Forum    Members    Search    FAQ

Board index » Erfworld Things » Everything Else Erfworld




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 69 posts ] 
 
Author Message
 Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 3:08 pm 
Offline
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 3:58 pm
Posts: 118
Lately, Erfworld's been pulling off a lot of stuff that could probably classified as unbalanced if it were actually played as a competitive game (Turnamancer link stopping GK cold, Arkenpliers creating massive unstoppable army, and so on).

The question is: is crazy unbalanced stuff good for the story?

Like how a lot of people complain about the recent Vanna-Charlie setup that Deus-ex-machina'd Jetstone to another chance at survival. That could have been handled another way, right? Would it have been better if it was? Sure, links are supposed to be crazy-powerful, but do they need to solve every major problem that comes up?

I actually think Erfworld works best when it plays on a basic strategy game level. Parson commanding the Dwagons to take out siege, that was pretty sweet. The Volcano link was pretty sweet conceptually, but things like it are getting into a pattern of one-upmanship. I'm getting kind of hungry for the point when things start maneuvering with more outright cleverness than sheer power.

Anybody else have thoughts on this?

_________________
Very Amazing Adventures (possibly inappropriate)

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 4:04 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 Was an active Tool on Free Cards Day
    Offline
    Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 2:54 pm
    Posts: 1932
    Website: http://www.tendonitisexpert.com
    Yes I have thoughts, but I'm on the other side.

    I think the 'deus-ex-machinas' aren't. I think they've been shown to be clever strategy.

    You think the jillian-charlie thing is d-e-m. I think it's clever strategy, just of a different scale than Parson using dragons to take out the siege engines.

    I like that there's both troops on the ground, and higher-powers-that-be-strategies.

    I think that if erfworld was just troops on the ground game mechanics, it wouldn't be very interesting.

    I think the differences between 'your' side and 'mine' is that you think the big magic is 'unbalanced'. Wheras I think the big magic, like ending turn, is balanced, because all sides have access to it. Wanda can raise an unstoppable army of the used-to-be-dead. And she just got countered.

    Seems balanced to me.

    The fact that one magical move can vastly change the direction/outcome doesn't to me make it unbalanced, it just adds to the complexity and volatility of battleground factors.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 4:56 pm 
    Offline
    Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:03 pm
    Posts: 20
    The pliers are the only OP artifact, IMO, and even then only for allowing 0-upkeep troops. Without some other limiting factor, this would allow the owner to build up indefinitely large armies, which has obvious implications. With traditional uncroaked, their limited duration created a soft cap on their numbers, but decrypted do not have these issues. Otherwise, the Arkendish basically makes Charlie into a super-thinkamancer and the Arkenhammer makes Stanley a super-warlord with spell-like abilities, nothing unexpected and maybe even a bit tame for unique world-changing artifacts.

    The only gamebreaking effect we've seen to date has been time warp, and all indication is that it will be a one-time phenomenon that will never be repeated. There was a lot of foreshadowing that something was coming, and unfortunately what we got was basically a deus ex machina that could have came right out of an episode of yugi-oh. A ridiculously powerful ability that we've never seen before just changed the whole course of the game, and all indication is that we'll never see it again, either, despite being the most powerful ability we've seen to date. Basically the rules took one for the plot, there's no question that this ability would be utterly gamebreaking in any real strategy game like Erfworld.

    Whether that's good or bad will require the hindsight over the entire story that we don't have right now. There's no question that a precarious situation was needed to drive the plot, and it's unfortunate that the author had to fall back to an ass pull/deus ex machina to pull it off.


    Quote:
    You think the jillian-charlie thing is d-e-m. I think it's clever strategy

    The thing is, that ability is so powerful that even an average tactician should be able to find dozens of clever ways to use it. A good one should be able to find hundreds. It should be practically impossible for an enemy to predict what you're going to do with time warp next time, and by the time you do so it's far too late to stop it. This ability goes beyond tactics, it's just plain unstoppable. All of Parson's tactics involved using combinations of abilities in creative ways (there's also a bit of a hand-wave that a lot of the finer mechanics of his tactics were developed and implemented off-panel and we only saw the high-level stuff). Most of Parson's ploys actually required Ansom to fall into traps that he could have predicted or counteracted. In some cases, by luck or by good choice, he did beat Parson's ploys. This is something else; this is something Parson could not have predicted, and even if he could have predicted it there is no reasonable way to counter-act it.


    Last edited by Dasrak on Sun Feb 28, 2010 5:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 5:03 pm 
    User avatar
    Year of the Dwagon Supporter
    Offline
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 5:24 am
    Posts: 3447
    Oh God thank you, thank you so much for this thread!

    It is great that finally a thread exists to discuss these things in story terms. Maybe now people will desist calling them gamebreaking, or complain that others call them gamebreaking.

    But first some quick replies-

    OneHugeTuck wrote:
    You think the jillian-charlie thing is d-e-m. I think it's clever strategy, just of a different scale than Parson using dragons to take out the siege engines.

    I like that there's both troops on the ground, and higher-powers-that-be-strategies.

    I think that if erfworld was just troops on the ground game mechanics, it wouldn't be very interesting.


    For one, this is wrong. History is interesting without magic. The cleverest matchup of tactics that I know of was the Battle for the Atlantic, WW2. Yeah, all those years of it. And though it was not won by cleverness in the end (I think other factors had a bigger say in it), it was one heck of a battle of intelligence. Of the "boring" kind that even Parson can pull off with his bracer.

    Second, this is wrong. Many of the abilities people are complaining about were not introduced satisfactorily. Because of that, it is easy to see them less as a clever combination of rules and resources- since we obviously don't know the rules and sometimes not even the resources necessary to pull them off- than an authorial fiat of the kind "let's have some cool stuff now, we'll explain it later".

    But that's going too far in the game direction of things and this is about story.

    So in story terms, this was supposed to be the story of the best, cleverest warlord ever. It promises a display of tactical and strategic smarts and often delivers. Then it goes and p----- all that by inserting cool-stuff-to-be-explained-later. Of course some people, like me, will find this kind of thing jarring.

    Now, on the one hand we had the "world is cheating you" thing in Book 1, which was nicely built up and lead to a truly satisfying and beautiful cool thing that was nicely foreshadowed (a city atop a volcano ... you wanna bet it blows up by the end) and beautifully set up by making each of the participants, both casters, Parson, and victims, sympathetic to us and therefore their actions/fate meaningful.

    This was nice for Book 1, that story is over. By now Parson should know what is or isn't possible and while something big surely must happen eventually, bad timing right now. Parson in Book 2 should be less the surprised and inexperienced apprentice, and we along with him. Which means less cool-stuff-to-be-explained-later and more cleverness.

    Finally my biggest problem with all this is the turnamancy thing. So there is a spell that can turn at a distance a high-level opposing unit without even capturing it first.

    I've had various discussions about this and in the end it boils down to costs. Not necessarily juice costs, but whatever it is that makes this spell difficult to cast and therefore meaningful in the story, as well as not story-breaking. Because if you have a spell that can reprogram your characters at no cost (they don't need to be subdued, you don't need to sacrifice 22 virgins while the stars are aligned and Cthulhu sees its shadow or something) it means you don't actually have characters because their personalities are subject to the whims and vagaries of plot (contrivance).

    Phew does the above sound pissed off. Anyway I was saying that I had the above discussion about the Turnamancy thing, and it boils down to costs. I'd like to know what they were before the thing is cast, so that I know that it can't be used arbitrarily, that this particular use was meaningful to the user- as in it required actual deliberation on their part and the desire to sacrifice something in order to get what they want- and so on.

    On the other hand, many more people appreciate or at least tolerate surprises like this and are perfectly fine with explanations and such being post-poned, and to them I kinda look like an old codger :lol: .

    Different tastes I guess. Let's leave it at that and just say that I for one think yes, you can have too much magic in a story. "A wizard (link) did it" is not good enough.

    Dasrak wrote:
    The only gamebreaking effect we've seen to date


    Please, let's keep some things off limits in this thread please, "game breaking" being one of them.

    The reason for that is that if you look in the reaction threads, most everyone argues about how this or that is or isn't game-breaking. I think it's an easy way to derail a discussion which started about story and how it can be affected by magic (ab)use, so we're best to avoid it.

    _________________
    The whole point of this is lost if you keep it a secret.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 5:27 pm 
    Erfworld Bicycle® Playing Cards supporter Has collected at least one unit Was an active Tool on Free Cards Day
    Offline
    Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:53 am
    Posts: 439
    BLANDCorporatio wrote:
    So in story terms, this was supposed to be the story of the best, cleverest warlord ever. It promises a display of tactical and strategic smarts and often delivers. Then it goes and p----- all that by inserting cool-stuff-to-be-explained-later. Of course some people, like me, will find this kind of thing jarring.

    Book 1 was supposed to be the story of the best, cleverest warlord ever, and it was. Book 2 is supposed to be an exciting soap opera that develops the back stories of some of our favorite Erfians, and so far that's what it's shaping up to be.
    BLANDCorporatio wrote:
    Finally my biggest problem with all this is the turnamancy thing. So there is a spell that can turn at a distance a high-level opposing unit without even capturing it first.

    I've had various discussions about this and in the end it boils down to costs. Not necessarily juice costs, but whatever it is that makes this spell difficult to cast and therefore meaningful in the story, as well as not story-breaking. Because if you have a spell that can reprogram your characters at no cost (they don't need to be subdued, you don't need to sacrifice 22 virgins while the stars are aligned and Cthulhu sees its shadow or something) it means you don't actually have characters because their personalities are subject to the whims and vagaries of plot (contrivance).

    I think your issues with this spell are premature. If, in the next comic, Vanna, with her last few dregs of juice, instantly turns Ansom into Faq's new chief warlord, then I'll join your complaining. However, the only hint we have about the costs of this spell so far is Vanna's "Pfff. I can try." Which might mean, "I can try, but it has a 0.5% chance of success," or "I can try, but it'll only work if, deep down, they really want to turn," or "I can try if their loyalty is really, really low," or "I can try, but the target's going to backstab you the first chance he/she gets," or "I can try if you order me to, but the effort will probably kill me."

    Or it might mean, "I can "try" but I'm so kick-ass that it'll definitely succeed."

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 5:28 pm 
    Offline
    Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:03 pm
    Posts: 20
    Quote:
    since we obviously don't know the rules and sometimes not even the resources necessary to pull them off

    Absolutely; 90% of strategy is logistics, getting resources where you need them in order to pull off your grand plan. That's not glamorous dynamic, but Parson was doubtlessly doing hours of this off-panel to get his strategies to work.

    Quote:
    So there is a spell that can turn at a distance a high-level opposing unit without even capturing it first.

    You know, I don't have that big a problem with this. If a unit is already willing to turn, then a turnamancer giving it the final "push" is quite reasonable even on low juice. We've already had indication that units in Erfworld have real emotions, and while their loyalty and demeanor is guided somewhat by the rules of their world, they still have a certain level of free will. If their free will is telling them that they want to turn, then I don't have a problem with a turnamancy needing practically no juice to give them a mechanical excuse to do so.

    We've already had confirmation that turning enemy warlords is very rare because their loyalty is questionable, so quite frankly such high vulnerability to turning on low-loyalty units isn't surprising at all. I can accept that they aren't going to waste on-panel time explaining the finer details of how this turning spell works, along with all limitations.

    Quote:
    The reason for that is that if you look in the reaction terms, most everyone argues about how this or that is or isn't game-breaking. I think it's an easy way to derail a discussion which started about story and how it can be affected by magic (ab)use, so we're best to avoid it.

    Somehow I'd think gamebreaking has a lot to do with the (im)balance that the topic is talking about. More to the point is that I'd certainly put time warp in a category of its own with no other comparable abilities displayed to date, and I used "gamebreaking" for lack of a better term. I'm aware it's a high charge to call something gamebreaking, and quite controversial.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 5:36 pm 
    User avatar
    Year of the Dwagon Supporter
    Offline
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 5:24 am
    Posts: 3447
    Dasrak wrote:
    You know, I don't have that big a problem with this {{long distance turning}}. If a unit is already willing to turn, then a turnamancer giving it the final "push" is quite reasonable even on low juice. We've already had indication that units in Erfworld have real emotions, and while their loyalty and demeanor is guided somewhat by the rules of their world, they still have a certain level of free will. If their free will is telling them that they wan to turn, then I don't have a problem with a turnamancy needing practically now juice to give them a mechanical excuse to do so.


    That is reasonable, you're right. Because it does not actually reprogram a character just, I dunno, gives them a confidence boost to make a decision, for instance. Agreed here.

    It's just that, well, after a surprising time-warp, I kinda want to know what magic can and can't do.

    Dasrak wrote:
    Somehow I'd think gamebreaking has a lot to do with the (im)balance that the topic is talking about. More to the point is that I'd certainly put time warp in a category of its own with no other comparable abilities displayed to date, and I used "gamebreaking" for lack of a better term. I'm aware it's a high charge to call something gamebreaking, and quite controversial.


    :lol: Why, it's almost as bad as calling something a Deus Ex Machina!

    It really shouldn't be that controversial, but the problem with it is that if somebody brings it up a) they'll be countered by "Erfworld is not a game, but a story" and b) they were actually thinking about story themselves.

    There are imba games out there, but I think that's missing the point. Does Erfworld make a good story because/despite certain mancy apps in it?

    splintermute wrote:
    Book 1 was supposed to be the story of the best, cleverest warlord ever, and it was. Book 2 is supposed to be an exciting soap opera that develops the back stories of some of our favorite Erfians, and so far that's what it's shaping up to be.


    Erfworld: the Young, and the Restless

    No. Oh dear Titans no.n :lol:

    _________________
    The whole point of this is lost if you keep it a secret.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 5:58 pm 
    Offline
    Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:03 pm
    Posts: 20
    Honestly, yeah, I'd call it borderline Deus Ex Machina. We knew some miracle was coming, and then (surprise, surprise) the wizard did it. I'd have been satisfied if we'd have had something like the turnamancer blowing all her juice to make all enemy units in that hex lose the remainder of their turn, but that would mean we'd probably have another dozen pages (at least) of GK doing damage control before Jillian (and the plot) started to move. As I said, the rules took one for the plot, and whether or not that was worth it will become apparent only when book 2 can be viewed in hindsight.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 6:05 pm 
    Offline
    Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 5:57 pm
    Posts: 236
    Dasrak wrote:
    Honestly, yeah, I'd call it borderline Deus Ex Machina. We knew some miracle was coming, and then (surprise, surprise) the wizard did it.


    I don't think you know what dei ex machina are.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 6:41 pm 
    Offline
    Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:03 pm
    Posts: 20
    Deus Ex Machina; god from the machine. It goes back to ancient theatre where cranes were used to hoist in statues of gods during the epilogue and they would magically set everything right with the world. It essentially refers to something extremely unlikely or improbable or outright impossible happening that spontaneously solves the problem. I actually did look up the term a few years back when I first heard it.

    We only knew that something was coming because we're genre-savvy readers and we chose to interpret Jillian's remarks as meaning that she has an ace up her sleeve. Other than the people who actually knew about this spell, no one in-universe even questioned that Spacerock's position was hopeless. The matter is whether the ability we saw was something reasonable or probable, or something that was unreasonable or unprobable in the setting. In terms of the spell's actual effect, time warp is unprecedented in two ways. First, this is the only spell we've ever seen with global effect. This is not to be mistaken with global range. Thinkamancy can contact anyone, but Maggie cannot contact everyone. Every contact is a separate spell with its own cost, and we've yet to see anything with a flat cost that can affect an entire faction (especially a big one like current GK). Secondly, every powerful effect that we've seen to date seems to offer a "saving throw" for warlords and high level units to resist it. Heck, there were a couple golems who survived the volcano at the end of book 1, so even that wasn't instant death.

    So yes, I say this is DEM. It's only arguable because we do have magic in-universe. However, the type of magic displayed here is without precedent and came completely out of nowhere. Yes, we knew there was a wizard there and as savvy readers we knew that something was going to happen and the wizard would be the one to do it, but that doesn't make it any less DEM.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 6:58 pm 
    User avatar
    Offline
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:41 pm
    Posts: 2521
    Dasrak wrote:
    As I said, the rules took one for the plot, and whether or not that was worth it will become apparent only when book 2 can be viewed in hindsight.


    The story is FILLED with characters constantly being surprised by what magic can do, or what people can do.

    Jillian should not have been able to break the magical compulsion.
    Ansom's side should not have been able to dance-fight.
    Bogroll should not have been able to kill Ansom single-handedly.
    Charlie should not have been able to hack the Eye-books.
    GK should not have been able to wipe out the entire Royal Crown coalition.
    Parson should not have been able to swear.
    Caesar should not have been able to survive the ambush.
    The U.S. should not have been able to wipe out Hiroshima with a single bomb. (Wait, what?)

    Stop asking yourself "is it balanced?" and just ask yourself "Is it entertaining?"
    For me, personally, the answer is still "Yes".

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 7:18 pm 
    Offline
    Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 5:57 pm
    Posts: 236
    I have a feeling that some Japanese people want to lynch you now :lol:

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 7:54 pm 
    User avatar
    Offline
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:41 pm
    Posts: 2521
    MarbitChow wrote:
    The U.S. should not have been able to wipe out Hiroshima with a single bomb. (Wait, what?)

    Stop asking yourself "is it balanced?" and just ask yourself "Is it entertaining?"
    For me, personally, the answer is still "Yes".


    Ehbobo wrote:
    I have a feeling that some Japanese people want to lynch you now :lol:


    Doh! Stupid pronouns. By "it", I mean Erfworld's story, obviously.
    That last example was thrown in as a real-world case of something that, at the time, appeared impossible and near-magical.

    I did not mean to imply that real-world examples of war are entertaining.
    They are horrifying, and should be undertaken only as a last resort, when all other avenues have failed.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 7:55 pm 
    Offline
    Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:03 pm
    Posts: 20
    Quote:
    Jillian should not have been able to break the magical compulsion.

    Sizemore called it, so yes we had an in-universe character anticipating that. Secondly, we had good reason to believe that Wanda's analysis was emotionally, not rationally, driven. We also saw Jillian struggling against the spell as well as Archons actively trying to get her to resist its effects. As well, the spell was repeatedly called "suggestion" and the characters frequently repeated it's "not mind control".

    Quote:
    Ansom's side should not have been able to dance-fight.

    Quite frankly, I didn't even blink when this happened. A high level warlord whose very role is to enhance his own units has the ability to lead a dance fight? Presumably requiring archons to actually enable him to support that many units?

    This ability may have come out of nowhere, but it was perfectly in step with other abilities we'd seen to date from high level warlords and archons. The reason this isn't DEM is because it's entirely probable that Ansom and the archons have special abilities Parson doesn't know about, and those abilities ended up being reasonable within the boundaries of other abilities we'd seen to date.

    Quote:
    Bogroll should not have been able to kill Ansom single-handedly.

    Clearly Parson thought so. This was very reasonable, if somewhat anti-climatic.

    Quote:
    Charlie should not have been able to hack the Eye-books.

    Unmatched thinkamancy was able to overcome an adept thinkamancer's work? Totally unsurprising. From a plot point of view, there wasn't even any "problem" that this magically overcame.

    Quote:
    GK should not have been able to wipe out the entire Royal Crown coalition.

    Talking about volcanic TPK? That was pretty close to DEM itself, but it got away with it because it made such perfect sense, especially in light of Parson's implication that the world was subtly cheating him. And yes, a volcanic explosion of that size would wipe out all life within a substantial radius around the volcano (most would die from being smothered by super-heated ash, explaining why golems could survive).

    From a purely mechanical perspective, the volcano was already there as a prerequisite entity, there is no indication that this action can be repeated on the same volcano (croakamancy rules are very clear: can't uncroak the same target twice), and it wiped out pretty much all of his own units as well. Powerful yes, but with so many limitations that it doesn't significant impact my willing suspense of disbelief that this is a plausible representation of a "fair" ruleset.

    Quote:
    Parson should not have been able to swear.

    We'd just been told by Maggie that all magic in Erfworld has limitations. Apparently intentionally being aware that Erfworld is the censor at work here and swearing for no other reason than to defy it exceeded the limitation of that magic. So yes, there was plenty of basis around which that could be justified.

    Quote:
    Caesar should not have been able to survive the ambush.

    Why not? This is more plot armour than DEM. He won a tough battle with significant losses, what's unusual about this at all?

    Quote:
    The U.S. should not have been able to wipe out Hiroshima with a single bomb.

    There's a reason strategy games almost never have nukes to scale, and that's because it just doesn't make for a good game. Erfworld is supposed to be a strategy game that adheres to certain rules and conventions, and developing "superweapons" isn't intended to be possible. Real life warfare is all about challenging the rules and developing completely new weapons and approaches (and other than that: logistics logistics logistics). Secondly, if the Pacific theatre of WW2 were a work of fiction, a good author would have devoted considerable time to indicating what the Americans were developing so it didn't just come out of nowhere.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:13 pm 
    Offline
    Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 5:57 pm
    Posts: 236
    Dasrak wrote:
    Quote:
    The U.S. should not have been able to wipe out Hiroshima with a single bomb.

    There's a reason strategy games almost never have nukes to scale, and that's because it just doesn't make for a good game. Erfworld is supposed to be a strategy game that adheres to certain rules and conventions, and developing "superweapons" isn't intended to be possible. Real life warfare is all about challenging the rules and developing completely new weapons and approaches (and other than that: logistics logistics logistics). Secondly, if the Pacific theatre of WW2 were a work of fiction, a good author would have devoted considerable time to indicating what the Americans were developing so it didn't just come out of nowhere.


    Ah, so here's where the battle of opinion reaches its climax and stalemate. You apparently belong to the "Erfworld is a game" camp, whereas I believe that it is a world, governed by game-like rules, yes, but still a world. Meaning that Erfworld warfare is just like Real World warfare in that the key to victory is the achievement of tactical superiority through any means possible. In WWII this translated into nukes; in Erfworld this translates into getting the best set of casters and bonuses you can.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:24 pm 
    Erfworld Bicycle® Playing Cards supporter Has collected at least one unit Was an active Tool on Free Cards Day
    Offline
    Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:53 am
    Posts: 439
    Dasrak wrote:
    First, this is the only spell we've ever seen with global effect. This is not to be mistaken with global range. Thinkamancy can contact anyone, but Maggie cannot contact everyone. Every contact is a separate spell with its own cost, and we've yet to see anything with a flat cost that can affect an entire faction (especially a big one like current GK). Secondly, every powerful effect that we've seen to date seems to offer a "saving throw" for warlords and high level units to resist it. Heck, there were a couple golems who survived the volcano at the end of book 1, so even that wasn't instant death.

    So yes, I say this is DEM. It's only arguable because we do have magic in-universe. However, the type of magic displayed here is without precedent and came completely out of nowhere. Yes, we knew there was a wizard there and as savvy readers we knew that something was going to happen and the wizard would be the one to do it, but that doesn't make it any less DEM.

    It's not necessarily a global effect - it's a spell that affects either an entire side or an entire battlespace. This might not be the first time we've seen such a spell - Maggie might be limited by juice, but she can receive the thoughts of everyone on her side, and I'm sure if Charlie wanted to contact all the units on a side simultaneously, he'd be capable of doing so. Also, we don't know what the range of the eyemancer table was - I'm pretty sure it was able to display every single GK unit, and if the range was sufficient, it might have been able to provide the disposition of all RCC forces and its constituent sides - the equivalent of casting a lookamancy spell on multiple sides. If you think Charlie was involved in the gobwin disappearance and the betrayal of Saline IV, and knowing Charlie was involved in the defection of the western giants, those could be attributed to spells that affect entire sides (natural allies are technically autonomous "sides"). If you're just concerned about the magnitude of the effect, the single most powerful and far-reaching spell that was ever cast in the history of Erfworld was the one cast by the Faq predictomancer.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:27 pm 
    Offline
    Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 3:58 pm
    Posts: 118
    Ehbobo wrote:
    Ah, so here's where the battle of opinion reaches its climax and stalemate. You apparently belong to the "Erfworld is a game" camp, whereas I believe that it is a world, governed by game-like rules, yes, but still a world. Meaning that Erfworld warfare is just like Real World warfare in that the key to victory is the achievement of tactical superiority through any means possible. In WWII this translated into nukes; in Erfworld this translates into getting the best set of casters and bonuses you can.


    I'm actually of the camp that claims Erfworld is a story about a world that functions on game-like rules.

    And the content of the game-like rules is a big factor in the world. If the rules are made to be mostly balanced, would that make for a better (or more enjoyable) story told about this world? That's the question here: If Erfworld's rules function as a better game, do they correspondingly help make it into a better story?

    _________________
    Very Amazing Adventures (possibly inappropriate)

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:32 pm 
    User avatar
    Offline
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:41 pm
    Posts: 2521
    The point of my original list was that there are multiple examples of things that, from a certain character's perspective, should not have been possible that, after the fact, clearly were possible.

    Dasrak wrote:
    Erfworld is supposed to be a strategy game that adheres to certain rules and conventions, and developing "superweapons" isn't intended to be possible. Real life warfare is all about challenging the rules and developing completely new weapons and approaches (and other than that: logistics logistics logistics). Secondly, if the Pacific theatre of WW2 were a work of fiction, a good author would have devoted considerable time to indicating what the Americans were developing so it didn't just come out of nowhere.


    Here's where our underlying assumptions are shown to be incompatible.
    Your assumption is that Erfworld is a strategy game.
    My assumption is that a universe that has strategy-game-like physics.

    We're trapped in the mode of thinking that Magic has to be like a turn-based game, and the only way to implement magic in such a game is to clearly define what is and is not possible.
    But in Erfworld, it's been made clear that magic can do anything that one can imagine, as long as they get the right caster for the job.

    Sizemore has more knowledge about the theory of magic than anyone else, and he's been studying it his whole life.
    This indicates that Magic is far, far more complex than we're making out to believe.

    In our own world, ignorance created a lot of false assumptions.
    Sickness was caused by evil spirits, because that's what they understood at the time.
    In Erfworld, love and loyalty are 'hidden values', because that's what they understand currently.

    Was Erfworld 'cheating' Parson, or did Parson's ignorance simple cause him to constantly create situations that weren't as airtight as he thought?
    If Erfworld was actively cheating Parson before, why would you assume it stopped?

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:45 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 Was an active Tool on Free Cards Day
    Offline
    Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 2:54 pm
    Posts: 1932
    Website: http://www.tendonitisexpert.com
    Watsit Hoohow wrote:
    Ehbobo wrote:
    Ah, so here's where the battle of opinion reaches its climax and stalemate. You apparently belong to the "Erfworld is a game" camp, whereas I believe that it is a world, governed by game-like rules, yes, but still a world. Meaning that Erfworld warfare is just like Real World warfare in that the key to victory is the achievement of tactical superiority through any means possible. In WWII this translated into nukes; in Erfworld this translates into getting the best set of casters and bonuses you can.


    I'm actually of the camp that claims Erfworld is a story about a world that functions on game-like rules.

    And the content of the game-like rules is a big factor in the world. If the rules are made to be mostly balanced, would that make for a better (or more enjoyable) story told about this world? That's the question here: If Erfworld's rules function as a better game, do they correspondingly help make it into a better story?



    But, the game -IS- balanced. Big magic with big effects does not make it unbalanced. Arkentool, game breaking? Clearly not, as an appropriate counter was just brought into play. That, my friend, is balanced.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:03 pm 
    User avatar
    Offline
    Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:13 pm
    Posts: 181
    Dasrak wrote:
    Quote:
    Erfworld is supposed to be a strategy game that adheres to certain rules and conventions, and developing "superweapons" isn't intended to be possible. .

    then why are there links. if you want to avoid "superwepons" just remove links. since links are part of the system "superweapons" are just another tool.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
    Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
     
    Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 69 posts ] 

    Board index » Erfworld Things » Everything Else Erfworld


    Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: Quickenservice and 5 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: