Book 3 - Page 17

Book 3 - Page 17
Comic - Book 3 - Page 17
Recent posts... (See full thread)
victor227 wrote:
ManaCaster wrote:
I think the best argument against allying with Charlie would be that Charlie doesn't actually care about his natural allies. Sure, he can pay a king's ransom in schmuckers, but under circumstances, Charlie cannot afford the luxury of friendship. Vurp's tribe would be nothing but tools to Charlie. And if it ever became convenient to do so, Charlie would sacrifice them in a heartbeat.


How does that differ from anyone though? Politics in Erfworld tend toward the pragmatic. When upkeep becomes an issue, less important aspects of a side are neglected and disbanded. In the case of Jetstone, even border cities were razed if I recall correctly. Charlie's greatest power is that he's spent hundreds and thousands of turns building up a reputation of reliability. In the magic kingdom, he has a stellar reputation as an employer (even with the odd bit of shenanigans like Digdoug's story).

Charlie may be no one's friend, but the fact is that natural allies are always going to be second stringers. If the choice ever came to Stanley between his side falling and maintaining the hobgoblins, you can bet they're going to be left out to dry. He's practically an embodiment of Erfworld's terrible politics of winners and losers, where lives are worth only as much as the schmuckers they bring in and safeguard. Vurp is big on 'tribe is for fighting and winning' (heh, Warhammer), he gets it. His tribe is worth only what they can bring to the table in battle, and Charlie is a guy who apparently values people who can bring violence to the table on his behalf.

And Charlie must be even more ruthlessly pragmatic than normal in order to survive the Fate curse.

Sure, Jetstone had to let the marbits and elves go when they could no longer afford them. But they didn't do anything underhanded.

As for Charlie though. Remember when Charlie tried to have Ansom croaked to remove a "distraction" from Jillian? That is not the sort of person I would want as an ally.
Really hoping that the next strip shows Vurp pulling out a desperation attack with a sliver of "Will" remaining to turn the tables here. This isn't even clever by Charlie, it's just out and out bribery. More and more wanting to see Charlie suffer a setback for once.
Ugh, I just have to say, this page is the worst yet in regards to David's art. I can barely even make out facial features.

To be clear, that statement is to be taken in jest. In all seriousness, besides the first few pages, I am very happy with the art in Book 3.
ftl wrote:
ff6shadow wrote:
Hm, something I noted on reading. This seems to me to be the closest I've seen to outright stating that Stanley was involved in the hobgoblin rebellion that killed his predecessor. Charlie out right states they are responsible for Stanley being in power and Vurp says "He has paid". I knew it was suggested and hinted at before but this is pretty close to out right confirming it unless I missed another major pointer another time.


I don't think this is confirming that. I certainly didn't get that vibe. It says that they are responsible for Stanley being in power - which is certainly true and could mean many things, they're a critical part of his forces - but it doesn't say anything about who orchestrated the rebellion. (And it was a gobwin rebellion, not a hobgobwin rebellion anyway...)


No it says that they are responsible for putting him in power, which is more specific and should refer to the revolt agaisnt Saline IV and Stanley retaking Gobwin Knob. Though it could just mean that the Gobwins revolted and the Hobgobwins allied with Stanley to defeat the Gobwins, I think it means that the Hobgobwins were in on both the revolt and Stanleys return.
Well, but even if it the Hobgobwins were in on the rebellion, the line doesn't mean that Stanley asked them to do it, does it?

This panel is about whatever Charlie wants to say to be persuasive, and I don't think it tells us much about the reality of what happened. Hobgobwins could have been minor bit players previously and Charlie would still be talking up how they were so valuable that they should ditch Stanley because he's riding on their coattails rather than the other way around.
bladestorm wrote:
Or even more awesome sauce would be to ally with both witches and demons.


... as when Lord Juss of Demonland destroyed the Ghouls at the Races of Kartadza? No?
On the topic of comebacks, I happen to know of an epic one in a context like this one. It concerns a game of Street Fighter, from way back in 2004: in the EVO 2004 semi-final, one player Daigo Umehara (player 1; Ken, the guy) is beaten very nearly to zero by the other player Justin Wong (player 2; Chun-Li, the girl). Then, with his last sliver of health, he manages to block all attacks from an entire barrage by Chun-Li, turning it around and finally beating her instead.

The characters are not exact matches, and I don't want to give anyone false hope of course, but just saying there's a precedent for winning a Street Fighter match with only a sliver of [will/health] bar left...

As an aside, for those interested: while it might be a bit obscure to reference a random game tournament's semifinal from 10 years ago now, I'm pretty sure this particular match is still famous in fighting game circles. And hence, perhaps famous enough to be referenced here in the next comic. Perhaps. I hope. Anyway, I came across this video because it was used to illustrate a point in an article by David Sirlin (http://www.sirlin.net) on competitive gaming, and it's stuck with me because of two reasons: one, the crowd (such as there was back then) goes absolutely wild, and two, it was explained how incredible this feat actually was, above and beyond the 'wow, that looks pretty hard' impression that a layman like me has from watching it to begin with.

I didn't look up the original article (must have been one of the Street Fighter II series on game design/balance), but the amazingness of this feat is also explained by this gaming wikia article. Basically, instead of simply blocking it as I called it above, he parries the attacks. He had to, since blocked attacks apparently still do a small amount of damage, and he didn't have enough health to even let one (!) attack do residual block damage. Parrying is instead an active action, and so what he did was perfectly time his own actions to parry Wong's attacks, about 20 times in a row. Wow.
I'm not sure it entirely matters what decision Vurp makes if Ansom succeeds in capturing Jillian but it does leave some rule questions. If Vurp turns they almost certainly lose Gobwin knob and Stanley is in the stuck but it could all be moot.

Scenario:
1) Vurp is turned, he and all his units fall under Jillian's control.
2) Stanley is left on his Dwagon kinda lonesome.
3) Ansom captures Jillian and her megalowiff (he doesn't want to kill her he wants control of her unit)

Resulting game rule questions:
Q1) If a leader is captured, field units disband what happens to natural allies? Do they just revert to neutral status?
Q2) Do the dwagons turn with their riders or is their loyalty personal to Stanley like the uncorked are to Wanda?
Q3) If dwagons don't turn with their riders, can he still disband them from underneath their riders or order them to flip either way causing massive falling damage?
Q4) What happens to natural allies if a ruler is captured? Do they revert to neutral status?
Q5) If Vrup is still standing on Vanna's Mega when it disbands and he takes massive falling damage and croaks what happens to Hobgobwin alliance status?
technicalvault wrote:
Q5) If Vrup is still standing on Vanna's Mega when it disbands and he takes massive falling damage and croaks what happens to Hobgobwin alliance status?
This one has been answered. Unlike a Ruler, Chiefs are not technically special unique units that were popped or designated. If the current one croaks, a surviving member of the tribe becomes the new chief. This is how Vurp became chief in the first place, he was the only surviving Hobgobwin after tBfGK.
Spoiler: show
technicalvault wrote:

Q2) Do the dwagons turn with their riders or is their loyalty personal to Stanley like the uncorked are to Wanda?
Q3) If dwagons don't turn with their riders, can he still disband them from underneath their riders or order them to flip either way causing massive falling damage?

The next page answers these two kinda, dwagons stay loyal to Stanley. It also looks like the dwagons are fairly good at seeing to their own security, nom nom nom.