Aranfan
Team Plasma Grunt
I just don't like the idea of binding warp entities. It smacks too close to slavery for me, and its close enough to daemonology that if the witch hunters catch wind of it they'll want the hat back.
Warhammer Fantasy: Divided Loyalties - an Advisor's Quest
- Thread starter Boney
- Start date
- Fantasy Users' Choice!
Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
I just don't like the idea of binding warp entities. It smacks too close to slavery for me, and its close enough to daemonology that if the witch hunters catch wind of it they'll want the hat back.
Mathilde is an excellent combatant, and will have another excellent combatant with her for backup, I'm not all that concerned. It's not as if it's a greater daemon level entity.
Boney mentioned it was possible we might catch more than one depending on how things go, realistically though we only want one, so I don't see this as an issue either way. Even plenty of golds only have one hound we were told, and that's a much more stress tested spell.
This is functionally an argument for never doing it, there will always be competing priorities. It's also been 3 IRL years since we made the deal for the lore.
Last edited:
Sinsystems
Patron Librarian
We will also have the initiative as there is no way that Mathilde would not set this up as an ambush where she stacked the deck in her favor as much as possible.
- Location
- Hiding in the walls.
- Pronouns
- She/Her
I'm fine with Mathilde taking risks, and I expect her to prepare as much as possible for those risks. But for those whose primary motive is "Get stronger before we go fight the Iron Orcs" - which was one of the reasons brought up for pursuing this plan now - I do feel it's worth pointing out that we have much easier options that don't require putting ourselves in one dangerous situation because we're worried about our ability to handle another dangerous situation.
If we only want one at the moment, then some of those concerns aren't as important right now, true. I was very much under the impression we wanted at least a few as our end goal, and wanted to point out that there were potentially some pretty significant barriers to getting there from here, since I strongly suspect that getting several at once is unlikely with this particular apparition (though not impossible).
I personally see it as more of an argument for wrapping up some of the things we have active before we add yet another iron to the fire, particularly one that seems like it has the potential to demand multiple AP and be fairly time sensitive.
- Location
- Earth
I don't think the associations are too compelling, because Boney's been introducing them using alternate names, e.g Bleak Swarm instead of Eyes of Nurgle, or Wisdom's Asp instead of All Knowing Serpent, or indeed Rider in Red instead of Blood Knight. That first one is what we suspect the Ambers to be using for one of their spells, for example.
NavySeel
"I don't know what I'm doing."
- Location
- Places
The Rider in Red is a Canon name.
- Location
- Earth
They're all canon names, yes.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Right, but Rider in Red is the primary name. Blood Knight is an alternate.
I want to do both the Apparition and sword style as soon as possible. Since we can't do the theorized next step of Apparition binding at the same time as the hunting option this is actually the fastest way to complete both ( more turns taking two of the options I really care for at the same time ), assuming we take both a sword action and the next step of Apparition binding next turn.
Last edited:
To be honest I simply don't actually feel the "We can do it later" argument has any persuasive power when it's made in quests. Because there's no guarantees whatsoever we actually can do it later. I think this risk is illustrated pretty strongly when you look at what would be classified as "More urgent" based on this framework, it's a mapping action that we have no immediate use for or any reason to think is time sensitive. If that is the threshold for something being more urgent, then basically anything can be more urgent, and as such the argument that apparitions need to be kicked down the road will just happen again and again.
- Location
- Washington
What SOME OF US suspect the Ambers to be using. Notably the Ambers are the only ones who have any explanation at all what they're doing even if it's completely meaningless to everyone else, I'm inclined to believe that the Ambers are, in fact, dealing with some entity called Corvus the Crowlord when they say they're doing their crow summoning spell on the basis of some entity called Corvus the Crowlord.
It's also the leading theory the Golds have, not just some OC thread theory.
They might be wrong on this, but it would be quite the coincidence and the Ambers have good reason to distance their spells from association with a warp entity.
Last edited:
Sinsystems
Patron Librarian
You know it is funny that with Rite of Way and the future Red Rider spell, plus the shadow steed spell that already exists, we are making Grey Wizards very appealing as attachments to elite Cavalry units.
- Location
- Washington
Yes it's the leading theory the golds have but my point was a not insignificant number of us think the golds are wrong.
- Location
- New Brunswick, NJ
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
You're mistaken about this; the turn currently being voted on is the overwork turn. If it turns out the second stage of the Rider in Red binding is time sensitive enough that we need to do it next turn, it's going to dramatically screw with our schedule by either forcing Branarhune off another turn, by displacing a research action we want to do like the seed with Pan or doing the liminal realm check, or us dropping a Waystone action, all of which I would hate doing.
dinomannitro6
all your gender is belong to us
- Location
- The Land Where The Sunflowers Bloom
This turn is the overwork turn.
(Also if we do a Father turn next as I hope, we won't have room for apparition binding)
edit: oop eshin'd
Last edited:
It would really be best to just get our Branarhune mastery done, and having it ready for next turn. Instead of starting apparitions and then of having two unfinished projects that we will not see any significant benefits from till finished.
[x] Plan Codifying and Swords
[x] Plan Codifying and Swords, Ostland
[x] Plan Codifying and Swords
[x] Plan Codifying and Swords, Ostland
Last edited:
Thanks for the correction , not sure how I messed that up since it's noted right there in the plan.
I guess I got confused while counting the options we are taking and mixed something up.
That makes it a lot riskier to do the apparition at this point, but I have waited so long that I'm not sure if I am willing to vote against it. I guess I'll have a good night's sleep and decide when I'm less confused tomorrow.
Dermonster
The Shittiest Wizard
Don't we have more overwork actions too? We've only ever used the free one except for Rite of Way.
Mopman43
Mountain-Hermit of Nitpeak
- Location
- Vermont
It comes with a pretty significant downside- every single action taken on the following turn will get a -10 penalty to the roll.
- Location
- Hiding in the walls.
- Pronouns
- She/Her
That's not actually my argument. The mapping action probably isn't that important in itself, although I am in the camp that would prefer a minimum of three Waystone actions per turn. My preference is for Codifying and Swords*, even if I feel the need to vote for the standard Windfall variant given the current state of affairs.
My argument is that we currently have a signficant backlog and this does not seem to be a project that we can reliably put on hold once we've started it. Rather than add yet another thing to the pile, this time something that blocks us from clearing up anything else (at least in part) until we get it to a stable point some unspecified number of actions and turns from now, I'd prefer to actually complete some of the stuff we're already doing.
I admit I'm also unenthused by the idea of binding a Red Rider in particular; the Nazgul memes have rather soured me on the prospect. But that's a highly personal objection that's irrelevant to my general concerns about binding any apparition right now.
*Also, on that note, I'm going to toss an approval vote out, because why the heck would I not vote my first choice when I've been reminded I can do that and a tactical vote?
[X] Plan Codifying and Swords
Mopman43
Mountain-Hermit of Nitpeak
- Location
- Vermont
If you want to vote for both, you need to include the votes for both in the same post.
Later posts with votes override earlier posts with votes.
NexusEye
Aspiring God
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Yes but the second one inflicts a -10 for all actions next turn and the third inflicts -20 for two turns, we used the second for Rite of Way because of how important it would be to the Expedition, 99% of the time it isn't worth the penalty.