Forum    Members    Search    FAQ

Board index » Erfworld Things » Everything Else Erfworld




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 41 posts ] 
 
Author Message
 Post Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2009 2:00 pm 
Offline
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 1:32 pm
Posts: 12
Just a little speculation on my behalf - what would happen upon the 'capture and turning' of a heir apparent? We know that units can turn and that it is usually reserved for casters but could a heir turn? The Ansom situation aside, what do you think? I am tempted to believe that King Banhammer was not actually killed by Stanley per se and is still pulling strings. I was struck by the similarity of the Don to the only vague rendering of Banhammer but have been thinking of 'Charlie'. Again another wild theory related to Translvito's mob structure, what better way to keep the 'heat' off you by having someone else in the hot seat and controlling a pocket or "Garden" kingdom personally? The Titans themselves look like a bunch of Elvis impersonators!

As a small aside Bunny I think holds more power in the Translvito structure than we give casters credit for. Just think how Charlie, possibly a thinkamancer (has this been confirmed?), controls his side! Think how Maggie is showing independence.

In essence I'm speculating on the throat of the comics written narrative with the 'heir' and 'thinkamancer' threads that seem to run throughout.

So in summary : Banhammer alive, thinkamancy is extremely important, the heir apparents' (sp?) are more important to the comic than is let on.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 9:02 am 
    User avatar
    Offline
    Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 4:17 am
    Posts: 666
    WLM: mooseodeath@hotmail.com
    Location: Brisbane, Australia
    i still hold the belief faq stands, but find saying so too off topic in most places.

    so my belief is that banhammer is alive and well, and that warlord stanley was offered schmukers and some casters to spare his kingdom. and by spare, i mean not jump up and down on the city walls and wreck up the place. fighting seems to be what you do when someone is too stubborn to listen.

    thinkamancers are extremeley important, they act as telephone's. they handle the news and current events they are the tv, radio, telephone and chief source of intelligence. a side without a thinkamancer is at a serious disadvantage.

    they also relay orders to warlords, as seen when parson instructs maggie how to do a fighting retreat when you have two order types available. fight or flight.

    hiers are inherrantly disloyal it would seem so sides can split apart into new factions, i get the feeling ansom would have split away from his side after GK's victory had it happened. taking up residence in GK. but that statement conflicts with things i've said elsewhere.

    _________________
    http://moosetech.blogspot.com/ my video game art. in easy to read blog form. swing on by. laugh at my spelling.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 6:57 am 
    User avatar
    Offline
    Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 7:59 am
    Posts: 20
    [quote="moose o death"]i still hold the belief faq stands, but find saying so too off topic in most places. [quote]
    Then why did Jillian ever become a barbarian?

    As to Banhammer being alive, he struck me as the sort of person Erfworldians (the Erfworldish?) would'nt want to deal with at all. I definantly don't think Stanley would be the sort to allow him to live. Still, it's still a mystery why Stanley did'nt rebuild FAQ straight away. I theorise that it may not have been many turns ago that he took it down (hundreds of turns is considered a long time, but it would add up to less than three Earth years).

    Thinkamancy- it's probably the most useful/practical magic seen so far (Pooosssibbbllly tieing with Lookamancy). With the order giving, I believe it was established that non-thinkamancy long distance communication could be achieved though note passing in an FAQ, so the communication side may not be super inportant (especially if the Overlord trusts his Chief Warlord, and he his Warlords). It may be that the different magic's usefulness varys with the size of the army. Going by the Allied forces troop commitments at the BfGK, it is probably possible that their are 100 troop nations out their. In that case a Dollamancer that can make maybe 10 weakish units per turn would be incredibly useful, will a thinkamancer becomes a luxury when the Overlord can be on a first name basis with all his units.

    Capturing a heir probably won't do much- Jillian's alliance terms weren't effected by it. Probably in the case of turning real world examples of princes and princesses going to the enemy and then trying to become king or queen (respectively) of their originall nation and their ellegibility for the possistion in such a case will give a good idea. Sorry, my history is no were good enough to think of an example of the top of my head.

    _________________
    Avatar is an one of Charlie's Archrons from the Erfworld Webcomic. May the Titans bless thee and Croak thy enemys.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 1:03 pm 
    User avatar
    Offline
    Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 7:44 pm
    Posts: 1185
    moose o death wrote:
    so my belief is that banhammer is alive and well, and that warlord stanley was offered schmukers and some casters to spare his kingdom. and by spare, i mean not jump up and down on the city walls and wreck up the place. fighting seems to be what you do when someone is too stubborn to listen.


    ~And, of course, Stanley is a good listener whose first resort isn't usually violence.~

    moose o death wrote:
    hiers are inherrantly disloyal it would seem so sides can split apart into new factions, i get the feeling ansom would have split away from his side after GK's victory had it happened. taking up residence in GK. but that statement conflicts with things i've said elsewhere.

    If heirs were inherently disloyal, why the pop them? I don't necessarily disagree with the idea that a victorious Ansom might have taken up residence as king of GK, assuming Jetstone gets control of GK: after a side has expanded significantly, it only makes sense to consider splitting up into two sides. But it would surprise me to hear that Ansom was anything but a boy scout, fiercely loyal to his king and unlikely to even consider disobeying an order from him.

    _________________
    They could not possibly win. Every man knew this with certainty, and lo it was glorious.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 5:40 pm 
    User avatar
    Offline
    Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 4:17 am
    Posts: 666
    WLM: mooseodeath@hotmail.com
    Location: Brisbane, Australia
    for the same reason they don't move when it's not their turn, they pop heirs because that's what you do. there is probably multitudes of reasons to justify an heir such as micromanagement of larger sides. their death was predicted. those would be the two reason i see from the current crop. and despite the betrayals tv tried it twice before settling for a non royal heir in ceaser. so having an heir does seem to be a necessity. we just don't know WHY yet. apart from the very obvious death reason.

    _________________
    http://moosetech.blogspot.com/ my video game art. in easy to read blog form. swing on by. laugh at my spelling.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 6:10 pm 
    User avatar
    Offline
    Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 7:44 pm
    Posts: 1185
    moose o death wrote:
    for the same reason they don't move when it's not their turn, they pop heirs because that's what you do. there is probably multitudes of reasons to justify an heir such as micromanagement of larger sides. their death was predicted. those would be the two reason i see from the current crop. and despite the betrayals tv tried it twice before settling for a non royal heir in ceaser. so having an heir does seem to be a necessity. we just don't know WHY yet. apart from the very obvious death reason.

    We know from both Stanley and Caesar that nobles and commoners can both be made heirs. So if popped heirs are a source of trouble, wouldn't it nearly always make sense to make existing units—units that a ruler knows, who may have a high degree of loyalty, who may have proved themselves in battle and/or in command, who have suitable temperaments and philosophies—into heir designates?)

    _________________
    They could not possibly win. Every man knew this with certainty, and lo it was glorious.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:33 pm 
    Offline
    Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 1:48 am
    Posts: 31
    We might be missing a distinction between Nobles and Royals here. Unless I'm just missing some information. Ansom is not overlord. He is chief Warlord and Heir of his side. He is self-identified as Royal. Caesar is in the exact same situation, and yet Don King refers to "Royalty mattering" as a reason to change his mind about having Caesar be heir. He was Visconte of Vitalis, therefore he was noble (barely one, sure, but still), so tapping him to be Heir should have made him Royal if Noble Heirs count as Royal.

    Therefore the only way to get a Royal heir is to pop one, which is why Royal Overlords pop heirs. Nice and clean.

    _________________
    "You mustn't think me vain if you catch me glancing at my reflection in the mirror. I do it solely to remind myself what I look like - and that I should never stop trying to compensate for it"

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:09 am 
    User avatar
    Offline
    Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 4:17 am
    Posts: 666
    WLM: mooseodeath@hotmail.com
    Location: Brisbane, Australia
    DevilDan wrote:
    moose o death wrote:
    for the same reason they don't move when it's not their turn, they pop heirs because that's what you do. there is probably multitudes of reasons to justify an heir such as micromanagement of larger sides. their death was predicted. those would be the two reason i see from the current crop. and despite the betrayals tv tried it twice before settling for a non royal heir in ceaser. so having an heir does seem to be a necessity. we just don't know WHY yet. apart from the very obvious death reason.

    We know from both Stanley and Caesar that nobles and commoners can both be made heirs. So if popped heirs are a source of trouble, wouldn't it nearly always make sense to make existing units—units that a ruler knows, who may have a high degree of loyalty, who may have proved themselves in battle and/or in command, who have suitable temperaments and philosophies—into heir designates?)

    you might find the immediate non royal sides must be destroyed mentality mentioned early in book one has something to do with that.

    if non royal heirs were so much better behaved and made for better warrior nations the whole world would become progressively more aggresive with each nation that rose.

    thus the royal angle forces the type of leader willing to use diplomacy as well as might to solve problems. which admittedly stanley and eventually ceaser all fail to comprehend.

    the royals seem to like maintaining their elitist class.

    _________________
    http://moosetech.blogspot.com/ my video game art. in easy to read blog form. swing on by. laugh at my spelling.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:41 pm 
    User avatar
    Offline
    Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 7:44 pm
    Posts: 1185
    moose o death wrote:
    you might find the immediate non royal sides must be destroyed mentality mentioned early in book one has something to do with that.


    When you're in power, wanting to maintain the status quo is natural. This is why heirs that are guaranteed to be trouble don't exactly seem like a sweet deal to me.

    moose o death wrote:
    if non royal heirs were so much better behaved and made for better warrior nations the whole world would become progressively more aggresive with each nation that rose.


    Not sure that what means. The point is that I think that royal heirs are not such a liability.

    moose o death wrote:
    thus the royal angle forces the type of leader willing to use diplomacy as well as might to solve problems. which admittedly stanley and eventually ceaser all fail to comprehend.


    That addresses a greater question: just what are the differences between royals, nobles, and commoners? Stanley should never have been made warlord: it was just sentimentalism on Saline IV's part. Caesar could be a good overlord, perhaps, but may not be the best choice when things like the battle for GK and its use of arkentools are factored in, not to mention the appearance of the game-breaking Parson. This turned out to be quite true of Ansom.

    On the other hand, Vinny, a noble, would possibly do a superb job as overlord in this brave new Erf.

    moose o death wrote:
    the royals seem to like maintaining their elitist class.

    See my first point.

    _________________
    They could not possibly win. Every man knew this with certainty, and lo it was glorious.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:45 pm 
    User avatar
    E is for Erfworld Supporter Battle Crest Pins Supporter Print Book 2 & Draw Book 3 Supporter This user is a Tool! This user was a Tool before it was cool Pin-up Calendar and New Art Team Supporter Here for the 10th Anniversary Has collected at least one unit
    Offline
    Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:12 pm
    Posts: 565
    Location: Northern Virginia
    DevilDan wrote:
    That addresses a greater question: just what are the differences between royals, nobles, and commoners? Stanley should never have been made warlord: it was just sentimentalism on Saline IV's part.

    Huh? We have no idea why Saline IV picked Stanley for promotion to Warlord (though presumably it was not for being "handsome and dashing"). He may have earned Saline's attention through valor and performance in combat -- he seems to be a capable enough tactical fighter, just not so good at strategy.

    _________________
    Is this a real holy war, or just a bunch of deluded boopholes croaking each other?

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 1:19 pm 
    User avatar
    Offline
    Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 7:44 pm
    Posts: 1185
    SteveMB wrote:
    DevilDan wrote:
    That addresses a greater question: just what are the differences between royals, nobles, and commoners? Stanley should never have been made warlord: it was just sentimentalism on Saline IV's part.

    Huh? We have no idea why Saline IV picked Stanley for promotion to Warlord (though presumably it was not for being "handsome and dashing"). He may have earned Saline's attention through valor and performance in combat -- he seems to be a capable enough tactical fighter, just not so good at strategy.


    Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but Sizemore specifically states: "But the King was very fond of Stanley, so he did something that rarely happens. He promoted Stanley to Heir Designate, at great expense."
    http://www.erfworld.com/book-1-archive/?px=%2F079.jpg

    _________________
    They could not possibly win. Every man knew this with certainty, and lo it was glorious.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 8:58 am 
    E is for Erfworld Supporter Here for the 10th Anniversary Has collected at least one unit
    Offline
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 10:38 am
    Posts: 830
    vdragan wrote:
    We might be missing a distinction between Nobles and Royals here. Unless I'm just missing some information. Ansom is not overlord. He is chief Warlord and Heir of his side. He is self-identified as Royal. Caesar is in the exact same situation, and yet Don King refers to "Royalty mattering" as a reason to change his mind about having Caesar be heir. He was Visconte of Vitalis, therefore he was noble (barely one, sure, but still), so tapping him to be Heir should have made him Royal if Noble Heirs count as Royal.


    Yeah, it seems reasonable that Noble and Royal are not the same. Perhaps, Nobles are popped by normal cities but Royals are only popped by capitals.

    The city that popped Caesar might have just been minor, so he counts as a minor noble.

    Nobles could have mid-scale leveling rates and bonues between Royals and standard units.

    I wonder if Don King has formally decided to designate a new Heir Apparent.

    He said "... But he was only Viscount of Vitalis, barely a Noble. Recent events have forced me to reconsider whether or not that should matter."

    If Heirs are naturally disloyal (or perhaps just not forced to be loyal), then that could be a risky thing to do, since Caesar is apparently well respected.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 10:16 am 
    User avatar
    Offline
    Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 4:17 am
    Posts: 666
    WLM: mooseodeath@hotmail.com
    Location: Brisbane, Australia
    i'm pretty sure parson says in a klog that royal sides pop nobles.

    _________________
    http://moosetech.blogspot.com/ my video game art. in easy to read blog form. swing on by. laugh at my spelling.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 8:42 am 
    E is for Erfworld Supporter Here for the 10th Anniversary Has collected at least one unit
    Offline
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 10:38 am
    Posts: 830
    moose o death wrote:
    i'm pretty sure parson says in a klog that royal sides pop nobles.


    That doesn't mean that they are the same thing. You may need to be a royal side to be able to pop nobles, but that doesn't mean that there can't be a rule that only Capitals can pop royals.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 12:43 pm 
    User avatar
    This user is a Tool! This user was a Tool before it was cool Pin-up Calendar and New Art Team Supporter Here for the 10th Anniversary Has collected at least one unit Erfworld Bicycle® Playing Cards supporter
    Offline
    Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 2:54 pm
    Posts: 1748
    Website: http://www.tendonitisexpert.com
    So was Ansom noble or royal? He certainly seemed to consider himself royal. And it doesn't make much sense that only the King of a side is Royal.

    Upgrading to Royal status....not very royal if just anyone can be upgraded. I say ya gotta be popped royal to be royal.

    So...was Ansom a noble? Was he a royal noble? Are nobles royalty?

    And, is ansom technically still noble/royal?

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 3:30 pm 
    E is for Erfworld Supporter Here for the 10th Anniversary Has collected at least one unit
    Offline
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 10:38 am
    Posts: 830
    OneHugeTuck wrote:
    So was Ansom noble or royal? He certainly seemed to consider himself royal. And it doesn't make much sense that only the King of a side is Royal.


    He is clearly royal. My suggestion was that Royals can only be popped at Capitals.

    Quote:
    And, is ansom technically still noble/royal?


    That is less clear. If he was turned to GK by Thinkamancy, he would probably still count as Royal

    OTOH, decrypting might count as popping again.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 4:02 pm 
    User avatar
    Offline
    Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 7:44 pm
    Posts: 1185
    If the decrypted Ansom is essentially unchanged, in terms of stats at any event, then he probably has the some perks and bonuses as a royal.

    _________________
    They could not possibly win. Every man knew this with certainty, and lo it was glorious.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 10:51 pm 
    Year of the Dwagon Supporter
    Offline
    Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 10:25 pm
    Posts: 43
    DevilDan wrote:
    Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but Sizemore specifically states: "But the King was very fond of Stanley, so he did something that rarely happens. He promoted Stanley to Heir Designate, at great expense."
    http://www.erfworld.com/book-1-archive/?px=%2F079.jpg


    Read the third to the last panel. It explained that he liked Stanley because of his victories. He didn't decide make him an heir based on a whim, there was reason to believe that Stanley would be a competent leader based on his performance in battle.

    I don't agree with the conclusion someone made about heirs being inherently disloyal. The only definite example we have so far is Don King's son, and Stanley's situation is still subject to speculation. Based on what we know so far, Ansom seems loyal to Slately, and Jillian and Don King's daughter do not get along with their fathers, but that does not indicate disloyalty. After all, Jillian never made an attempt to take over her father's throne.

    As for the topic creator's comment on the importance of thinkamancers, I think it depends on the faction. Wanda seems to be the most respected caster on Stanley's side. Both Maggie and Sizemore refer to her as Lady Firebaugh which indicates that she outranks them. I might be reading too much into it, but I believe one of the summer updates said that Faq had casters who assisted Jack which implies that Jack might be the most important caster at Faq.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 12:13 am 
    User avatar
    Offline
    Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 7:44 pm
    Posts: 1185
    random_guy wrote:
    Read the third to the last panel. It explained that he liked Stanley because of his victories. He didn't decide make him an heir based on a whim, there was reason to believe that Stanley would be a competent leader based on his performance in battle.


    If Saline IV really believed that, he was a dolt. I still find it significant that so much is made of how Saline felt about Stanley.

    random_guy wrote:
    I don't agree with the conclusion someone made about heirs being inherently disloyal.


    I quite agree that we've little or no proof to suggest that heirs have an inherent tendency toward treasonous thoughts. (Ansom certainly appeared to be the sort of straight arrow who'd never consider turning on his father; he has somewhat different loyalties now, of course.

    random_guy wrote:
    As for the topic creator's comment on the importance of thinkamancers, I think it depends on the faction. Wanda seems to be the most respected caster on Stanley's side. Both Maggie and Sizemore refer to her as Lady Firebaugh which indicates that she outranks them. I might be reading too much into it, but I believe one of the summer updates said that Faq had casters who assisted Jack which implies that Jack might be the most important caster at Faq.


    It was mentioned by Jillian that a predictamancer assisted Jack in using foolamancy to hide the Faq cities as needed: this is how their system worked. There has been no mention of a thinkamancer, and Faq may have needed one less than sides who have larger domains and who actually communicate with other sides.

    _________________
    They could not possibly win. Every man knew this with certainty, and lo it was glorious.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 12:53 am 
    User avatar
    Offline
    Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 4:17 am
    Posts: 666
    WLM: mooseodeath@hotmail.com
    Location: Brisbane, Australia
    dan if your getting into a long term relationship with someone all you tend to have is your feelings about them. you study them and see what makes them tick. saline could very well have chosen to make stanley an heir based on his opinions of stanley's motivations.

    conversely this happened after stanley, allegedly as far as i'm concerned, conquered faq. so wanda was more likely the reason for all of it happening. she convinced saline to make stanley heir, she orchestrated the gobwin's and marbits commiting regicide while stanley, maggie and sizemore of all people were out riding dwagons. and we have evidence of wanda using suggestion on whatever the big orange guys are (twolls or gobwins?)

    i said all heirs are inherrantly disloyal as it aids in sides splitting and forming new kingdoms. sounds like a sensible method of causing such an issue if you ask me. either way we have as much evidence in both regards. so it's too early to say anything conclusive. i do not believe in the lack of evidence being proof for the safe theory. webcomics by design need to be as complicated and abstract as possible to keep the community guessing. being predictable is not in their best interests.

    i think thinkamancers generally are very important , as are dirtamancers, foolamancers. essentially all the casters are important if you know how to best utilise their abilities. having a side without a thinkamancer is not terminal, from diplomacy and long range warfare angles thinkamancers would be very useful. but from the geurilla warfare type nations they may be a security risk and not something you would want. especially if charlie really can intercept thinkagrams.

    erfworld is the kind of place you play the hand your dealt, there is no bad hands.

    _________________
    http://moosetech.blogspot.com/ my video game art. in easy to read blog form. swing on by. laugh at my spelling.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
    Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
     
    Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 41 posts ] 

    Board index » Erfworld Things » Everything Else Erfworld


    Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 4 guests

     
     

     
    You cannot post new topics in this forum
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum
    You cannot post attachments in this forum

    Search for:
    Jump to: