Erfworld thread IV: In memory of King Saline

[EnragedFilia]

if the Anchorbar crews continue to display unwillingness to attack the eagle like I think they did earlier, it might not even need to use any more luck bonus to capture its targets. And if the capture special is limited solely by capacity and not by usages per turn, it could probably just keep capturing targets one at a time indefinitely until the Anchormen figure out what's going on.

[Aquillion]

Doing things at least superficially resembling the real world activity exists, but is merely a cost saving measure.

Spoiler

Show

Those furnaces/ovens the ship has are probably completely ignored by all the sailors, but grant the ship the ability to either convert wheat to bread or outright pop bread directly at greatly reduced price, thus making the Quakken taming strategy much more economical.

I'm not sure. It's not necessary to cook your own rations, but what they're doing here is unusual; if you want a large amount of food to use for some other strange purpose like this, rather than as part of your rations, then you may need to cook it yourself.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Yeah, you only pop rations for your units and prisoners. Barbarians and allies take care of themselves (with the Schmuckers you pay). Since the quakken are not Anchorbar units, you have to do something else (like feed bread to the duckies).

[Killer Angel]

if the Anchorbar crews continue to display unwillingness to attack the eagle like I think they did earlier, it might not even need to use any more luck bonus to capture its targets.

Good point. Superstition would work for Forecastle.

[Welf]

I'm not sure. It's not necessary to cook your own rations, but what they're doing here is unusual; if you want a large amount of food to use for some other strange purpose like this, rather than as part of your rations, then you may need to cook it yourself.

I think cooking is something units do often. I think pooping a ration will cost schmuckers, while cooking something from larder will reduce the upkeep. Bogroll does it early in book 1 with his pigeon/nut pie.

[ObadiahtheSlim]

There are rules for foraging and prepared rations. There may be similar rules for poping extra rations.

[ChowGuy]

I think cooking is something units do often. I think pooping a ration will cost schmuckers,

If I had my druthers, I'd druther not have pooped rations, please.

[HandofShadows]

New Page

Spoiler: Oh Gorsh

Show

Parson and Ace are talking and Parson just talked about Transformers. And Parson has NEW CLOTHES.

[Mobius Twist]

Spoiler

Show

On a more technical side, apparently the damage done to Spacerock was severe enough to reduce its defense bonus from 5 to something lower (4 most likely).

And Tremennis, for all his complaints about being able to change strategy from the baseline infantry-heavy tactics of all his warlords, is engaging in scouting around their former capital.

Standard procedure, maybe, given how deep into Jetstone territory Parson is at the moment (based on the map of a few updates back). I can't imagine Jetstone is in a position of strength to take Spacerock back, but at least they've got them covered on three sides by their lands, if not heavy concentrations of units.

I'd love to know where Jetstone the capital is relative to Spacerock so we could get a good idea of how imminent an attack is.

[Killer Angel]

New Page

Spoiler: Oh Gorsh

Show

Parson and Ace are talking and Parson just talked about Transformers. And Parson has NEW CLOTHES.

Look matters, and it will give a kind of bonuses. Not a big surprise, after all...

[-D-]

Seriously am I the only one that think that the best way to combat Charlie's modern weapon is with giant mecha suits?

[Welf]

If I had my druthers, I'd druther not have pooped rations, please.

The soldier's life is not an easy one.

Also, curse you spellchecker, why did you fail me?

[Lentrax]

The soldier's life is not an easy one.

Also, curse you spellchecker, why did you fail me?

It prolly failed cause poop is a word.

Spoiler

Show

Portals are Natural Magic. A Portal Gun would be Unnatural Magic. Someone better get a stack of carnymancers on that.

And I totally got the impression that Parson would change some part of Jetstone into Soundwave. Bet with a Signamancy like that you'd get a massive bonus to Dance Fighting.

[tomaO2]

Alright, I got this idea I've been refining for the past few days.

Been reading the story and I came across an interesting tidbit that I will use to imagine the main benefit of heavies.

But Tramennis pointed out that with superior leadership, they could take the sourmanders and cloth golems into the adjoining hex and plow untouched through any unled stacks, take out the enemy's remaining leadership, and it would be over.

Untouched. Meaning with no reduction in hit points, even though they are going up against hundreds of infantry.

A lot of people bemoan how useless dwagons are but when you look at them against unlead infantry, they destroy. They go into hexes FULL of infantry with no worries about suddenly dying before they can pull out, while in other fights, they die extremely quickly. So what is the reasoning for this?

My answer is that heavy units have DAMAGE REDUCTION. Most unlead infantry does 1 point of damage per turn. We know that dwagons have a lot of hit points but not so much that 4 knights can't kill them in a single turn. 100 infantry should be able to do that amount of damage while dwagons leisurely move around picking off various siege. However, this doesn't happen.

If you consider that heavies have damage reduction though, it all makes sense. Suddenly 100 arrows are the same as nothing to a dwagon, and the infantry, being unlead, is aiming for the biggest target, not the warlord on the back. So, only a small fraction of that hex army can actually do any damage at all and that damage accumulates slowly enough that Parson can time it so they leave with less then 5 hit points left, without having a single one die.

I'd further guess that certain units, such as knights, perhaps. Have an armor ignore special, which allows them to damage units quickly. We already know that having the right unit for the right job is important. With mountain, forrest, tunnel, etc. units being featured. So it makes sense to me that it would also go for the battle itself.

Heavies are good against infantry but can be taken out with superior leadership or by units with armor ignore. It gives the war a deeper complexity.

I also think that another mechanic Rob hasn't mentions is that Leadership also gives attack damage bonuses, in addition to the attack rating bonus. For this I will use Vinny's words and make some interpretation.

Warlord leading make bats like infantry.
A warlord leading bats while the Chief warlord is in the hex is like Advanced infantry.
All bats in a Chief warlord's personal stack are treated like Heavy infantry.

It has been speculated that these two infantry types may be different units but I believe that this refers to basic infantry that has leveled enough for a damage bonus.

A basic infantry does 1 damage per attack.
An advanced infantry does 2 damage per attack (level 3 for stabbers; level 5 for stabbers/archers).
A heavy infantry does 3 damage per attack (level 7 for stabbers; level 9 for stabbers/ archers).

Basically damage is basic attack/2, rounded up, and basic attack increases by 1 every 2 levels gained (3, 5, 7, 9). Also, as I said in my earlier post, I think stabbers start off with a slightly higher attack rating then the other two, so they gain the damage bonus faster.

With that in mind, I would suggest that bats generally can't do damage unless the unit is immobile normally. However, when lead by a warlord, it can do 1 attack. When lead by that same warlord with a chief warlord in the hex, the bat can do 2 damage. When in the chief warlord's personal stack

All other units in a warlord stack, of course, get the same bonus. This would be another example of how leadership is a multiplier effect.

However, even with these bonuses, the bats seems to have not done much damage, so I would further guess that dwagons reduce damage by 2 instead of just 1.

I think it goes like this
Large heavy units (twolls, battle bears) reduce damage by one.
Massive heavy units (dwagons) reduce damage by 2.
Colossal heavy units (megawiffs) reduce damage by 3.

Going by that chart, only bats in Caeser's personal stack can do damage to dwagons without large amounts of effort. For the rest, they go after the knights or screen for the warlord. Warlords don't have the damage reduction special BUT we know that warlords can crit dwagons, if they have an attack bonus that is much higher then the dwagon's defence.

I think if you view the fights against heavies in this light, they make a lot of sense.

Oh, and keep in mind that, even though attacks can't lower hit points, if it doesn't surpass damage reduction, it can still do superficial damage, such as arrows sticking in the body of the heavy unit.

I also believe that heavies have the ability to kill multiple units per turn. In the story, we've seen a rock golem kill two warlords in a single hit and a heavy hob gobwin knight kill two normal (of damaged) knights at once and megawiffs seem able to take down multiple infantry at once, and even a heavy mount.

I've never seen a normal infantry unit do this (exception of Ansom killing multiple uncroaked. I assume that is a feature of the arkenpliers though) so I believe that killing more then one unit per turn is a special trait of heavies.

[Winterwind]

I... really, really hate to be this negative, after you've obviously put so much work into this, but... what you are doing here is basically starting with wild speculations that you drew from thin air, presuming they are entirely correct, then drawing more wild speculations out of thin air that don't follow logically from anything previously established but are purely something you made up, presuming those are entirely correct as well, then repeating the last few steps multiple times. In other words, as far as I can tell, your method is as unscientific as it could possibly be, and there is no proof that Erfworld works even remotely the way you describe it does. I'm genuinely sorry to be this harsh, but that's how I see it.

Some examples to illustrate why I think that way (prefacing every single statement of mine below with "as far as I remember, given the information we've been given so far,...").

Likely maximum stack bonus is +7.

Or +14, or +700, or +50%, or +7d6. We have not been given any information on the numbers involved, nor in what way it bolsters the units precisely (you assume it increases their Attack and Defence ratings, which may or may not be true), nor whether the increase is additive or multiplicative.

Warlord units are +3 attack and defence.

You literally pulled that out of a hat. To the best of my knowledge, we don't even have any indication that warlord units get any kind of attack or defence bonuses (they would be stronger just on account of coming with a leadership bonus anyway), nevermind a specific number for that.

Assuming that the base for a typical warlord is 3. Ansom gets a +1 for being a royal unit, and an additional +1 for every two levels he gets above his first (levels 3, 5, 7, 9).

[...]

Stabbers= 2 att/1 def
Pikers= 1 att (+1 if defensively entrenched; +1 if fighting stabbers)/ 1 def
Archery= 1 att (0 at melee range)/ 1 def

With a +1 to both attack and defence every 2 levels beyond level 1.

The even numbers might give bonuses to movement and/or hit points.

Firstly, every number for the infantry, as well as their specials (like pikers being better against stabbers specifically) comes entirely out of nowhere. Secondly, there is no indication that even and odd levels have different effects. Thirdly, levels may or may not have fixed effects; it's equally possible for them to be randomized.

Stabbers and pikers can be promoted to warlord or knight. Knight has higher attack/defence then a warlord but lacks the command bonus. The two options are mutually exclusive.

There is no reason to assume archer promotion is any different from stabber or piker promotion. Knights being stronger in combat than warlords comes from nowhere, and there is nothing indicating knight- and warlord-status are mutually exclusive.

A knight would have to be at least 4 att/ 4 def in this case.

Just look at what goes into this conclusion for a perfect demonstration of what I'm talking about. You're basing this off basic infantry having roughly 1/1 stats - which you made up - warlords having a +3/+3 bonus - which you made up - and knights being stronger than warlords - which you also made up!


It just goes on and on. We don't know what kind of dice are rolled in combat, we don't know with what frequency units attack, whether they do so simultaneously or whether there is some sort of initiative system, we don't know if units have a limit on the number of attacks they do in a turn, we don't know how the various stats interact (is Defence like Armor Class in D&D, making you more difficult to hit, or is it damage reduction - which you postulate to be a property of heavier units instead?), we don't know whether damage is fixed or randomized.

I realize you are merely speculating, and speculations are fun... but if they are not founded on actual information, and instead rely on stuff entirely made up, they quickly become pointless, as they lose all touch with reality and drift off into the realm of pure imagination. And I fear what you have done isn't so much moving past that point, as blazing past it with warp engines going full overdrive.

I really don't want to bring you down, and I hope my tone doesn't come across as too mean - because I really, really don't mean it that way - but, I think if you want to speculate about how Erfworld works, you'd be better off sticking more closely to what we know (which, I admit, is probably too little for any proper conclusions), and making up less stuff as you go.

[tomaO2]

I... really, really hate to be this negative, after you've obviously put so much work into this, but... what you are doing here is basically starting with wild speculations that you drew from thin air, presuming they are entirely correct, then drawing more wild speculations out of thin air that don't follow logically from anything previously established but are purely something you made up, presuming those are entirely correct as well, then repeating the last few steps multiple times. In other words, as far as I can tell, your method is as unscientific as it could possibly be, and there is no proof that Erfworld works even remotely the way you describe it does. I'm genuinely sorry to be this harsh, but that's how I see it.

Okay, yes, I'm making things up. So what? I'm making a working theory of how the game world works. That said, I'm not getting it out of complete thin air.

I quoted Tram saying that heavy units can kill unlead units with no damage. We've seen dwagons go into hexes and come out fine. While on the other hand, we've seen dwagons die fast. What makes the difference? There has to be something. I said that there might be damage reduction.

It's also a fact that heavy units are the only units seen killing two units at once. So why not include it. I also have more then what I wrote here. I've plotted out 3 battles that we have seen and modified my rule set based on it. I've taken the limited amounts of basic info and spun it into a working model. If you told me it didn't work because of X reason. That is one thing but just to discard what I have done just because there isn't enough evidence is really harsh.

Some examples to illustrate why I think that way (prefacing every single statement of mine below with "as far as I remember, given the information we've been given so far,...").
Or +14, or +700, or +50%, or +7d6. We have not been given any information on the numbers involved, nor in what way it bolsters the units precisely (you assume it increases their Attack and Defence ratings, which may or may not be true), nor whether the increase is additive or multiplicative.

We have actually been given some numbers. Specifically we are using Ansom's numbers. A level 10 decrypted warlord in a max stack with Wanda, who gives all units in the same stack as her a +8, stacks at 33. 33- 18= 15. The remaining points must, therefore, come from Ansom's base stats and the stacking bonus. We know it maxes out at 8 people. It's not unreasonable to say that stack bonus is 7, especially since a single unit is stated to have a stack bonus if 0. If you take that away the remainder is 8. We also know that royals get a bonus over non royals, so I pegged that bonus at +1. Bogroll has an attack of 5, and Jack has an attack of 2. I figure a warlord is stronger then a caster but weaker then a heavy. That's not an outlandish thought.

So with the remaining 7 points, yea, I made it up but even here it's reasonable to think leveling gives some bonuses. So I went with the idea that an attack bonus comes ever 2 levels. Levels 3, 5, 7, 9, etc. That's 4 points. Remainder is 3. Therefore, warlords have a base 3 attack and defence.

You literally pulled that out of a hat. To the best of my knowledge, we don't even have any indication that warlord units get any kind of attack or defence bonuses (they would be stronger just on account of coming with a leadership bonus anyway), nevermind a specific number for that.

I got it from extrapolating from the three characters we get attack numbers for and from the various battles we've witnessed. It's largely made up though, yes. It doesn't contradict existing canon though.

Firstly, every number for the infantry, as well as their specials (like pikers being better against stabbers specifically) comes entirely out of nowhere. Secondly, there is no indication that even and odd levels have different effects. Thirdly, levels may or may not have fixed effects; it's equally possible for them to be randomized.

Pikers getting bonuses is canon. It's in the latest backer story. Originally I had pikers at one attack and two defence. Then I read that it gets bonuses, so I modified it to 1/1 with a +1 for defence and +1 for fighting stabbers. Put the two together and it's +3 which puts them over stabbers if they are +2, which allows for those rock paper scissor situations.

I did make up the bonuses levels give though. I'm not sure why that's so wrong. Partly I came up with that as a way to quantify Vinny's statement on how warlord bonuses make bats like different units. When I looked at attack bonuses, and the way they shoot up, it didn't make sense that we are just talking about hit rate, so I focused on damage bonuses instead, and found that this worked quite well into what I know.

There is no reason to assume archer promotion is any different from stabber or piker promotion. Knights being stronger in combat than warlords comes from nowhere, and there is nothing indicating knight- and warlord-status are mutually exclusive.

Well, there are no knight archers. That's basically how I came up with that. I figure it would be different. Plus, since archers are long range and not good in close combat. I thought it would be reasonable to have them be more of a glass canon.

Actually, Vurp can be promoted to chief, even though he's a knight already. On the other hand, he's the only unit we've seen do that and it could be another one of those weird tribe things that lets them upgrade to heavy knight. I'll admit that falls under personal preference. It's not a big deal.

Just look at what goes into this conclusion for a perfect demonstration of what I'm talking about. You're basing this off basic infantry having roughly 1/1 stats - which you made up - warlords having a +3/+3 bonus - which you made up - and knights being stronger than warlords - which you also made up!

I don't see any issue with that. If it make sense. If it works, then why not try and quantify things? Knights and commanders are stronger then infantry. I would figure that knights are more battle orientated and commanders are more leadership orientated. So knights being stronger then commanders that are stronger then infantry makes sense.

We also know that 8 pikers and archery are made per turn, but only 6 stabbers. So stabbers are slightly stronger then pikers/ archery. Therefore, if you assume that pikers and archery are the weakest (attack 1), then stabbers (attack 2), then commanders (attack 3), then knights (attack 4). All four are under the attack of a heavy unit. Who, one would think should be the strongest of all and his attack is 5.

It just goes on and on. We don't know what kind of dice are rolled in combat, we don't know with what frequency units attack, whether they do so simultaneously or whether there is some sort of initiative system, we don't know if units have a limit on the number of attacks they do in a turn, we don't know how the various stats interact (is Defence like Armor Class in D&D, making you more difficult to hit, or is it damage reduction - which you postulate to be a property of heavier units instead?), we don't know whether damage is fixed or randomized.

I'm assuming 1d20 for attack chances with damage coming in fixes amounts.

We actually do know battle frequency due to the Artemis battle. There is a clear flow of battle. First one side attacks, then the next. I played out that battle using the rule set I developed and it seems to fit logically inside of it.

From what we've seen damage reduction seems to be a heavy unit property but we don't know. Doesn't it make sense though? I'm going with it being deflection chance unless we get evidence of it being something else.

I'm going with fixed damage, mainly because there seems to be some clear differencials on what certain units can inflict, and because it's easier to calculate stuff. So far, the math works out.

I really don't want to bring you down, and I hope my tone doesn't come across as too mean - because I really, really don't mean it that way - but, I think if you want to speculate about how Erfworld works, you'd be better off sticking more closely to what we know (which, I admit, is probably too little for any proper conclusions), and making up less stuff as you go.

I'm making a set that is entirely based on what is known. I have a bunch of stuff written on this. It's all workable and when I hit a problem, yea, I make guesses, but I try and ground it on my exisiting structure. I even wrote out 3 battles so far and it fits in pretty good. I think you can read my mechanics explanation with the actual battles and it makes sense and stays consistent!

Anyway, if there are outrageous flaws, I'm happy to modify it. I've done that several times now. Heck the entire damage reduction idea came because of flaws I found in how I was doing the mechanics. I had to create that wholesale to plug a gap but as soon as I worked on it, it made more and more sense and suddenly a lot of stuff started clicking for me. I'm pretty proud of this deduction.

One thing I'm really unsure of is hit points. I think 4 is a good number for infantry but it could be higher or lower. I also had to think of stuff like if there is hit points, can you die from a paper cut? I gave some thought to this and decided that the wound has to be a certain amount and hit in the vital zone. You don't see units dying from getting a limb cut off, they die from being hit in the torso, head, neck areas. Unless that happens, they seem able to live no matter how damaged they get.

Even if this isn't the right way the world works, it's still a model that is usable. I think people could play an actual battle off this rule set I made up, which was my intention. This allows people to do an Erfworld style tactical simulation.

http://forums.erfworld.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=7200

[Kornaki]

It sounds like a good guess at an approximation of Erfworld. It would be interesting if you could use it to guess the results of a battle before we see it play out, then we can see if it is any good at estimating how fights go down in the comic.

[tomaO2]

Like I said, I wrote 3 out already at the link I provided. My essay was getting long and I wanted a new thread so I could find my information easily.

I can post one here. The full rule set I developed is at the link I provided, along with 2 more fights.

I also wrote out the Artemis fight, which likely has wonky hit ratios but I figure fate is involved with that. I focused mainly on turn order and damage dealt.

Third is Jillian's original fight with the dwagons.

Anyway, here is a battle.

Battle#1

During dwagonfall.

Sylvia is incapacitated. A level 1 warlord attacks with 4 infantry attacks. Her defender is a heavy hobgobwin knight.

Bonuses:
Sylvia is level 6, in a 2 stack with a level 2 chief warlord that isn't in the hex (1/3 level 2 bonus= 0?). I would guess you get 0 bonus because Syvia mentioned getting a boost when Parson arrived on the hex. Since Parson is level 2 at this time and hex bonus is 1/3 total. That implies 0 boost when he's not there. Also, he's likely not decrypted, although that's not certain. So the knight does not get the +1 side bonus from the pliers.
+6 (warlord bonus)+1 (stack bonus)+0 (chief warlord bonus)= +7

Jetstone warlord is level 1, in a 5 stack, with a chief warlord in the hex... at level 7 (could be lower, Tram didn't seem to fight much)? Tram is incapacitated, which may or may not remove the side hex bonuses. For the purpose of this, we shall say it remains.
+1 (warlord)+4 (stack)+3?(chief)= +8

As both are lead stacks they each get a +1 to damage. In addition the Jetstone stack has their chief warlord in the hex, and inflicts an additional +1 damage.

Bonuses are probably equal. So the main difference would be what is the bonus of a heavy knight and the fact that this is a hobgobwin not a man. If the base is 4 for a knight, I would guess that a hob's stats are slightly higher but there is a minus because hobs don't wear armor. So lets say +1 for attack over normal knights. In addition, a promotion to heavy gives an astonishing +3 to att/def and 6 to HP, maybe. His total is +15 att/+14 def.

Jetstone warlord is the target. He is likely not a royal, so his base is +3 with +8 for bonuses. Total is +11/+11. Assume he is leading stabbers, they would be +10/+9.

Round 1

Initiative goes to the higher level warlord, so the hob attacks first. Warlord orders units to screen while he holds back.

Hob has an attack of +15 vs. the stabber's def. of +9. Base success is 50% +30% (5%*6)= 80% to hit + a 10% to crit. Since the hob is over 5 points in attack strength, he can bulrush through the screen and attack the warlord directly. Which he does.

Hob has an attack of +15 vs. the warlord's def. of 11. Base success is 50% +20% (5%*4)= 70% to hit. Hob hits and does 5 points of damage (base attack of 8/2= 4+ 1 (warlord bonus)= 5). Warlord has 5 hit points and dies from the blow.

The 4 units attack. They have lost leadership so their att/def is -1. More importantly, they lose the +1 damage bonus from being lead. With an attack of +9 vs. the Hob's def. of +14, their attack success chance is 50% (base) - 25% (-5%*5)= 25% to hit for 1+1 (from chief warlord damage bonus)= 2 point each. One of the 4 attacks hits, doing 2 points of damage, minus the Hob's damage deduction, which brings it to 1. The hob's hit points is now 11.

Round 2

Hob attacks. His attack is +15 vs. a stabber's def. of 8. Attack chance is 50% (base) +40% (+5%*7)= 85% chance to hit with a 15% crit chance. Hob gets lucky and gets a crit, killing the first stabber. Crits mean that the victim has the equivilant of 1 hit point. So the hob still has 4 attack blow through. This time the heavy can use his cleave ability so the hob rolls to hit the next stabber. It also hits and does 4 points of damage. Killing him as well.

Had the warlord still been alive, he could have ordered the remaining two stabbers to kill Sylvia. However, he died in the initial attack, so the stabbers mindlessly attacked the hob instead. Both miss their rolls. The hob then hits back with a normal hit and kills another stabber and his cleave means he can also strike the next unit for 1 point of damage bringing him down to 3.

The last stabber attacks again and hits for 2 damage, bringing the hob to 10 after his damage reduction reduces it by a point. The hob then attacks for the last time, hits, and kills the stabber. This allows him to level to 3, giving him an additional +1 to att/def.

Victory!

I'm making stuff up, don't know if anyone crits, for instance, because the battle wasn't described in detail.I do know that crits exist though, so that has to be modeled for when I write up a battle.

I made up bullrushing as well. I liberally steal from D&D when I feel it fits. But it's canon that you can break through a screen with a higher attack rate, so, again, I am trying to figure out a rule set for it. He's a big unit, and has a higher attack. Since both those things are in play, it seemed appropriate to include it.

I also believe that the warlord has to be killed first, otherwise he can simply order his units to go around the heavy and kill Sylvia. The hob is only one unit and can't really screen her against so many opponents. Anyone could kill her while she was like that. Therefore, it's clear that if warlord doesn't die immediately, then his most sensible course of action is to sacrifice himself in order to kill Sylvia. After that, stabber stupidity can account for what happens next.

The main thing I took away from this fight, and it influences how I wrote it, is that the fight was easy for the hob. So he would have to be clearly better, on his own, fighting Jetstone. If he doesn't have a significant advantage, then my modeling would be proven to be wrong. So I have to work the numbers in a way that clearly shows him as being stronger.

I rewrote things several times with that in mind until I felt that this ruleset adequately portrayed that fact while still fitting in with the other two battles I wrote and other information given.

EDIT:

Here is a problem I just came across. I had been writing that only knight and commander units can ride but in the recent battle between Jillian and Stanley, it is stated that Jillian has rider units that are not knights. I now have to pick from one of three options.

1. There is no issue with riding mounts, it's just that it's traditional for only knights/warlords to do so.
2. These are a new unit that hasn't been revealed.
3. It is possible to add the Rider special to basic infantry
4. Jillian is simply taking the malus, even though she has enough warlords to split into 4 stacks and avoid it.

When I think about it, I am aware that there are units that have the scout designation that look the same as other units. Since those and these riders look the same as other units of their type, I'm going to guess that you can specifically pop infantry with either the scout or rider special at an increased cost.

Now I have to modify my post to take that into account.

[NEO|Phyte]

So I was a lot happier with that holiday break newspost until I actually clicked to read it and noticed that we were supposed to be getting Forecastle updates. Unless we have been and the front page isn't updating.

[El Grapadura]

So I was a lot happier with that holiday break newspost until I actually clicked to read it and noticed that we were supposed to be getting Forecastle updates. Unless we have been and the front page isn't updating.

I don't think we've had anything, and I agree. Gimme dat sweet Forecastle.

I suggest taking the opportunity to re-read the prologue chapters. I was a little apprehensive the first read-through, but on the second go round, I was blown away by the quality of the story and the writing. It's a deep piece of work, makes you think about life and stuff. Good job, Rob.

[Aquillion]

Forecastle update.

Spoiler

Show

The trick with the deck can't possibly work, can it? If it did, Luckamancers would be outrageously overpowered, since they could just accumulate luck by playing children's card games and losing. Unless it only works for Double Eagles or something, I guess.

[BRC]

Forecastle update.

Spoiler

Show

The trick with the deck can't possibly work, can it? If it did, Luckamancers would be outrageously overpowered, since they could just accumulate luck by playing children's card games and losing. Unless it only works for Double Eagles or something, I guess.

Spoiler

Show

The Double Eagle builds up its Luckamancy reserve by cursing the ship it is on. Unlike a normal Luckamancer, which probably just uses Juice like every other caster.

[Legato Endless]

Forecastle update.

Spoiler

Show

The trick with the deck can't possibly work, can it? If it did, Luckamancers would be outrageously overpowered, since they could just accumulate luck by playing children's card games and losing. Unless it only works for Double Eagles or something, I guess.

Spoiler

Show

Perhaps Luckamancers don't have the reserve the Eagle does?

[Lentrax]

Spoiler

Show

Cursing a deck....

"I have two threes, a joker, the nine of cups and the get out of jail free card from Monopoly. Go fish."

[Lizard Lord]

Spoiler

Show

Heh. First fishing and now playing cards. The captain indeed has out-of-the-box battle strategies.

[Narkis]

Forecastle update.

Spoiler

Show

The trick with the deck can't possibly work, can it? If it did, Luckamancers would be outrageously overpowered, since they could just accumulate luck by playing children's card games and losing. Unless it only works for Double Eagles or something, I guess.

Spoiler

Show

Normal Luckamancers can't control where they get the good roll from. It's up to Fate's whims, and she can be a cruel mistress.

[Killer Angel]

Forecastle update.

Spoiler

Show

The trick with the deck can't possibly work, can it? If it did, Luckamancers would be outrageously overpowered,

Maybe. But firstly, you had to think to it.

[ryuplaneswalker]

Maybe. But firstly, you had to think to it.

Eh, it is a very basic idea once you actually tame a Double Eagle.

[Kornaki]

Spoiler

Show

When the eagle first landed, there were reports of the crew getting irate over games of luck gone awry, so I suspect this will work perfectly well. It's an exploit, because double eagles were never supposed to be tamed (just like the quakken is an exploit)

[Killer Angel]

Eh, it is a very basic idea once you actually tame a Double Eagle.

Yep, but it remains a trick with a tamed beast, and you need an important character to do the thing. I doubt you can afford it on so many ships.
And it's no more broken than the "taming" of a quakken.

I do believe that the rules of Erfworld, are made to reward those able to think outside the usual schemes.