Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 009

[name lips]

What you do is, and this is different than DnD, is you make all your rolls for an attack at the same time. You literally pick up a handful of dice and toss them on the table. Each dice is an individual guy, and represents whether he wins or looses his little individual fight on the table top.

What they're saying is that, if you have Luckmancy, you can rearrange the die rolls so that the guys who are important win their battles, while giving lousy rolls to other guys who are presumably going to loose. (However, they wouldn't have to loose even if they have bad rolls. If they're fighting weak opponents, or have other bonuses (high ground, a big wall, etc.) they might just stalemate or something).

That's it. Or at least that's how I read it. If you have played a table top war game, this is a pretty clear and simple mechanic. It's pretty easy to imagine rearranging your rolls on a table top like that. Rob could have something totally else in mind, of course, but that's how I see it.

I'm getting a "close but not quite" feeling. You get to pick certain units to receive the highest rolls, but you don't get to pick where the low rolls go. They could go to extremely valuable units, resulting in their deaths, or they could go to units in other engagements, or they could pop up the next turn... occasionally they might be given to the other side, but not often. It's unpredictable. All you know is that you're Boosting certain units -- you don't get to know what price you pay for doing so.

Clay Dice doesn't know where the bad luck ends up. All he observes is the more he boosts units, the more bad things seem to happen elsewhere. He is having a hard time quantifying it. He's not quite sure how or why it works the way he thinks it must be working, and doesn't seem to fully understand the "imaginary" dice that erfworld uses. His d4s are just an analogy.

[gameboy1234]

I'm getting a "close but not quite" feeling. You get to pick certain units to receive the highest rolls, but you don't get to pick where the low rolls go. They could go to extremely valuable units, resulting in their deaths, or they could go to units in other engagements, or they could pop up the next turn... occasionally they might be given to the other side.

Actually a good point, I think you are correct. Take my idea for die rolls, and substitute instead of the player a random (!) replacement algorithm by a computer. The computer makes the rolls, and then decides who gets the unlucky parts. Occasionally it pulls from the opponent's rolls. I guess you could substitute any impartial third party (like "the GM") for the computer.

On minor point: on the "next turn" part, Clay said Luckmancy is lazy, and takes the closest rolls. So next turn might be possible, but it seems the least likely option. Wanda's "debt" may be related but might some other sort of special thing.

[kiyote]

What you do is, and this is different than DnD, is you make all your rolls for an attack at the same time. You literally pick up a handful of dice and toss them on the table. Each dice is an individual guy, and represents whether he wins or looses his little individual fight on the table top.

What they're saying is that, if you have Luckmancy, you can rearrange the die rolls so that the guys who are important win their battles, while giving lousy rolls to other guys who are presumably going to loose. (However, they wouldn't have to loose even if they have bad rolls. If they're fighting weak opponents, or have other bonuses (high ground, a big wall, etc.) they might just stalemate or something).

That's it. Or at least that's how I read it. If you have played a table top war game, this is a pretty clear and simple mechanic. It's pretty easy to imagine rearranging your rolls on a table top like that. Rob could have something totally else in mind, of course, but that's how I see it.

I'm getting a "close but not quite" feeling. You get to pick certain units to receive the highest rolls, but you don't get to pick where the low rolls go. They could go to extremely valuable units, resulting in their deaths, or they could go to units in other engagements, or they could pop up the next turn... occasionally they might be given to the other side, but not often. It's unpredictable. All you know is that you're Boosting certain units -- you don't get to know what price you pay for doing so.

Clay Dice doesn't know where the bad luck ends up. All he observes is the more he boosts units, the more bad things seem to happen elsewhere. He is having a hard time quantifying it. He's not quite sure how or why it works the way he thinks it must be working, and doesn't seem to fully understand the "imaginary" dice that erfworld uses. His d4s are just an analogy.

Nothing is pointing to Clay being a high level luckamancer. Chances are he doesn't have the full picture yet, but mathematically his dice analogy seems sound, and if the redistribution is random, it would have a larger effect on the weaker troops than stronger unbuffed troops, just based on how much a stronger hit those troops can handle before dawn heals the wounds.

[raphfrk]

Actually a good point, I think you are correct. Take my idea for die rolls, and substitute instead of the player a random (!) replacement algorithm by a computer. The computer makes the rolls, and then decides who gets the unlucky parts. Occasionally it pulls from the opponent's rolls. I guess you could substitute any impartial third party (like "the GM") for the computer.

Can a master class luckamancer control the RNG that decides where the bad rolls are sent ? Boost the boosting process, rather than a particular unit. Hmm, maybe boost the luckamancer would do it.

[DevilDan]

On a more general topic, I'm beginning to see how Wanda knows from personal experience that struggling against fate can be quite painful, not just theoretically. It's possible that lessons has been one that Erf has taught her to respect, over and over, even before meeting and befriending (?) Faq's predictamancer or losing Faq to GK.

[kiyote]

Actually a good point, I think you are correct. Take my idea for die rolls, and substitute instead of the player a random (!) replacement algorithm by a computer. The computer makes the rolls, and then decides who gets the unlucky parts. Occasionally it pulls from the opponent's rolls. I guess you could substitute any impartial third party (like "the GM") for the computer.

Can a master class luckamancer control the RNG that decides where the bad rolls are sent ? Boost the boosting process, rather than a particular unit. Hmm, maybe boost the luckamancer would do it.

I highly doubt pulling from enemies rolls is ever possible, even for a master class luckamancer. It would be doubly lucky, over-powerful, and break the zero-sum nature of Erfworld that we've seen so far. It may be possible for a master class luckamancer to curse allied heavies who can withstand it in order to help stave off the negative effects luckamancy boosts have on the weakest allies.

[Balerion]

I highly doubt pulling from enemies rolls is ever possible, even for a master class luckamancer. It would be doubly lucky, over-powerful, and break the zero-sum nature of Erfworld that we've seen so far. It may be possible for a master class luckamancer to curse allied heavies who can withstand it in order to help stave off the negative effects luckamancy boosts have on the weakest allies.

I would not be so quick to doubt it. Casters are all pretty much walking balance breakers once they have the levels. They are balanced by being squishy, and also by having lots of each other around to fight back. After all, a luckamancer without a predict/math is pretty heavily weakened in effectiveness already; being able to jinx enemy and help allies seems fair when compared with Wanda uncroaking 1-2k jetstone troops all at once, if we are balancing master classes.

[Matthew Wildstar]

It may be possible for a master class luckamancer to curse allied heavies who can withstand it in order to help stave off the negative effects luckamancy boosts have on the weakest allies.

That sounds like Parson-class thinking. "Clay - I want you to unBoost all of our Knight-class heavies that're at full health - now!" "You want me to do...what?" "If you're right - and the bracer agrees with you..."

[kiyote]

I highly doubt pulling from enemies rolls is ever possible, even for a master class luckamancer. It would be doubly lucky, over-powerful, and break the zero-sum nature of Erfworld that we've seen so far. It may be possible for a master class luckamancer to curse allied heavies who can withstand it in order to help stave off the negative effects luckamancy boosts have on the weakest allies.

I would not be so quick to doubt it. Casters are all pretty much walking balance breakers once they have the levels. They are balanced by being squishy, and also by having lots of each other around to fight back. After all, a luckamancer without a predict/math is pretty heavily weakened in effectiveness already; being able to jinx enemy and help allies seems fair when compared with Wanda uncroaking 1-2k jetstone troops all at once, if we are balancing master classes.

It would break the mechanic. Even in the Wanda example, all those Jetstone troops were at a fraction of their full power and could only last a turn. Before she got the pliers, no matter how good she was, there were still certain types of things that she couldn't uncroak.

If a luckamancer could swap rolls with an enemy, there wouldn't be a downside to the spell, and the only win-win spells we know of so far belong to the archentools. And maybe Parson's bracer.

[ParsonIsOP]

I'm going to go with another theory. What if Delphie is motivated by Duty and is trying to save Goodmiton.

Consider, the Mathamancer states that for every number you'll get a zero and that Fate is lazy and pulls form the nearest source. With Wanda Goodmiton just rolled a REALLY good number and now they are due for a really BAD number. But, If Delphie can pass Wanda off to Haffaton then they'll get the bad number.

Additionally, Delphie is a predictimancer. Lets assume for a minute that she knows everything that we know. Wanda is going to go to FAQ and then go to GK. The simplest way for this to happen is for goodmiton to somehow be destroyed and leave Wanda leaderless so she goes to FAQ. However, if Delphie can trade Wanda away for peace then there can be ways or Wanda to get to FAQ that do not include Goodmiton's destruction.

The only problem I can see with this theory is that the simplest thing Delphie could have done to save Goodmiton was to stop Wanda from ever popping. But I suppose it's possible that with the amount of Fate Wanda is supposed to have, Delphie decided to let her exist anyways because she felt that Wanda would have a net positive effect on the world.

Delphie might not have had a choice. Without Wanda popping tBfGK would never have happened so Wanda had to have popped. So what Delphie has to do is try to maneuver the story to tBfGK without having Goodmitton destroyed and with the least death and destruction to her side possible.

Wanda was extremely loyal to her original side. A pity she didn't get Parson at that time.

Speaking of Parson, what sort of Zero would he represent in this system? He also has literal Erf shaking significance way beyond the huge cost to summon him and his huge upkeep fee. Does this mean that GK will have bad rolls or does Parson not count because it wasn't random chance that summoned him?

Or is Parson where Erf divided by Zero?



The idea that every high roll has to be balanced by a low roll is an interesting one. It could be Erfworlds balancing system to keep the conflict ongoing. A side wiping out creates a negative that needs to be balanced and a new side is created or a side expanding to fast creates a positive to be balanced resulting in bad luck for that side. Sort of like how in the Game Planetside if one Empire is to large then the other two start getting bonus.

This could explain how no one has won yet. I sort of see Erfworld as a big game of Civilization with a whole lot of sides and a tactical simulator added in. In Civ once you reach a certain size you can start grinding up other smaller civs easily and the momentum swings in your favor as your expansion fuels your expansion. The fact that Erf doesn't have this happen could mean there is some sort means to prevent a large side from continuously expanding, it could be maintenance fees, or distance from capital fees or something like that. Or it could be a civ that has gotten to large starts having roll issues.

I think Mathamancers are full of crap.

This plays into the psychology of Erfworld being a zero-sum game, whether it truly is or not. One of Parson's journal entries states his trying to figure out how to get a side without a constant deficit, which implies that sides have to raid each other in order to just stay alive. Erfworlders are used to looking for the string attached.

That said, I don't think that great advantages must be balanced elsewhere at some great personal cost. This is basically just the kind of fatalism endemic to Erfworlders. They're way too obsessed with their own petty personal problems and too used to thinking that the cosmos revolve around them. I think Wanda is a victim to the idea of some grand Destiny. Whereas Parson is a progressive and modern individual from Earth. The entire difference in their destinies (not Destiny) is simply in their outlook.