Hmm, there's a lot of ways to analyze this choice. Though you might not know it, looking at the thread right now. There's also something of an... interpretive double standard going on? The general takeaway is that one instills defense and the other offense, and that's understandable, but that's not being taken to consistent logical conclusions. Different logic is being applied to each option, while also missing implications from the direct text in favor of drawing from contrast. Which is a bit frustrating.
[ ] I would wield it to put them on the defense, to be miserly with their power and resources, and loathe to expend anything that is theirs.
In terms of what Ling Qi buys with this effort, it's chiefly time and latitude to act. This option says "defense", and that's not untrue, but it's also a bit of a misnomer. The rest of the context makes it clear that it's more about being conservative. With positioning, with reaction, and with resources.
And I think people understand that basic thrust? The "elixir saving" metaphor being used is apt here; the enemy being "put on the defense" doesn't mean prioritizing spending resources on defensive efforts. That's what potions/elixirs are, after all, and the metaphor being used sees them not being used. Which I think is correct. This tech instills a bias against spending resources broadly, of saving the cards in their hand. And the current cards, at that. A defensive stance is simply the one that lines up with a thrifty disposition, generally.
[ ] I would wield it to encourage glory-seeking, to make them willing to sacrifice what they should not for their dreams.
What Ling Qi gets out of this approach is opportunity and limiting the opponent's options. Inducing enemies to act more impulsively can open up gaps in enemy lines which can be exploited, even as they're spending resources to have large impacts where they do act. It also make enemies more likely to fall for bait of various kinds, which (I might add lines up with Gan Guangli's low-key trickery) sort of splits the difference between opportunity and limiting the opponent's options. The greater part of limiting their options is, of course, by draining them over time by getting them to "waste" their tools in lackluster circumstances, or even against feints.
This option is being interpreted as inducing enemies to go on the offense. That's just wrong. It's not in the text of the option. It's being inferred via contrast to the first option, but as I went over, "defense" is a bit of a misnomer even in the first option. It shouldn't be extrapolated out this way, this far.
What this option does is make the enemy more aggressive with their resources. That can mean going on the attack, yes, but it also means maneuver and defense responses. The enemy's more likely to commit reserve forces to a flagging front, or in response to the appearance of a new threat, sooner. They're more likely to spend qi on defensive techniques to stop even minor wounds.
You could have a situation where an officer manning a fallback fortification slams the gates shut while many men are still trying to retreat, because he irrationally prioritizes his duty of making sure no enemies pass whatsoever. Conversely, you could have the situation where the officer leaves the gates open too long because he wants to save every man possible, and ends up letting our forces slip through. Both are totally viable outcomes, and it comes down to the perspectives and aspirations of our targets.
It's true one of the most obvious, and probably common, impacts of this tech would be enemies going on the offense and hopefully overextending, but it also just makes them more willing to take chances or expend resources for some kind of return, generally. There's reasons to value this or not, but I think how pigeonholed the thread is on what this option actually does is unfortunate.
[X] I would wield it to encourage glory-seeking, to make them willing to sacrifice what they should not for their dreams.
I dunno, seems funnier. Letting Renxiang go clockwork butcher on opposing forces Ling Qi has disrupted into plucky heroics sounds interesting from a character perspective too. Really feed our villain coding.
