mantelpiece we've seen in this series...

[EnragedFilia]

Certainly not, the RCC is a loose coalition of independent nations while the so be it union actually had rules beyond "You must be THIS Royal to hate Gobwin Knob" anyhow

Spoiler

Show

That book is probably the biggest gun on the mantelpiece we've seen in this series...

Spoiler

Show

Not quite the biggest (dibs on his dice!), but it's probably the most obvious for now.

[CRtwenty]

Spoiler

Show

Called it.

...

Well, partially. Figured that Prince Axe would get a hold of the plan and do something with it. Whiffed on him figuring out on his own that it was a good plan and that he might kill his king.

Though beating him to a bloody pulp is pretty close.

Spoiler

Show

I loved the exchange between Axe and Crush in the dungeon. It also surprised me a bit to find out that Crush was actually a royal. I guess it makes sense since his ruler's a queen, but still.

[HandofShadows]

Spoiler

Show

I think it's interesting being a Royal means nothing to him. In fact dislikes it.

[The Glyphstone]

I wonder what the necessary Duty/Loyalty ratio is to allow a Chief Warlord to beat the crap out of his own Ruler for the good of the side?

[NEO|Phyte]

I wonder what the necessary Duty/Loyalty ratio is to allow a Chief Warlord to beat the crap out of his own Ruler for the good of the side?

I suspect it doesn't require particularly low of either stat. As long as you don't croak the guy, he'll be right as rain come next turn.