But "depopping" is something that doesn't exist in our world. We don't have popping and depopping in our world (above, possibly, the quantum level) - things don't simply appear and vanish again. Life on Earth is a gradual process; cells multiply and change, forming a whole organism over time. Instant disintegration of an organism also don't happen. Depopping is, functionally, like what we envision happens if someone travels back in time and kills the person's parent before they were born. One second they're there, the next - *pop* - they never existed. There's no trace of them anywhere. The difficulty with thinking about it like that is, of course, there's never really that moment where they existed for one second and then didn't the next, but that's how a lot of cheesy sci-fi has portrayed it.
If death is the end of existence, then depopping is lethal - it results in nonexistence. But no "force" is applied to the body of the depopped; there's nothing left. It's not "violent" - it's just lethal.
So it seems like good trap, but she should be able to slip out of it.
Well, nobody but FAQ knows what's happening here. FAQ would absolutely have the initiative in claiming cities, and they have air transport. With Olive and Wanda's knowledge of the cities and terrain, I would think they can claim a lot of cities pretty quickly, Then they could order the units to consolidate at the higher level ones, and raze the lower level ones to boost the treasury and restore the side to a normal profile for Erfworld.
But isn't Wanda worried that some terrible punishment will rain down upon her for doing something that goes against Fate? Is this really what she would call the Easy Way? She seems to be trying to get Olive to turn which would defeat Fate. Perhaps Wanda thinks she has nothing to lose, but if she really believed in the Easy Way, she would just relax and assume that Olive was going to lose the trial without any dangerous Fate-defying maneuvers.
She isn't trying to prevent fate. She knows Olive better than anyone else in attendance. She may be counting on Olive being unwilling, or actually unable, to turn. We know Olive's chief loyalty is to herself. What if that were actually binding? Because she isn't sincere, she may be incapable of turning.
Also, consider this. Even if Olive could, and did turn, that wouldn't be the end of Jillian's fate. The capitol city that they just captured is also called Haffaton. Loj Banhammer is the new Ruler. That is a way Fate could course correct. We know it won't, because Jillian is far away when Faq falls, but that is a loophole that fate could exploit.
pardon, but we only have Jillian's word as told to Prince Ansom as to where she was when FAQ fell And at the time, she was masquerading as Jillian Zamussels and showing a lot of conflict of interest. I consider everything she said during that time - or any time to a side other than her own, really - to be questionable.
Some terms I can think of:
Destroying the Olive Garden.
Olive remaining as a "guest" of FAQ forever.
Turning over all cities except Efbaum to FAQ.
Hosting FAQ's occupation of Efbaum, with no resistance to any action taken by FAQ units.
Ceasing all aggression against other sides, except for defense, forever.
The penalties aren't really well known except for Shmuckers, but I'm sure the document can be worded in a way to ensure that breaking it would spell the end of Haffaton.
I don't see the difference between disbanding and enough explosives to insta-kill and a powerful enough magic spell to insta-kill. In each case person may feel nothing/dies instantly. Whether body exists or not afterwards does not mean much.
For example: http://www.erfworld.com/book-1-archive/?px=%2F133.jpg Maggie shows power of attack spell in killing, possible maggie could insta-kill a low level ally in same way so quickly they wouldn't feel any pain, not that different from disbanding as far as humane.
It can come down to culture/customs on what is "better", in real life for example some cultures believed dying without any blood loss was somehow "better". Some felt important thing was what happened to body after - preserve it, burn it, bury it, send it out to sea, etc... different for each group.
It is possible "disbanding" is seen as better or worse compared to direct death. Viking logic might be disbanding is worse as results in worse afterlife.
At least that's the way I suspect normal Erfworlders think of disbanding. I wouldn't expect the strange pacifists of Faq to feel the same way. They probably prefer the peace of disbanding over the violence of croaking.