Book 3 - Page 312

Stanley Say Relax

Book 3 - Page 312
Comic - Book 3 - Page 312
Recent posts... (See full thread)
twhitt wrote:
DeanXeL wrote:
Yes, also the same. Only problem is, just like Ossomer, we're still in the same Turn as the turning happened, so no idea about other ... implications, you know?

Lillith hasn't been a GK unit at the start of any turn in the last few dozens, I think.

Edit to add:

Sides or barbarians who have had Decrypted prisoners at the start of their turn include:
Jetstone / Lillith
Charlescomm / Lillith
FAQ / Ansom
Transylvito / Jack
Unspecified Dirtamancer(s) / Beans, Archons
Possibly also Janis / Beans, Archons

Yet no one outside of GK has ever once commented on their lack of upkeep. It could be that prisoners are simply special somehow, but I suspect they may not actually be free of upkeep. It may be a special function of the Pliers to provide for the upkeep of Decrypted, so that any Decrypted on another side would simply have a normal expense profile.
There was also talk that prisoners might continue to "charge" their parent side for upkeep, although I don't recall that conversation ending in more than speculation. If prisoners charge their parent side for upkeep then decrypted prisoners would cost their captors exactly what anyone should expect them to, nothing. Or maybe some trivial amount for cell maintenance and housekeeping but not their actual upkeep.

Regardless, the idea makes a certain amount of sense to me from a balance perspective. Poorer sides executing a high-upkeep prisoner (presumably an interesting character) just to stay in the black seems rather anticlimatic to me. And the captive's side paying for their upkeep even while imprisoned would show a genuine interest in their survival, as well providing an incentive for negotiations not to drag on too long. Kind of like POW conditions so crappy that prisoners are forced to beg for generous care packages from the outside if they want to be able to survive.

Jillian does have Marie captive and turned to her side, which presumably means that Jill should be paying Marie's upkeep one way or another. We haven't had any mention of Jillian noticing that Marie has zero upkeep, although FAQ hasn't had a turn start since Marie turned and Jillian's never been all that observant anyways.
DukeofTuring wrote:
twhitt wrote:
DeanXeL wrote:
Yes, also the same. Only problem is, just like Ossomer, we're still in the same Turn as the turning happened, so no idea about other ... implications, you know?

Lillith hasn't been a GK unit at the start of any turn in the last few dozens, I think.

Edit to add:

Sides or barbarians who have had Decrypted prisoners at the start of their turn include:
Jetstone / Lillith
Charlescomm / Lillith
FAQ / Ansom
Transylvito / Jack
Unspecified Dirtamancer(s) / Beans, Archons
Possibly also Janis / Beans, Archons

Yet no one outside of GK has ever once commented on their lack of upkeep. It could be that prisoners are simply special somehow, but I suspect they may not actually be free of upkeep. It may be a special function of the Pliers to provide for the upkeep of Decrypted, so that any Decrypted on another side would simply have a normal expense profile.
There was also talk that prisoners might continue to "charge" their parent side for upkeep, although I don't recall that conversation ending in more than speculation. If prisoners charge their parent side for upkeep then decrypted prisoners would cost their captors exactly what anyone should expect them to, nothing. Or maybe some trivial amount for cell maintenance and housekeeping but not their actual upkeep.

Regardless, the idea makes a certain amount of sense to me from a balance perspective. Poorer sides executing a high-upkeep prisoner (presumably an interesting character) just to stay in the black seems rather anticlimatic to me. And the captive's side paying for their upkeep even while imprisoned would show a genuine interest in their survival, as well providing an incentive for negotiations not to drag on too long. Kind of like POW conditions so crappy that prisoners are forced to beg for generous care packages from the outside if they want to be able to survive.

Jillian does have Marie captive and turned to her side, which presumably means that Jill should be paying Marie's upkeep one way or another. We haven't had any mention of Jillian noticing that Marie has zero upkeep, although FAQ hasn't had a turn start since Marie turned and Jillian's never been all that observant anyways.
I can't find it now, but I'm pretty sure either Olive or Wanda states the opposite in book 0; Jillian's upkeep was unaffordable for a prisoner, and unless she turned in order to earn her upkeep they would have to disband her. Wish I could find it, but book 0 is LONG.
While Book 0 gives us a good point of reference it ultimately isn't canon until Rob completes it and the prisoner rules have been retconned quite heavily already since it was written by subsequent books.

It seems too suspicious that we have not either had a character remark that Decrypted cost no upkeep when they hold them prisoner or that TV a side that was nearly on the verge of bankruptcy didn't remark how expensive Parson was.

Both are extreme examples of upkeep but no character reaction? Seems odd unless upkeep is simply a static amount (when prisoner) or some variation on that i.e. A minor sliding scale dependant on position Warlords cost more than Pikers.
CDS wrote:
While Book 0 gives us a good point of reference it ultimately isn't canon until Rob completes it and the prisoner rules have been retconned quite heavily already since it was written by subsequent books.

It seems too suspicious that we have not either had a character remark that Decrypted cost no upkeep when they hold them prisoner or that TV a side that was nearly on the verge of bankruptcy didn't remark how expensive Parson was.

Both are extreme examples of upkeep but no character reaction? Seems odd unless upkeep is simply a static amount (when prisoner) or some variation on that i.e. A minor sliding scale dependant on position Warlords cost more than Pikers.


Well it might be like this. Lets say you are a stupid world soldier. As a solider, the army is required to pay a certain amount. But if you are a captured soldier , the people who have you captured do not need to pay your salary. They just need to provide enough to feed you. SO it might not matter who is captured. Their upkeep is the same, with perhaps only attributes such whether you are a heavy or not making a difference. And a decrypted needing upkeep just might mean the pliers (or something else) supplies the upkeep and not the side. But when a unit is captured the pliers cannot supply the upkeep anymore, just like a sides tower cannot supply upkeep to a captured unit.

The same would explain attitude with the magic kingdom short pier. A large part of an upkeep cost could just represent the units value (or wage in Stupid world terms). The moment you are hired for a side erfworld rules enforce the full value, but while a a barbarian caster you only need to support your food cost. SO your upkeep is just cheaper as a barabarian. It is the best answer I have as to why poor casters just don't work on sides for cheap. Erfworld has signamancy wage rules, just like here :lol:
Yeah sounds plausible in fairness not having to worry about Prisoner upkeep helps the narrative flow better so I am happy it isn't really coming up. I think the story has done well with how it handles money it is a tool that operates in the background to explain things but ultimately doesn't hinder the story - Parson needs to do some crazy plan he can and isn't limited by that particular resource.

Also being rich also doesn't strike me as being an insta-win because you're limited in how much you can pop so TV aren't suddenly this dominate power because of their wind fall. The only two exceptions to this seems to be natural allies and hiring casters but the latter as an option has always been tough to pull off in the story and the former is an interesting plot point.
twhitt wrote:
Jillian does have Marie captive and turned to her side, which presumably means that Jill should be paying Marie's upkeep one way or another. We haven't had any mention of Jillian noticing that Marie has zero upkeep, although FAQ hasn't had a turn start since Marie turned and Jillian's never been all that observant anyways.
I can't find it now, but I'm pretty sure either Olive or Wanda states the opposite in book 0; Jillian's upkeep was unaffordable for a prisoner, and unless she turned in order to earn her upkeep they would have to disband her. Wish I could find it, but book 0 is LONG.[/quote]

Marie doesnt have upkeep, shes decrypted.
Quote:
Marie doesnt have upkeep, shes decrypted.


That's the point of the argument; if decrypted don't have upkeep, and this is something groundbreakingly strange like a person having three arms, then why hasn't anyone who held decrypted units captive notice that they didn't have upkeep? Parson would have naturally recognized the importance of this secret and let people who would have the opportunity to tell anyone not to, but when a side's accountant (ruler, moneymancer, chief warlord, whoever) sees that the high profile units they have captured aren't costing upkeep it should have triggered a response, but we have seen none (doesn't mean there haven't been any, but this might have simply been more proof to the royalists that the decrypted aren't units, but are just special uncroaked, since I seem to recall magically created units have little to no upkeep anyways).
Well I am very late to this topic, so maybe this has been covered. If so, I apologize.

I don't get the impression that the Maggionette really wants anything, per se. I think it feels an echo of the real Maggie's thoughts and desires, and when those feelings come through strongly enough it can act on them. So when it seems to not want to be a part of Charlescomm, it's because the real Maggie wouldn't want to be a part of Charlescomm.
I'd agree with that just an echo of Maggie's desires etc I don't think it has autonomy beyond a normal doll.
twhitt wrote:
DukeofTuring wrote:
twhitt wrote:

Lillith hasn't been a GK unit at the start of any turn in the last few dozens, I think.

Edit to add:

Sides or barbarians who have had Decrypted prisoners at the start of their turn include:
Jetstone / Lillith
Charlescomm / Lillith
FAQ / Ansom
Transylvito / Jack
Unspecified Dirtamancer(s) / Beans, Archons
Possibly also Janis / Beans, Archons

Yet no one outside of GK has ever once commented on their lack of upkeep. It could be that prisoners are simply special somehow, but I suspect they may not actually be free of upkeep. It may be a special function of the Pliers to provide for the upkeep of Decrypted, so that any Decrypted on another side would simply have a normal expense profile.
There was also talk that prisoners might continue to "charge" their parent side for upkeep, although I don't recall that conversation ending in more than speculation. If prisoners charge their parent side for upkeep then decrypted prisoners would cost their captors exactly what anyone should expect them to, nothing. Or maybe some trivial amount for cell maintenance and housekeeping but not their actual upkeep.

Regardless, the idea makes a certain amount of sense to me from a balance perspective. Poorer sides executing a high-upkeep prisoner (presumably an interesting character) just to stay in the black seems rather anticlimatic to me. And the captive's side paying for their upkeep even while imprisoned would show a genuine interest in their survival, as well providing an incentive for negotiations not to drag on too long. Kind of like POW conditions so crappy that prisoners are forced to beg for generous care packages from the outside if they want to be able to survive.

Jillian does have Marie captive and turned to her side, which presumably means that Jill should be paying Marie's upkeep one way or another. We haven't had any mention of Jillian noticing that Marie has zero upkeep, although FAQ hasn't had a turn start since Marie turned and Jillian's never been all that observant anyways.
I can't find it now, but I'm pretty sure either Olive or Wanda states the opposite in book 0; Jillian's upkeep was unaffordable for a prisoner, and unless she turned in order to earn her upkeep they would have to disband her. Wish I could find it, but book 0 is LONG.

Haffaton was incredibly poor. It could be said that any prisoner that didn't turn wasn't worth the upkeep. Every schmucker counted. And if I recall correctly, Jillian had been prisoner for a while.