-
Going forward, links to content from Twitter (now X) will no longer be embedded. Pre-existing links should not be affected.
On the Road to Elspar [Book 1] (Dryad Mercenary Schoolgirl Quest)
- Thread starter Kei
- Start date
- Original Fantasy
AnonymousRabbit
Rabbit Faced
[x] Take the safe option and rush towards where you heard the blast, making sure that Stephanie and Elizabeth are safe and unhurt.
This is what I call a style switch!
This is what I call a style switch!
Spectrum
Tell me a secret~
- Location
- Behind you~
Well, that's a lot of complete nonsense.
The point is that Neianne does know exactly what she is facing and what the opportunity is in front of them--to win the battle in a single instant by following up on Eleanore's rush. Giving up an opportunity for needless conservatism because of fearmongering against the unknown is -bad leadership-. At some point, you have to trust that your people are capable enough to not die instantly. Frankly, if they can't hold out long enough for the bandits to morale break here (given Eleanore's speed and already demonstrated prowess), then Neianne and Sieglinde would never have gotten over there fast enough to do anything anyway.
This is also like literally the exact opposite of what the narration tells us, that Neianne is concerned about wooded areas limiting the effectiveness of her and Sieglinde's primary weapons.
PhDEevee
Mathematician and Questgiver
- Location
- Sydney
[x] Take advantage of Eleanore's momentum as a knight, and use her as the bulwark for a devastating frontal attack.
Yeah, there's a risk. But remember when Lucille had to take command because neither Sieglinde nor Liz would do it themseves? I think it's better if Neianne is willing to make the risky plays, because goodness knows no-one else on her squad is going to want to.
Also hi Kei, sorry I haven't been around~
Yeah, there's a risk. But remember when Lucille had to take command because neither Sieglinde nor Liz would do it themseves? I think it's better if Neianne is willing to make the risky plays, because goodness knows no-one else on her squad is going to want to.
Also hi Kei, sorry I haven't been around~
That's even worse. You sacrifice people for objectives? Maybe clients will like you, but good luck keeping a mercenary group staffed! Others sure won't trust you to have theirs lives in mind! Protip: Mercenaries won't care much for money if they think they'll die before getting it.
Also, also big fat F from supervisor about possibly losing two of your group just to take out a bandit group. Way too short a sight.
This is not the army. BECAUSE we have quality over numbers (at least as far as Caldran mercenaries go), we CANNOT afford sacrifices like that for the long term. If we were about to turn a war around? Maybe, that sure is important enough. For a bandit camp? Hell no.
Last edited:
Spectrum
Tell me a secret~
- Location
- Behind you~
Again, quit fearmongering. If smol mage and ninja and supervisor would get run over in the time it takes to shatter an untrained bandit camp from surprise while supporting a knight, it was never a realistic proposition to get there fast enough to help them. Think about the actual logistics of the fight instead of emotionally reacting.
Given your mistake with the supervisor, who exactly think about the logistics better?
The supervisor is NOT supposed to fight. We do NOT factor her in. The moment she intervene, that means the two were about to die and we FAIL the assignment because in a 'real-life' mission a a squad, with no supervisor, they would have died.
So congrats! You cleared the camp but lost half your squad for a mere camp! Great job, isn't it?
Last edited:
Yeah, but the Knight is going to be taking the bandits on regardless, and our support is likely to just make things faster. Which means we can delay checking up on our teammates, or we can just trust Eleanore is, in fact, a badass combatant who can beat a dozen poorly equipped and trained bandits the way she thinks she can.
- Location
- United States
I think people are too focused on which option is "the best" and finding the option that diminishes the most downsides. I implore people to read the AN at the end of the last chapter again and try to forgo thinking about which option has the most supreme tactics allowing us to dominate the objective with fewest downsides. There isn't one.
This is about what sort of leadership we want Neianne to have, as this option will shape her leadership style moving forward. A priority on the safety of her squad (reinforcing squad members who send out the predetermined signal for help), a priority on completing the mission as quickly as possible in aggressive fashion (blitz strike by reinforcing the knight), or a priority on strategy for complete overwhelming dominance (sneaking around in a way to cut off retreat for the bandits).
This is about what sort of leadership we want Neianne to have, as this option will shape her leadership style moving forward. A priority on the safety of her squad (reinforcing squad members who send out the predetermined signal for help), a priority on completing the mission as quickly as possible in aggressive fashion (blitz strike by reinforcing the knight), or a priority on strategy for complete overwhelming dominance (sneaking around in a way to cut off retreat for the bandits).
My issue with the attitude is well... Actually, I have the perfect scene in mind to compare it to. Star Wars Episode 8 at the very start. The battle against the dreadnought.
They destroyed it but lost theirs bombers for that 'chance'. And they could have used them when in deep shit later on. Obviously, those two won't die with the instructor around, but we're not supposed to factor her in and the signal WAS used. As a mercs, unless the mission objective is critically important, there's really no good reason to lose people. And a bandit camp sure is not.
They destroyed it but lost theirs bombers for that 'chance'. And they could have used them when in deep shit later on. Obviously, those two won't die with the instructor around, but we're not supposed to factor her in and the signal WAS used. As a mercs, unless the mission objective is critically important, there's really no good reason to lose people. And a bandit camp sure is not.
Nope. The truth is that we have jack shit idea what caused them the signal. Don't you dare lie by saying otherwise.
Last edited:
- Location
- United States
It's the "We need help" signal. Nothing less and nothing more, because we didn't establish anything more elaborate. Could be "we're gonna die" (not really since instructor is there, but test-wise), or could be "we need reinforcements, but can handle them for a while", or anything inbetween. However, almost certainly not just "contact" since they blew their cover in a huge radius and requested help.
cB557
voOOP
You're acting like otherwise, by assuming that they're in need of immediate assistance and forfeiting the initiative on that basis.
Well, this IS the 'need help' signal. What is wrong in acting as established for that?
And initiative? Who care anyway? It's not like we have the advantage of surprise anymore anyway, so we can regroup and strike as a whole.
cB557
voOOP
They're not organized yet. If we strike now, we'll split them in two directions before they can organize a defense. If we try to meet up with the other two first, we'll be facing them all in one fight after they've had time to organize themselves.
First time I hear getting surrounded is a good tactic idea.
cB557
voOOP
No idea where you're getting surrounded from.
Splitting them in two. Given we're just three if we attack now, what do you think happen right after the initial surprise with how you suggest we move? They surround us, obviously.
cB557
voOOP
If that's what you're worried about, how much is grouping up going to change that? Going from three to five isn't going to prevent them from doing that, and given that it'll be all of them, organized, responding to one group instead of them disorganized and trying to respond to two situations at once, I'd think your plan would leave us the more likely to be surrounded.
