Erfworld 72, page 66

[sihnfahl]

"She knows this situation is critical to my side" (underlining added).

But is 'my side' Stanley... or herself?

Stanley apparently does know about the general catch-and-release arrangement. He grumbles about it occasionally

Which... wasn't what I was talking about. He's accepting the catch and release, because he gets 'on the ground' intel he otherwise wouldn't get... but think for a moment how Stanley would react if he found out Wanda was grooming Jillian to save HER, and not HIM, in the event Ansom won?

[ag30476]

All of which is why I think this is the first time that Stanley has actually made me laugh. The punch line is brilliant, the character has suddenly become almost likable in his pathetic egotism.

Huh?? Our favorite villian has been putting out the best one liners since his first appearance (Yes, yes I know he sent a book msg in 2 but that's doesn't really count as the first.)

He even does takes

Of course just cause I found him funny doesn't mean you had to.

[ag30476]

But is 'my side' Stanley... or herself?

Crazy logic is logical to the crazy.

[ag30476]

In order to keep my perfect prediction streak going, here's another...well the same old one just tweaked...

Spoiler

Show

Either

Jillian will not act which will force the Archons to contact Ansom who will come over and defeat the warlords and get captured in front of a paralyzed Jillian
-OR-
Jillian will run away which will force Ansom to fly to the dwagons and defeat the warlords and get captured

Either way, Ansom dressed that tight, sexy metal suit is just asking to be "taken".

[MedPig]

How would you categorize the loving cuddle Jillian shares with Wanda on the flight on the dragon (which seems to exude more than sisterly love)? Or the (implied) non-chaste kiss they have when they land? And Wanda's insistance that Jillian call her mistress?

I never saw that as a cuddle. I saw Wanda supporting a very much unconscious Jillian, who, under a spell for ease of transport, wouldn't have been able to hang on. Also, the implied kiss COULD have been the activation of the spell she's currently under. Post-Hypnotic Suggestion, as it were...

[MedPig]

I

As someone who grew up close to Philly, you ROCK with that screen name.

Okay, it's off-topic, but I just had to high-five you for the irony, and all...

(For the uninitiated, "Death Quakers" sort of ranks up there with "Electric Amish", under "Things that just don't belong...")

Sorry, carry on.

[Krelon]

After I reread page 66 slowly again, I'm not longer sure if Jillian hates Stanley.

This could have been a clever attempt to throw Stanley off the "what the hell is going on here" track.

The panels with the conversation could be read like that (I'll add "missing" text in itaclics):

She won't fight for someone she hates
Nor harm someone she loves

I know her very well, that's her nature... I don't need a spell for that.

She Loves Ansom?
She Hates Me?

Indeed those are good questions, but your are assuming too much.

Above all she will not harm me
She knows the situation is critical to my side.

You see my side looks like that: Me, Jillian and temporarily you too, so you are lucky to be on the right side

so what did she really say, what do we think we heard?

[sihnfahl]

I never saw that as a cuddle. I saw Wanda supporting a very much unconscious Jillian, who, under a spell for ease of transport, wouldn't have been able to hang on. Also, the implied kiss COULD have been the activation of the spell she's currently under. Post-Hypnotic Suggestion, as it were...

Okay, your reasoning that Jillian is unconcious for transport is based off ...

[SteveMB]

But is 'my side' Stanley... or herself?

After I reread page 66 slowly again, I'm not longer sure if Jillian hates Stanley.

Remember, Wanda's response is in the context of explaining why she can't simply get Jillian to switch sides and help defend the wounded dwagons. The only logical referent in this situation for "someone she hates" is Stanley.

Even if Wanda has an agenda of her own that doesn't necessarily conincide with Stanley's interests (which would not surprise me one bit), defeating Ansom's attack on GK is clearly part of it. If not, she could have simply let Stanley promote the next sap in line to Chief Warlord, or let him go ahead and remove Parson from his post. That being the case, the distinction between "our side" meaning Stanley and GK generally and "our side" meaning Wanda is a distinction without a difference, so far as this battle is concerned -- either way, the objective is a GK military victory.

EDIT: It occurs to me that the issue of whether Wanda can communicate her wishes to Jillian (either explicitly or on some subconcsious level) is not addressed. That suggests that it's at least a possibility -- otherwise, Wanda could have given the much simpler explanation that she literally could not ask Jillian to switch sides at the moment.

[MedPig]

Okay, your reasoning that Jillian is unconcious for transport is based off ...

Common Sense.

I was a cop for fifteen years. If I couldn't transport someone who could 'croak a small army' with a pair of chopsticks in handcuffs, behind a screen, I'd sure be a lot happier if they were out cold.

Think of it as "Ease of handling", sort of why they put those plastic ring-things on 20-ounce soda bottles when you buy six. You COULD carry six loose, but why bother? Sure, you COULD pin some Amazon Barbarian to a flying dragon (and I'd probably like it, come to think of it), but it adds too much risk. Thinking as someone who has played D&D for years, if I needed to move someone back to enemy lines to drop them off, I'd want them under a spell, if only so I could make the move without wondering if my Spleen would still be there when I got back...

Load the "Sack of Potatoes" - er, Jillian sleeping, onto the dragon, fly fast and low, drop her off, give her the suggestion that she will not fully awaken until ONE MINUTE after the kiss, pucker up while the engine is running, then FLY LIKE HELL out of there...

She wakes up, looks around, and the programmed story kicks in. She's none the wiser, you still have your Chitlins in place.

[SteveMB]

Common Sense.

I was a cop for fifteen years. If I couldn't transport someone who could 'croak a small army' with a pair of chopsticks in handcuffs, behind a screen, I'd sure be a lot happier if they were out cold.

Think of it as "Ease of handling", sort of why they put those plastic ring-things on 20-ounce soda bottles when you buy six. You COULD carry six loose, but why bother? Sure, you COULD pin some Amazon Barbarian to a flying dragon (and I'd probably like it, come to think of it), but it adds too much risk. Thinking as someone who has played D&D for years, if I needed to move someone back to enemy lines to drop them off, I'd want them under a spell, if only so I could make the move without wondering if my Spleen would still be there when I got back...

Load the "Sack of Potatoes" - er, Jillian sleeping, onto the dragon, fly fast and low, drop her off, give her the suggestion that she will not fully awaken until ONE MINUTE after the kiss, pucker up while the engine is running, then FLY LIKE HELL out of there...

She wakes up, looks around, and the programmed story kicks in. She's none the wiser, you still have your Chitlins in place.

Wanda has expressed absolute confidence that Jillian won't do anything to harm her. (Whether this is the result of a specific spell or her overall campaign of mental subversion is unclear.)

Unless her show of confidence is a false front, she shouldn't feel any need to have Jillian unconscious for transport -- she's certain that Jillian simply isn't dangerous to her, ability to croak a small army with a pair of chopsticks notwithstanding.

(That said, it's definitely possible that Jillian was under a spell during the ride, just to give Wanda an extra opportunity to implant/reinforce her suggestions.)

[ag30476]

After I reread page 66 slowly again, I'm not longer sure if Jillian hates Stanley.

That Jillian hates Stanley just mean that she can't fight for Stanley but it does not necessarily mean that she has to fight against Stanley or not fight againt Stanley. The real issue is....

If Jillian loves Ansom then she has to attack because Ansom will be hurt if she doesn't attack and eliminate the dwagons then the dwagons will destroy the remaining siege units on the next turn and the coalition attack againt Gobwin Knob will fail thereby hurting Ansom's cause and Ansom.

If Jillian loves Wanda then she can't attack because she will hurt Wanda because then Wanda's side will not be able to eliminate the remaining siege units on the next turn and the coalition attack against Gobwin Knob will continue and because of it's sheer numbers it will likely win thereby hurting Wanda's cause and Wanda.

If Jillian loves Ansom then she has to attack because Ansom will be hurt if she doesn't attack and eliminate the dwagons then the dwagons will destroy the remaining siege units on the next turn and the coalition attack againt Gobwin Knob will fail thereby hurting Ansom's cause and Ansom.

If Jillian loves Wanda then she can't attack because she will hurt Wanda because then Wanda's side will not be able to eliminate the remaining siege units on the next turn and the coalition attack againt Gobwin Knob will continue and because of it's sheer numbers it will likely win thereby hurting Wanda's cause and Wanda.

...and so on...

Good thing our BFS wielding barbarian princess BDSM same-sex sex-slave is not a robot BFS wielding barbarian princess BDSM same-sex sex-slave.

[SteveMB]

Good thing our BFS wielding barbarian princess BDSM same-sex sex-slave is not a robot BFS wielding barbarian princess BDSM same-sex sex-slave.

I am not programmed to respond in that area.

[sihnfahl]

Common Sense.
I was a cop for fifteen years. If I couldn't transport someone who could 'croak a small army' with a pair of chopsticks in handcuffs, behind a screen, I'd sure be a lot happier if they were out cold.
<snip>

Jillian cannot hurt Wanda, though; the spell on her prevents it. And she won't go against Wanda's orders; again, the spell on her compels her. So from, a 'control the prisoner' standpoint, it's handled (at least, that's what Wanda seems to believe).

[Tirian]

EDIT: It occurs to me that the issue of whether Wanda can communicate her wishes to Jillian (either explicitly or on some subconcsious level) is not addressed. That suggests that it's at least a possibility -- otherwise, Wanda could have given the much simpler explanation that she literally could not ask Jillian to switch sides at the moment.

It seems obvious to me that this communication can take place, and that it has been. We have an annoyingly limited view of the game map, but let's talk about what we do know:

- Jillian found the dwagon stack, not from a search pattern, but from what appeared to the Archons' POV to be a direct trip to Ansom's hex.

- Parson, who did a good job of planning the trap on Ansom, expected that Ansom would realize that his boops were in a vice at this point and is evidently bright enough to plan around the responses that Ansom could have made in this panicked state. Specifically, he would have expected the possibility of Jillian being called in for the rescue and therefore would not have hidden the dwagons between them.

- Reinforcing this point, Stanley has not blamed Parson for the dwagon stack being discovered, which he certainly would have had it been carelessly placed even in hindsight.

So this discovery would not have happened naturally: it is either great coincidence or Wanda led Jillian to that hex. And I believe that good writing contains no coincidences, everything that happens does so to advance the plot or the characters.

It seems quite consistent with everything that we've seen that the leader of Wanda's side is Wanda, and that she is quite capable of exerting her influence over the leaders of both Stanley's and Ansom's teams. We don't know what her desires are, or what Jillian believes them to be, but I don't think that fate has led us to this point for any reason other than ensuring that both Stanley and Ansom are evenly weakened.

[ag30476]

It seems obvious to me that this communication can take place, and that it has been.

It's not at all obvious in that 1) Wanda has not stated that she can, but 2) she has said that the control is subtle, and 3) she refused to, in Stanley's words, "make her [Jillian] switch alliance right now".

We have an annoyingly limited view of the game map, but let's talk about what we do know:

- Jillian found the dwagon stack, not from a search pattern, but from what appeared to the Archons' POV to be a direct trip to Ansom's hex.

The Archons gave no indication of that. During the several "hunt" panels, none of the characters including the Archons, Webinar, Parson, Stanley, Wanda and Sizemore, questioned the nature of the hunt or the search pattern...except for Jillian and she argued, illogically as the Archons clearly saw, that the dwagons were not there.

- Reinforcing this point, Stanley has not blamed Parson for the dwagon stack being discovered, which he certainly would have had it been carelessly placed even in hindsight.

It would seem that logic has little to do with who or what Stanley blames for his problems.

So this discovery would not have happened naturally: it is either great coincidence or Wanda led Jillian to that hex.

We do not know the move stats of all of Jillian's group or her starting location, but it is logical that the wounded dwagons would be somewhere near the dwagon fort. This is because the wounded dwagons had to stage from somewhere near the column. They were not in the empty hex but it had to appear conceivable that they were in the empty hex. Ansom knows something of the move stats of the dwagons. So the dwagon fort was put in the best spot to attract Ansom into a trap but one that by necessity had to be near the wounded dwagons.

At the point where she reaches the lake, according to Jillian, she has enough move to reach Ansom and from looking at the map, we can see that if she did not move towards Ansom she could search quite a few hexes. In fact from looking at the map and given her remaining move and the logic of putting dwagons on a lake -- thus being invulnerable to Ansom's ground forces had Ansom not fallen for the dwagon lake trap --
that if Jillian were to find any lake hex, she would have found the wounded dwagons.

Further, Parson himself says that he counted on Wanda's assurace that Jillian would not attack, on the off chance that she did reach the wounded dwagons from her "reserve" location -- the hex where she met up with her "rescuers". Parson explained to Stanley that most of Ansom's flyers couldn't reach. By this, we can see now, that he meant that Jillian's group could reach.

So there is no need to suppose a great coincidence in Jillian finding the wounded dwagons.

Lastly then, if direct communication was possible then even with the annoyingly limited view of the battle map, we can see that Wanda could have very simply directed Jillian around the lake hex. Then, it would have been much simpler for Jillian to justify to the Archons to fly to Ansom instead of searching as she was doing before the group found the dwagons.

And I believe that good writing contains no coincidences, everything that happens does so to advance the plot or the characters.

No. Good writing only needs to prevent coincidence from blowing suspension of disbelief -- and in this case we do not even need to suspend disbelief to imagine that Jillian could have found the wounded dwagons.

It seems quite consistent with everything that we've seen that the leader of Wanda's side is Wanda, and that she is quite capable of exerting her influence over the leaders of both Stanley's and Ansom's teams.

That makes her the influencer not the leader. She can influence Stanley but not lead him. He let's her influence him but he leads. He's got the big brass b...well it's really a plastic toy hammer...but same thing.

We don't know what her desires are, or what Jillian believes them to be, but I don't think that fate has led us to this point for any reason other than ensuring that both Stanley and Ansom are evenly weakened.

Nothing in Wanda's presentation up to now would suggest that she has not, unsuccessfully, tried to influence Stanley in the past to do better. Her subversion of Jillian prior to the development of Parson's plan also suggests that Wanda was not creating a "master" plot since she had no idea what Parson was up to and how Ansom would react. Wanda's surprise at Parson's success and emotional denial of lack of control over her submissive's actions indicate that, although she has her own end goals, she has no "puppetmaster" control plans over anyone other then her thrall.

[ChowGuy]

And let me chime in on gentle aftercare of submissives and the wonderful "performance" by Stanley. It really makes me wonder how old he is mentally. Perhaps he truly is the chosen one; he has the childish mindset that goes with the scenery.

About 12 would be my guess. In fact, the whole "She hates me? Well I hate her too" strikes me not only as childish, but child-like. Indeed everyone in the strip strikes me as having a rather child-like view of the world, as if they are children or early adolescents, role-playing their fantasy stereotypes at a war game. It goes along with the "Boop"-ing, the cutesy names, the Teddy Bears and Glass Figures as units, and the whole fairy-tale Handsome Prince vs Evil Overlord setting quite nicely, as well as the concepts of units / food "popping" with no recourse to the nitty-gritty of economic realities. Wanda asks "what is a child" not because there are no children in Erfworld, but because that's all there are. Like Barre's "Lost Boys" playing at Pirates, they never grow up, and any consequences of their actions are forgotten as soon as the action itself is. (cf Pan's remarks in the original about "Once I kill them, I forget them.")

If so, the discussion of Wanda and Jillian "intimate" relationships is a non-starter. While they may not necessarily be sisters in a biological sense, their attachment to each other need extend no further then that of childhood playmates. Indeed I would argue that in the real world such attachments may be far deeper and more binding.

[sihnfahl]

Indeed everyone in the strip strikes me as having a rather child-like view of the world, as if they are children or early adolescents, role-playing their fantasy stereotypes at a war game.

Really! And what, of Vinny's character, leads you to believe that he has a child-like view of the world?

concepts of units / food "popping" with no recourse to the nitty-gritty of economic realities.

To OUR economic reality, it's simplistic. But, it's their economic reality, and it's got its own versions of nitty and gritty. They fight to have their city and its resources. Money appears in the treasury (presumably at the end of the day) and disappears in the morning when food and units pop. Other resources may be necessary (remember, Parson never went over unit production in his klogs or discussions with Sizemore/Wanda). "Hold land, earn money, use money to sustain units we have, buy new units/buildings and (presumably) research new technology levels".

Wanda asks "what is a child" not because there are no children in Erfworld, but because that's all there are.

No, they're all adults. The mechanics of Erfworld are that they pop fully formed, with full knowledge of language, their basic abilities, speech; presumably, personality as well.
That's why Wanda asks 'what is a child'. Because there's no CONCEPT of a childhood on Erfworld.
They're not kids playing their favorite game; they're adults acting according to how the World created them (with changes here and there due to interacting with other Erfworldians).

If so, the discussion of Wanda and Jillian "intimate" relationships is a non-starter.

But, it's not, so it's a starter. Heck, at this point in time, it's going full-bore.

[pendell]

Hmm ..

y'know, I was really hoping we'd have resolved what was going to happen with the griffons and Jillian this week. But instead we get a bare step forward and we're put off again until at least Midnight Saturday.

I suspect the authors are doing this to extend the cliffhanger moment just a -little- bit longer. It's not working with me. My response is "bored now".

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Scientivore]

(Incidentally, I find it very fascinating to find that many readers immediately read "sex" into the torture scene, but are equally convinced that the seduction of Stanley meant nothing in Wanda's mind.)

Whaaat? You mean...she wasn't just indulging his secret transvestism? I'm shocked!

[Zak3056]

How would you categorize the loving cuddle Jillian shares with Wanda on the flight on the dragon (which seems to exude more than sisterly love)? Or the (implied) non-chaste kiss they have when they land? And Wanda's insistance that Jillian call her mistress?

Not to mention that "good girls get to eat sushi" isn't exactly a subtle reference.

[Tributary]

And don't think that 12 year olds don't think about sex. They do. Some of them are right on the cusp of puberty, and some have already entered puberty. Sexual relationships are something 12 year olds play about, mostly because they're not psychologically ready to have them yet. Role-playing games allow children to explore their ideas about sexuality in a relatively safe medium with other children.

[the_tick_rules]

huh, drifting a bit i think.

[benthehater]

About 12 would be my guess. In fact, the whole "She hates me? Well I hate her too" strikes me not only as childish, but child-like. Indeed everyone in the strip strikes me as having a rather child-like view of the world, as if they are children or early adolescents, role-playing their fantasy stereotypes at a war game. It goes along with the "Boop"-ing, the cutesy names, the Teddy Bears and Glass Figures as units, and the whole fairy-tale Handsome Prince vs Evil Overlord setting quite nicely, as well as the concepts of units / food "popping" with no recourse to the nitty-gritty of economic realities. Wanda asks "what is a child" not because there are no children in Erfworld, but because that's all there are. Like Barre's "Lost Boys" playing at Pirates, they never grow up, and any consequences of their actions are forgotten as soon as the action itself is. (cf Pan's remarks in the original about "Once I kill them, I forget them.")

If so, the discussion of Wanda and Jillian "intimate" relationships is a non-starter. While they may not necessarily be sisters in a biological sense, their attachment to each other need extend no further then that of childhood playmates. Indeed I would argue that in the real world such attachments may be far deeper and more binding.

Characters that originate as adults with adult purposes (jobs) are indeed prevented from having a kind of developement that arrives with normal human adulthood. However, they're still adults in the respect that an engineer unit doesn't need to be taught to be an engineer unit, they are what they are. And more importantly, having never been children, they don't need to be taught how not to be children.

"She hates me? Well I hate her too," is also something my friend Jason would say. I suppose you could accuse him of being childish I guess, but he might resent that since he does read the forums.

I think teddy bears and other cute such items in violent (yet unbloody) conflict is precisely hilarious because of how wrong it is, and I suspect it must be fun as hell to draw. (NOM NOM NOM)

Also, I hate you.

[Jason Va hater]

"She hates me? Well I hate her too," is also something my friend Jason would say. I suppose you could accuse him of being childish I guess, but he might resent that since he does read the forums.

When you find out that someone hates you the only natural response is to hate them right back adult or child. Stanley just said it out loud.

Not to mention he is an evil overlord.

The Emperor: Good. Use your aggressive feelings, boy. Let the hate flow through you

Oh and Ben I hate you

[Monan]

[QUOTE=Flipkat;3045021]I think Parson's surprise came from him hearing previously that Ansom loved her, not that it was mutual, and her obvious willingness (at that point) to participate in a plan that could lead to his capture. So...If she "loves" Ansom, then the attachment she has to Wanda must be stronger than "love"?QUOTE]

Actually, they haven't said if she loves Ansom more or less, nor do I think it matters if she loves them equally. "Nor harm someone she loves." So all she needs to do is love someone and she won't harm them.

BTW I think Lord Stanley the Plaid "is a shoo in... for hater of the year!" Hate! Hate! Hate! I guess he's going to go put water in Prince Ansom's momma's dish.

BTW whoever gave the probably time elapse on Parson being in Erfworld, thanks! Puts things well into perspective. It's only been about 2 days.

[Vreejack]

So there is no need to suppose a great coincidence in Jillian finding the wounded dwagons.

To simplify this, the wounded dwagons are only one or two hexes outside the area that was already searched, about as close as they can possibly be to the dwagon fort without getting spotted. If Jillian simply plotted a course to cover the unsearched area while journeying to Ansom (standard practice for these games—on every move as long as it does not affect your speed) then she had an extremely high chance of running into the beasts.

[Furin]

I have a question, why does Parson order the warlords not to attack. I thought he had ended his turn already? So even if he wanted to he could not attack, only defend? I am confused. Or can both sides move at the same time? Or attack at the same time, if moves left?

Sorry if this has been asked/answered somewhere else.

[shakes019]

why does Parson order the warlords not to attack. I thought he had ended his turn already? So even if he wanted to he could not attack, only defend?

The rules require that units of opposing sides cannot both be in a hex at the same time without attacking one another. If these groups had not been led by warlords, as soon as Ansom's units entered the lake hex containing the dwagons, battle would have immediately ensued.

However, units led by warlords can selectively attack or not attack at all, allowing for both battle groups to remain in the hex without battle.

Parson is instructing the warlords to stop the automatic battle that would normally happen.

[SteveMB]

I have a question, why does Parson order the warlords not to attack. I thought he had ended his turn already?

Units can fight when enemy units move into contact during the enemy turn (examples: Jillian's battle with the dwagons sent to capture her; Webinar and Dora's battle with the spidews that blundered into them on their "return path"). Stacks with a warlord can choose not to initiate combat.