Book 2 – Page 65

[Kreistor]

I'm not sure the GMTTA are in Portal Park personally. Why?

http://www.erfworld.com/book-2-archive/?px=%2F2011-04-07.jpg

Panel 10. You can clearly see Isaac Newton, a known GMTTA member, and several others, with portals in the background, the direction in which they are walking. Yes, they are most certainly in Portal Park.

[Tachyon]

I'm not sure the GMTTA are in Portal Park personally. Why?

http://www.erfworld.com/book-2-archive/?px=%2F2011-04-07.jpg

Panel 10. You can clearly see Isaac Newton, a known GMTTA member, and several others, with portals in the background, the direction in which they are walking. Yes, they are most certainly in Portal Park.

Oh. So they are. Apologies.

That said, I stick to my interpretation of their methods of attack. It looks like their goal is to surround and incapacitate (can't imagine them going after other casters with lethal intent, not on their home turf).

[Sieggy]

I think it was more that Maggie was worried that Parson might be intercepted or interfered with during his passage, and alerted the GMTTA that their master plan was now underway, and they needed to screen for him. Yes. he was noticed, but went through the trap fast enough that no one who wasn't waiting for him (like Janis, Marie, and of course, Jojo) was able to get off a shot or was capable of doing so (the casters who spotted him didn't appear to be particularly offensive . . .).

I suspect that Jojo is going to get nabbed by TGMTTA as soon as he egresses the tunnel, and there's nothing he can do about it (assuming Sizemore was correct in saying that he can't engage this turn). When they finish pumping him, if Charlie was, indeed, behind Jojo, I think some gloves will be coming off. I wonder how CHarlie is going to react to this, as he's going to have to emerge from the shadows and take more direct actions, which he's loathe to do. He's got some 'splainin' to do . . .

As for the casters who saw Parson, a bit of gentle thinkamancy will no doubt convince them that they were just seeing things or were simply mistaken . . . However, the question is now who if anyone is going to come out of the tunnel with Parson. If he has company, casters who not only are NOT upset that there's a Warlord in da park but seem to be escorting him, THAT'S going to be harder to cover up, unless the GMTTA are able to veil Parson's passage. Which they most likely will be able to do.

However, the repercussions of this ought to be amusing - unless there have been multiclass caster/warlords before, this ought to shake the MK down to its roots. Non-casters CANNOT enter the MK, but Parson has now done so. Twice. Either he's something outside of their experience (which, of course, he is) or there's something seriously wrong with their defenses.

[Kreistor]

I suspect that Jojo is going to get nabbed by TGMTTA as soon as he egresses the tunnel, and there's nothing he can do about it (assuming Sizemore was correct in saying that he can't engage this turn). When they finish pumping him, if Charlie was, indeed, behind Jojo, I think some gloves will be coming off. I wonder how CHarlie is going to react to this, as he's going to have to emerge from the shadows and take more direct actions, which he's loathe to do. He's got some 'splainin' to do . . .

Interesting, I hadn't thought about Jojo. He's running straight into their arms fro arson's direction, so, yeah, they'll be stopping him. I'm not sure how paranoid they'll be about his motives, though, with Parson being banned. It'll take Marie, Janis, or Sizemore telling them about the scroll that will make them realize Jojo's motives were not Parson's capture or destruction, like everyone else. Right now, he's just failed at what everyone else was trying to do, so there's no reason for excessive efforts.

But that leads to another issue. Right now, no one in GK is aware of Charlie's machinations. Ossomer was croaked before they learned Jillian was working with Charlie. No one has yet been captured that could tell them. Charlie hasn't been asking for relevant calculations. No Archons participating. Haggar's motives obscured. Unless it does come from Jojo, GK is going to need to decrypt Slately or Tremmenis to figure it out in Book 2.

[Oberon]

That said, I stick to my interpretation of their methods of attack. It looks like their goal is to surround and incapacitate (can't imagine them going after other casters with lethal intent, not on their home turf).

I would agree. I wonder if there is even any violence in the MK, ever. What few glimpses we've seen have been heavily hippymancy oriented, so that is no doubt contributing to this impression. It's been primarily Sizemore visiting the hippymancy section, all free love, flower power, calm study sessions, and magic mushrooms. Other glimpses have been Sizemore lending (or selling, it wasn't made clear) his considerable talents to needed construction or repair projects. And of course the GMTTA, which are a semi-segregated group which, as it says on the tin, think alike. But I do not recall any spells cast by one caster against another except for Janis' very much non-violent spell just now against Chewie. I don't even recall an argument that grew heated, or anyone storming off with angry words. We're coming to a point where major philosophical differences are going to conflict, so perhaps this will lead to more disputes seen in the MK in the near future.

[junovalkyrie]

* 1.1.10 Laurel of Napster

Could someone please remind me what this was?

[Dr Pepper]

* 1.1.10 Laurel of Napster

Could someone please remind me what this was?

The headpiece worn by Duncon Scone (formerly of Jitterati), Jillian's chief warlord. It allows him to determine the odds of specific one on one matchups. When he tried Jillian vs Wanda, he got a divide by zero error.

[Feyrauth]

How did Charlie know about the promotion? He is not allied with GK.

IIRC, Parson still isn't convinced that GK's Archons are entirely loyal.

Charlie covers all possible outcomes, so that he can never lose. This attempt by Jojo was pathetic. He had no plan to deal with the Summoning conspiracy, Sizemore, Jack, Wanda, or Maggie, any of which could have been present for this run. Further, the plan relied on Parson being a sucker, or carrying no counter-magic equipment.

No, this was a plan by a person of limited resources, relying on secrecy, a wing, and a prayer. Nothing like Charlie at all.

Parson hasn't made it out of the tunnel yet.

[Lamech]

What advantage would an extra caster or casters provide? They still can't cast on Parson until he drops the staff.

Not exactly. The staff doesn't have to grant immunity to spells to cause Jojo to pause. If it blocks 50% of spells, he is still not going to risk his one scroll on a coin flip, if he can trick it out of Parson's hand. While he might risk casting aggressively against a 5% chance of failure, 50% is worrisome, especially if Charlie is not bankrolling this, and it's Jojo's hard earned Rands.

And more casters means more options. Not all spells cause direct damage. A telekinetically thrown rock aimed at Parson would hurt him even if the staff were immunity. But the fact is, they wouldn't know he would have that staff during the planning stage, so they aren't planning for it. They need to plan for the presence of Maggie, Sizemore, Wanda, and Jack, just in case he comes through in force. Assuming they know about when Parson will step through, Jack and Wanda can enter from Spacerock and meet him at the Portal, while Maggie and Sizemore enter with Parson. This plan didn't even account for Sizemore being ready to help Parson, when he was right there to interfere, and that is simply not like Charlie, since Charlie knew something of that plan from eavesdropping on Parson's communication of the plan to Wanda.

First its very possible they knew about the staff. It was likely bought, or made by GK. If it was bought it would be really easy to know about the staff. If it was made GK's caster types have been painfully obvious for a while. Two if whoever was planning this did know about the plan via evesdropping they would know the strength that Parson was coming from. They would have know if Parson said "I will come through the MK", or if he said "Me and the other casters will come through the MK, meet me there."

They need to banish him. They must get to cast on him. Maybe they could croak him (summons, collapses ect.) but that won't stop the GMtTA from taking the body to Wanda and having Parson decrypted.

Again with this god-like version of the GMTTA. Thinkamancers are 1 of 23 schools, and that means they can't be assured of getting the corpse. No, I don't agree that a GMTTA link-up to overwhelm everyone in MK to get it makes even a single ounce of sense, when they can just create the Summon spell and get someone else to try again, without setting the MK on fire.

So now your arguing that Parson is easily replaceable? Well that makes removing Parson only part of the objective then. For this plan to work they also need to kill off the conspiracy or convince them to not resummon a Perfect Warlord. I would argue that attempting killing off the conspiracy would be suicidal. So that means that this plan must convince them that the SPW spell was inherently flawed. I don't think forcibly killing/banishing Parson would do that; they would simply replace him, and make sure the new warlord stays out of the MK.
Maybe they could be convinced if Parson decided to go home willingly; they could decide that they got abandoned and the perfect warlord really doesn't care about them and won't help them. Of course this would mean that attacking Parson is pointless.

And if someone warned a caster who wants to keep Parson out of the MK, why wouldn't the caster tell all the other casters? And why wouldn't the caster wall Parson off? And why wouldn't the caster get all battle ready outside the portal with weapon drawn waiting for Parson?

I have no idea, because you've made another Straw Man.

Okay your complaining about straw-men a lot so I'm going to try to lay out your argument.
Premise 1) Charlie does not do unreliable things.
Premise 2) It would be more effective for multiple casters to attack Parson
Premise 3) The casters of the MK have banned Parson, do not want him around and will use force against him. Charlie could therefore get any of these casters to attack Parson.
Conclusion) Therefore Charlie would have used multiple casters against Parson.
So is that right?

I would argue that the first part of Premise 3 isn't necessarily correct. Its possible for one to be some place they are not "supposed" to be, get a whole lot of people very angry at you, have your friends tell you to move, and not be officially banned or have violence result of you stay. For example in a public field sitting down in the middle of someone elses soccer game; your friends would tell you to move, the people playing soccer would be mad at you, but they wouldn't use violence.

Two, even if it is the case the casters of the MK have decided to ban Parson they probably have all agreed to it as a group, since I think it would be generally frowned upon to kill casters and Parson is one as far as most people in the MK know. And if it is an agreed upon response, the only one that would be agreed to by the conspiracy is a non-lethal one. (Lethal includes anything that might as well be a lethal response from GK's point of view). Hence the casters will not kill Parson even if he is banned.

And finally even if they do want to ban Parson and they will use lethal force, I would argue that they any caster who heard about Parson's return would do so effectively. They will get the help of other casters, they will make sure they are screened by summoned/created units, they would block the portal, they would have weapons ready, ect. At the very least the response will be at least as great as when Parson first entered the MK; a bunch of casters readied weapons before fighting began. They will not simultaneously have a stronger and weaker response. But any of these things would make it instantly obvious to Sizemore, and several other conspiracy casters that Portal Park is not safe for Parson, and therefore Parson would have gotten a no-go, and the plan would have failed. Parson would have sat safely in GK.

[Kreistor]

First its very possible they knew about the staff.

KNowing the staff exists might be easy enough. It could have been captured in many combats, or left behind when Bea killed herself. But knowing Parson will take that magic item instead of another is a different matter.

So now your arguing that Parson is easily replaceable? Well that makes removing Parson only part of the objective then. For this plan to work they also need to kill off the conspiracy or convince them to not resummon a Perfect Warlord.

Easy? Hardly. The general plan requires a set of circumstances that will not be particularly common... a less-than-intelligent non-Royal attuned Ruler, a defense desperate enough to require a non-standard Chief Warlord, Predictamancy that indicates a union of Arkentools, etc. There may be other combinations of events that can lead to this, but none of them will be particularly common.

But I'm confused. Who do you think is trying to stop the entire Conspiracy? The Free Casters will fear only Parson, not the idea behind Parson. If they feared the Conspiracy, they would have acted against it long ago.

I have no idea, because you've made another Straw Man.

Okay your complaining about straw-men a lot so I'm going to try to lay out your argument.

Telling me what I am saying inherently risks creating a Straw Man, if you're not aware. The correct method of going about this is to either quote my previous statements, or to ask me, "This is what I think you were saying." By synopsyzing me, you're putting words in my mouth that may have never been intended.

Premise 1) Charlie does not do unreliable things.

According to Charlie, that's correct.

http://www.erfworld.com/book-1-archive/?px=%2F130.jpg

"When you're working for Charlescomm, you'll learn. We prefer to play games that don't even contain a losing outcome."

Not so much a premise as a philosophy.

Premise 2) It would be more effective for multiple casters to attack Parson

Straw Man. I can skin a cat by firing a cannon into it's maw, or I can convince it to claw it's own skin off by deluding it into thinking it's being eaten by isects from the outside in.

Yes, attacking Parson directly might achieve the goal. But using a Master Class Dirtamancer to close the tunnel contains him without violence, and Sizemore won't have the power to overcome a Master. So, no, you're incorrect in that your assumption is that you can predict how Charlie will act. Charlie has 23 classes to draw on, and many of those are undefined, and thus could fill any role Rob can conceive that will make Charlie appear cunning.

Premise 3) The casters of the MK have banned Parson, do not want him around and will use force against him. Charlie could therefore get any of these casters to attack Parson.

Yes, that one at least, is accurate.

Conclusion) Therefore Charlie would have used multiple casters against Parson.

Incorrect. Charlie would have enacted a plan that ensured success. That might have included one caster, or it might have included two dozen. What he wouldn't rely on is a single flaeked out Carnymancer with unknown, but potentially lethal, motivations, and relied on him to trick Parson, a known experienced Warlord that uses verbal trickery against his opponents. (Case on point: Parson trash talking Ansom.)

So is that right?

Less than more.

I would argue that the first part of Premise 3 isn't necessarily correct. Its possible

I do not deal in "possible." I deal in "plausible." To be plausible, there must be more than speculation: it must have case example from the strip itself. Quantum Mechanics tells us that there is a finite probability that a Pink Elephant will appear in my room, play God Save The Queen on a trombone, and then disappear, but I'm not going to move my coffee table because it would crush it should it happen.

Two, even if it is the case the casters of the MK have decided to ban Parson they probably have all agreed to it as a group, since I think it would be generally frowned upon to kill casters and Parson is one as far as most people in the MK know.

I have been saying that from the start, so I don't know why you think that's such a great leap of logic. A Dollamancer specializing in Battle Bears has few options of how to directly kill Parson, for instance.

And finally even if they do want to ban Parson and they will use lethal force, I would argue that they any caster who heard about Parson's return would do so effectively. They will get the help of other casters, they will make sure they are screened by summoned/created units, they would block the portal, they would have weapons ready, ect.

All Straw Man. You are fundamentally restricting other people to your limited ability to predict their actions. We see only two surprised casters that chose to shout instead of cast, but we cannot even know if those two have any way to directly influence Parson through damage, immobilization, summoning, etc. All casters do not have all spells, and some are extremely restricted (like Sizemore, but unlike Wanda), so no conclusion can be drawn about what is actually going on outside the tunnel. Everything you posit might actually be going on, countered by the GMTTA, but it is all off panel at this point. We see only Parson and his group.

At the very least the response will be at least as great as when Parson first entered the MK

In D&D 3.0-3.5, there's this thing called the Surprise Round. If you surprise the enemy, you get a free action while he stands there gawking. Further, if you also win initiative, you also get first action, so you can get 1.5 free rounds before the enemy moves.

Surprised enemies are not evidence of their intended behavior. They first have to react to the shock of the unexpected, even if it was fully expected.

[Lamech]

Easy? Hardly. The general plan requires a set of circumstances that will not be particularly common... a less-than-intelligent non-Royal attuned Ruler, a defense desperate enough to require a non-standard Chief Warlord, Predictamancy that indicates a union of Arkentools, etc. There may be other combinations of events that can lead to this, but none of them will be particularly common.

But I'm confused. Who do you think is trying to stop the entire Conspiracy? The Free Casters will fear only Parson, not the idea behind Parson. If they feared the Conspiracy, they would have acted against it long ago.

If you want to get rid of the perfect warlord, you not only have to remove Parson you need to keep him from being replaced. If the conspiracy can simply do so again the conspiracy itself needs to be stopped somehow. So just removing Parson is pointless. And I don't see why the conspiracy would have any trouble manipulating Stanley in to accepting another SPW. They could offer it as a refund for the insane fail that happened the first time.
Or are you arguing that the conspiracy can't replace Parson? Or maybe arguing that it would be very difficult to replace Parson? If either of those things are the case the GMtTA might very well simply use links to seize Parson's body if he is croaked.

I have no idea, because you've made another Straw Man.

Okay your complaining about straw-men a lot so I'm going to try to lay out your argument.

Telling me what I am saying inherently risks creating a Straw Man, if you're not aware. The correct method of going about this is to either quote my previous statements, or to ask me, "This is what I think you were saying." By synopsyzing me, you're putting words in my mouth that may have never been intended.


Telling me what I am saying inherently risks creating a Straw Man, if you're not aware. The correct method of going about this is to either quote my previous statements, or to ask me, "This is what I think you were saying." By synopsyzing me, you're putting words in my mouth that may have never been intended.

Your absolutely right that I should have put something like "So is that right? " after my attempt to summarize your points. ...

Premise 2) It would be more effective for multiple casters to attack Parson

Straw Man. I can skin a cat by firing a cannon into it's maw, or I can convince it to claw it's own skin off by deluding it into thinking it's being eaten by isects from the outside in.

Yes, attacking Parson directly might achieve the goal. But using a Master Class Dirtamancer to close the tunnel contains him without violence, and Sizemore won't have the power to overcome a Master. So, no, you're incorrect in that your assumption is that you can predict how Charlie will act. Charlie has 23 classes to draw on, and many of those are undefined, and thus could fill any role Rob can conceive that will make Charlie appear cunning.

Not how that works. Charlie doesn't get to have any power to draw upon to make him look cunning. He only has the powers that exist, among casters that he can hire. Second show that there actually is a master-class dirtamancer running around for Charlie to hire. Sizemore said they are a rare class of casters. Things that are undefined become defined to fit the plot. So if Rob wants Charlie to fail, Charlie won't get cool previously unknown powers.

Conclusion) Therefore Charlie would have used multiple casters against Parson.

Incorrect. Charlie would have enacted a plan that ensured success. That might have included one caster, or it might have included two dozen. What he wouldn't rely on is a single flaeked out Carnymancer with unknown, but potentially lethal, motivations, and relied on him to trick Parson, a known experienced Warlord that uses verbal trickery against his opponents. (Case on point: Parson trash talking Ansom.)

Charlie uses plans that fail. A lot. For example his plan to capture Parson and the bracer? Fail. What about his plan to croak Wanda via Kingworld? Fail. How about his plan to croak Ansom. That's a fail. His plan to get Jillian to attack Wanda's airforce? Fail. I also note he used a similarly unreliable person, Jillian, as a keystone of his Kingworld plot. It seems to me like Charlie's schemes do an awful lot of failing with unreliable key actors.

So what you are saying is that Charlie would have used a plan that would work? So come up with a better plan. Since the plot calls for Parson to win apparently we can assume undefined things will work out in the worst plausible way possible for Charlie.

I would argue that the first part of Premise 3 isn't necessarily correct. Its possible

I do not deal in "possible." I deal in "plausible." To be plausible, there must be more than speculation: it must have case example from the strip itself. Quantum Mechanics tells us that there is a finite probability that a Pink Elephant will appear in my room, play God Save The Queen on a trombone, and then disappear, but I'm not going to move my coffee table because it would crush it should it happen.

... There are no case examples of kissing in the strip itself. Therefore kissing is implausible. Ditto for non-twolls with fabrication. Or peaceful trade between sides. (MK isn't a side.)

Two, even if it is the case the casters of the MK have decided to ban Parson they probably have all agreed to it as a group, since I think it would be generally frowned upon to kill casters and Parson is one as far as most people in the MK know.

I have been saying that from the start, so I don't know why you think that's such a great leap of logic. A Dollamancer specializing in Battle Bears has few options of how to directly kill Parson, for instance.

And this does nothing to counter the point that any such agreement would need to be non-lethal due to the conspiracy. (And once again lethal includes anything that might as well be lethal to GK or the conspiracy.)

And finally even if they do want to ban Parson and they will use lethal force, I would argue that they any caster who heard about Parson's return would do so effectively. They will get the help of other casters, they will make sure they are screened by summoned/created units, they would block the portal, they would have weapons ready, ect.

All Straw Man. You are fundamentally restricting other people to your limited ability to predict their actions. We see only two surprised casters that chose to shout instead of cast, but we cannot even know if those two have any way to directly influence Parson through damage, immobilization, summoning, etc. All casters do not have all spells, and some are extremely restricted (like Sizemore, but unlike Wanda), so no conclusion can be drawn about what is actually going on outside the tunnel. Everything you posit might actually be going on, countered by the GMTTA, but it is all off panel at this point. We see only Parson and his group.

First how in the hell is that a straw man. I'm am not claiming "Kreistor said the MK caster would do A,B, and C." I'm claiming that "If contacted and warned of Parson any MK caster who wanted him kept out of the MK would do X, Y, and Z." A straw man is I claim someone else's argument is "A" and then tear down "A".
Also I am not positing that any of those things are going on off-panel right now. I was positing that if the MK casters had an agreement to stop Parson and it involved lethal force, then if warned of Parson's approach they would do those things. (Create units, ready weapons, warn other ect.) And that if they did these things Sizemore or conspiracy casters would see whats going on, and warn Parson. And no I don't need to show that this is needed. YOU are the one claiming that Charlie can use them. YOU need to show that instead of keeping Parson out of the MK they will fail to do so when it would be trivially easy for them to stop Parson. They would simply need to say "Sizemore we will kill Parson if he tries to take the Jetstone portal."

At the very least the response will be at least as great as when Parson first entered the MK

In D&D 3.0-3.5, there's this thing called the Surprise Round. If you surprise the enemy, you get a free action while he stands there gawking. Further, if you also win initiative, you also get first action, so you can get 1.5 free rounds before the enemy moves.

Surprised enemies are not evidence of their intended behavior. They first have to react to the shock of the unexpected, even if it was fully expected.

When we saw Parson explaining to the casters the first time he entered the MK they were most definitely NOT surprised. They had there weapons at the ready, and had apparently asked questions Parson was answering. Again if the casters were planning on a lethal response to Parson next time, if they were warned of Parson's approach they would react, at least as strongly as they did last time, and have weapons ready. If they had done this Sizemore would have warned Parson and he would have remained safe.

[Tachyon]

That said, I stick to my interpretation of their methods of attack. It looks like their goal is to surround and incapacitate (can't imagine them going after other casters with lethal intent, not on their home turf).

I would agree. I wonder if there is even any violence in the MK, ever. What few glimpses we've seen have been heavily hippymancy oriented, so that is no doubt contributing to this impression. It's been primarily Sizemore visiting the hippymancy section, all free love, flower power, calm study sessions, and magic mushrooms. Other glimpses have been Sizemore lending (or selling, it wasn't made clear) his considerable talents to needed construction or repair projects. And of course the GMTTA, which are a semi-segregated group which, as it says on the tin, think alike. But I do not recall any spells cast by one caster against another except for Janis' very much non-violent spell just now against Chewie. I don't even recall an argument that grew heated, or anyone storming off with angry words. We're coming to a point where major philosophical differences are going to conflict, so perhaps this will lead to more disputes seen in the MK in the near future.

I wouldn't doubt there have been heated disputes in the MK in the past, but violence is probably new (or, hasn't happened in a very, very long time - but I think we'd have heard about that by now; it would have been a foreshadowing goldmine). It probably will happen very soon, regardless.

Recall Parson's discussions with Sizemore about the MK. Some casters go there to argue, but even so, we never saw anyone say there was any violence there, and casters from every side as well as neutral sides frequent the place.

In the real world, from which Erfworld is not that far removed psychologically, violence has a tendency to lead to disputes that threaten neutrality in officially-declared neutral places (see: any public protest someone's ever thrown a punch); because of this, violent offenders in neutral places (see: a bar or pub) have a tendency to get thrown out before the violence can escalate to that level. If there is any violence there, they likely have bouncers who are willing and able to forcibly remove violent offenders, and both Hippiemancers (Janis) and Thinkamancers seem highly qualified in defusing conflicts (and at this point I think I probably don't even need to restate their qualifications).

Wanda very specifically avoids visiting the MK - probably because she is carrying and attuned to one of the implements that would provoke an all-out philosophical conflict, and she has friends (or at least acquaintances) within the MK (Marie); she would likely be subject to tactics akin to what Jojo tried to pull just now, especially after the fall of Unaroyal at her hands, but simply because she is so high-profile in such a major conflict. Not to mention, if her side needed any scrolls from outside their available disciplines, someone would still have to go there and pay the (now very high) price to purchase them (likely Sizemore or Maggie). Casters being worried about violence in the MK leads me to believe it is at least a remotely valid concern (and that is what the GMTTA are there for at present).

More food for thought: Charlie would be most likely to form contracts with free casters in the MK via a Thinkagram (they'd have to try to get his attention first, or have their existence made known by some other means, a rule that has been implied about Thinkamancy numerous times since the end of Book 1) or a neutral negotiator from a side unrelated to any conflict he is presently involved in, as he does not go to the MK himself (too risky with other Thinkamancers there, and he also has the same reasons to stay away that Wanda does, and Archons confirm he never leaves his tower), and controls no units who can (even if he can veil his Archons, any number of casters possess abilities that make them easy to spot).

Here, Charlie has already found out not only about Jillian, but the existence of Faq... somehow: http://www.erfworld.com/summer-update-2 ... aurelB.jpg

Using this page, we can guess at how he knew.

"Questions about how I know things are some of the most problematic for me in terms of providing an answer. I'm in a complex position, in which I have access to the proprietary information of many clients, and constraints both ethical and contractual governing the release of--"

And, he has the Arkendish. The call to Jillian came out of nowhere, and they'd never spoken before. Charlie technically did have the opportunity to know of Faq beforehand, as Ansom's plan was to have Charlie beak alliance and then ally with Transylvito to accompany Jillian to stop Stanley from reaching Faq, and since they didn't, that left Charlie's Archons in the area free to observe the battle from a distance, so they probably did. We can safely assume there was no need for Charlie to use the Arkendish to randomly seek out Jillian's mind just to contact her, since he had opportunity to know of her beforehand. Stack that with the fact that we don't know if Charlie or a given Thinkamancer can even do that, at that distance, and it's pretty probable that's how he knows. The implied rule of Thinkamancy (that a Thinkamancer cannot just randomly seek out a mind they are not in the presence of and has to have met them beforehand or know of them somehow) still stands, despite the fact that the general notion of telepathy on which Thinkamancy is based does not necessarily have such restrictions. And regardless of the existence of any such rule, if a thing is out of sight, then even to a Thinkamancer it is probably out of mind.

This is even more evidence that Charlie probably does not have Jojo under contract, unless Jojo contracted him out of desperation for revenge (Jojo himself is not a major player, he's a caster Charlie likely didn't have dealings with directly at all). We can also, because of this, surmise that Vanna talked to Charlie of her own free will (Charlie, then, acceded to what we can presume was her request to be hired or to help her find work in the conflict - which actually reveals her motives for participating once again, and gives rise to speculation that Vanna previously knew Charlie from having encountered him before in some capacity, which is entirely possible given that the whole of Erfworld and the sides in the original RCC and outside of it including Charlie's existed prior to Stanley's reign).

Since we're also talking about Jojo: On one side, you've got Jojo acting on his own. This doesn't make a whole lot of sense; you don't go out of your way to potentially get yourself croaked against unknown odds when you can pay someone else to do it, and in Jojo's case all that would take is to sign a contract with another side in the conflict, then sit back and watch them do it. On the other hand, he talks crazy and acts crazy; he probably is crazy, regardless of whether anybody hired him.

Very possibly he was just acting on his own; although I know I mentioned Jojo's discipline contains many of the Stagemancy elements necessary for ninja-style assassinations, in the day of the hippie, there were also those who didn't belong to the mainstream culture or the hippie subculture, but were still free thinkers who earnestly believed in ending war - among the demonstrators, not all of them were nonviolent, and in retrospect, Jojo and Janis' interaction looks very much like an act of violent protest (Jojo) against a military authority (Parson) being quelled by a hippie's own nonviolent protest (Janis). Which speaks to the scene dramatically existing only to further the plot, while showing off Janis and Jojo's disciplines (which drama demanded, since both were foreshadowed previously).

Taking the above analogy for the scene into account, then if Carnymancy involves theatrics, deception, and rigging the odds (and indeed it seems to), it also contains the necessary elements for politics - in which case we also have a humorous role reversal here: Janis plays the bodyguard for the military figurehead, Jojo plays the agitated layman. Given this and Jojo's approach, we still have to assume Jojo has inside information on Parson's nature. If not by Charlie's doing, then this is mysterious, and utterly confounding.

I again offer Don King ordering the hit as a solution.

Doombats typically had a range of twenty hexes or so for scouting, but a Thinkamancer extended that range indefinitely. He kept thirty-six of his personal bats in various interesting locales, including four in and around the Jetstone fight. For the juice cost of a Thinkagram, Bunny could link him to one of their views, just like he was in the area himself.

It helped to get a firsthand view, instead of only relying on what his Warlords told him. He had seen a lot of battles. He'd seen more stuff than anybody probably suspected.

Don King has more than enough in the way of both means and motivation (he's very heavily invested in keeping Jetstone alive, he's got spies everywhere, he's low on alternatives), not to mention a stylistic predilection to mafia-style tactics. Indeed, this isn't the first time he's been party to a scheme to "head someone off at the pass". Just as Ansom falling at the final battle for GK dissolved the first RCC (well, that he was the figurehead leading the entire coalition in that fight points to this), the RCC2 would likely dissolve if the source of the coalition, Jetstone, was taken out - and that is what this entire conflict is now about (assuming the Toolism debate isn't enough to sustain it without its centre of leadership). Don King, for the sake of his own side's survival, can't afford to let Jetstone get wiped out.

[Kreistor]

If you want to get rid of the perfect warlord, you not only have to remove Parson you need to keep him from being replaced.

There's the problem. You're confusing what the Free Casters fear. They fear a Warlord that can enter the MK and force them to join a Side (or perhaps kill a Caster from an Opposing Side), not the Perfect Warlord concept. While they may wish to kill Parson (or merely ensure he stays out of the MK), they don't necessarily fear a replacement that may not be able to enter at all (especially when testing the theory risks one's life).

If the conspiracy can simply do so again the conspiracy itself needs to be stopped somehow. So just removing Parson is pointless.

That's your Straw Man. I never said that they must want Parson dead. My options included capturing him and transferring him to Charlie, a known non-aggressive mercenary side with no Armies to lead, just Archons that Parson cannot travel with easily.

Or are you arguing that the conspiracy can't replace Parson?

I most certainly said the opposite.

Straw Man. I can skin a cat by firing a cannon into it's maw, or I can convince it to claw it's own skin off by deluding it into thinking it's being eaten by isects from the outside in.

Yes, attacking Parson directly might achieve the goal. But using a Master Class Dirtamancer to close the tunnel contains him without violence, and Sizemore won't have the power to overcome a Master. So, no, you're incorrect in that your assumption is that you can predict how Charlie will act. Charlie has 23 classes to draw on, and many of those are undefined, and thus could fill any role Rob can conceive that will make Charlie appear cunning.

Not how that works. Charlie doesn't get to have any power to draw upon to make him look cunning.

I said Rob makes Charlie appear Cunning. There is no being named "Charlie". He is, at best, an aspect of Rob's personality, since Rob Balder makes all decisions of the character. Charlie is, then, inherently limited by Rob's imagination, and any previous abilities or restrictions Rob has previously given him.

Authors define as little as possible. Rob talks about that in the Retconjuration message. Defining things restricts future possibilities, so you want to define as little as possible. That is why great swaths of Magic Schools have at best a general description of capacity. They have names, but no specifics on limitations. While it remains undefined, Rob can define it as the plot requires later. Any Dungeon Master (such as myself) quickly learns that.

Maybe you're used to Dungeon Masters that run modules, instead of creating their own worlds. In those cases, everything is defined for the GM, tehre is little invention, and since the writer and editors have already reviewed it for consistency, the DM can run it without much concern. The next module will have nothing to do with the current, so there's no reason to worry about defining things.

Second show that there actually is a master-class dirtamancer running around for Charlie to hire.

Another Straw Man. The Master Class Dirtamancer was only an example that indicated a broad array of solutions to the problem, beyond murdering Parson outright.

Charlie uses plans that fail. A lot.

See Parson's rant about plans and the Perfect Warlord in Book 1. Plans do fail. That doesn't indicate Charlie doesn't fail, nor that he doesn't do his best to ensure success.

For example his plan to capture Parson and the bracer? Fail.

Fail because of a Dirtamancy trap that stunned every Ruler involved in the RCC. You're expecting Charlie to foresee a tactic that no other Ruler foresaw.

What about his plan to croak Wanda via Kingworld? Fail.

He expected Jillian to croak Wanda? Someone he knows she loves? Who he also knows loves Ansom. (That's all in the conversation after she leaves, before Charlie talks to Tremmenis.) Don't think so.

Fair point: he didn't cover the base where she ignores Wanda and captures or kills Ansom, which puts Parson in the CW job. Charlie's problem was that he had no one to work with in this case, since all Sides were ignoring him.

But the plan did not

How about his plan to croak Ansom. That's a fail.

No, Ansom is removed from the field and no longer influencing the battle. That plan did succeed in having the desired effect, though not using the expected vector (Jillian instead of Sammy).

I also note he used a similarly unreliable person, Jillian, as a keystone of his Kingworld plot.

As previously mentioned, no one else would even talk to him, so he had no choice. But he did succeed in half of the plan: Ansom is out of the picture, and GK ground forces utterly annihilated, all at no cost to Jetstone. he is back in the good books with the Royal Sides, and back in the game, if not entirely trusted. Only half of the plan failed, and even that might have succeeded had Parson not been put in command. Remember that Parson recommended someone in Wanda's group, not himself. It was Maggie that forced his ascension.

So what you are saying is that Charlie would have used a plan that would work? So come up with a better plan.

Obviously, I don't have to. Plans fail, for even the best prepared arlords, as Parson clearly states. Charlie does not need to have a 100% success rate in order to be fastidious about achieving his goal of not losing.

I do not deal in "possible." I deal in "plausible." To be plausible, there must be more than speculation: it must have case example from the strip itself. Quantum Mechanics tells us that there is a finite probability that a Pink Elephant will appear in my room, play God Save The Queen on a trombone, and then disappear, but I'm not going to move my coffee table because it would crush it should it happen.

... There are no case examples of kissing in the strip itself. Therefore kissing is implausible. Ditto for non-twolls with fabrication. Or peaceful trade between sides. (MK isn't a side.)

No peaceful trade? Review Slately attempting to get a loan from Don King. No kissing? Review Parson's discussion about sex with Maggie. Fabrication is mentioned a Special, not a unique ability of twolls.

But I understand what you're trying to say. You're trying to limit me to the specifics of a single sentence, by taking it out of context and trying to make it stand alone. Sorry, but I'm not a Bible you can quote and expect that I live solely by a single verse.

It comes down to this: it is impossible to disprove a negative. Inside the context of the comic, something that does not exist in Erfworld will never be mentioned inside the comic to not exist, because they don't know it could exist. Consequently, we can list a thousand things that might explain something that will never be disproven, because they don't exist as a concept in the minds of Erfworlders. By your expectation, Rob would have to spend months of comics listing everything that doesn't exist, but that would cover a small fraction of the nearly infinite possible, yet implausible, alternatives.

That means that if you continue trying to find alternatives that have no foundation in the comic, I'm just going to wave, "Seeya," because I simply have no time or interest in dealing with the infinite. I know you can find possibilities. Considering your previous limitations, I rather expect I can find a lot more than you. I reject all of them, no matter how reasonable you think they may be, untilt hey have a foundation in the comic.

I have been saying that from the start, so I don't know why you think that's such a great leap of logic. A Dollamancer specializing in Battle Bears has few options of how to directly kill Parson, for instance.

And this does nothing to counter the point that any such agreement would need to be non-lethal due to the conspiracy. (And once again lethal includes anything that might as well be lethal to GK or the conspiracy.)

Who said it was supposed to? Perhaps such an agreement exists. Perhaps it doesn't. We should find out fairly soon, so there's absolutely no reason to waste ink on this detail. I'm not attacking that pet theory, because there's no evidence for or against it in the comic.

And finally even if they do want to ban Parson and they will use lethal force, I would argue that they any caster who heard about Parson's return would do so effectively. They will get the help of other casters, they will make sure they are screened by summoned/created units, they would block the portal, they would have weapons ready, ect.

[snipped Straw Man accusation]

First how in the hell is that a straw man. I'm am not claiming "Kreistor said the MK caster would do A,B, and C." I'm claiming that "If contacted and warned of Parson any MK caster who wanted him kept out of the MK would do X, Y, and Z." A straw man is I claim someone else's argument is "A" and then tear down "A".

A Straw Man is a case you present that you expect the opponent to limit his defense to. I am not going to defend your concept of how such an attack on Parson would occur. I could present half-a-dozen completely dissimilar, and still not touch the thousands of possibilities.

When we saw Parson explaining to the casters the first time he entered the MK they were most definitely NOT surprised.

You seriously need to re-read that page. It is blatantly obvious that we're seeing into an incident well after it has been going on for some time, since I'm pretty certain Casters in Portal Park don't stand around evenly spaced around every portal constantly, which strongly suggests that they have had time to gather 8 casters and array against him, a GMTTA (Spock), and Janis. Further, Parson answers a question that was asked by someone before the comic starts, "Look I don't know why i didn't disband, okay?" He wouldn't phrase it that way if no one hadn't asked, "Why didn't you disband, Warlord?" So we can't tell how startled they were, since we never see the moment Parson stepped into MK.

[Lamech]

There's the problem. You're confusing what the Free Casters fear. They fear a Warlord that can enter the MK and force them to join a Side (or perhaps kill a Caster from an Opposing Side), not the Perfect Warlord concept. While they may wish to kill Parson (or merely ensure he stays out of the MK), they don't necessarily fear a replacement that may not be able to enter at all (especially when testing the theory risks one's life).

... But that wasn't what I was talking about there. The MK casters might dislike Parson specifically. But everyone else simply cares about getting rid of the perfect warlord. A new perfect warlord can serve just as well. So when talking about Charlie its getting rid of the perfect warlord NOT Parson. And for Charlie to do that he needs to stop another from being summoned.

That's your Straw Man. I never said that they must want Parson dead. My options included capturing him and transferring him to Charlie, a known non-aggressive mercenary side with no Armies to lead, just Archons that Parson cannot travel with easily.

That still does jack-squat if the conspiracy can simply recast SPW. Parson gets resummoned, and goes back to work.

Straw Man. I can skin a cat by firing a cannon into it's maw, or I can convince it to claw it's own skin off by deluding it into thinking it's being eaten by isects from the outside in.

Yes, attacking Parson directly might achieve the goal. But using a Master Class Dirtamancer to close the tunnel contains him without violence, and Sizemore won't have the power to overcome a Master. So, no, you're incorrect in that your assumption is that you can predict how Charlie will act. Charlie has 23 classes to draw on, and many of those are undefined, and thus could fill any role Rob can conceive that will make Charlie appear cunning.

Not how that works. Charlie doesn't get to have any power to draw upon to make him look cunning.

I said Rob makes Charlie appear Cunning. There is no being named "Charlie". He is, at best, an aspect of Rob's personality, since Rob Balder makes all decisions of the character. Charlie is, then, inherently limited by Rob's imagination, and any previous abilities or restrictions Rob has previously given him.

Authors define as little as possible. Rob talks about that in the Retconjuration message. Defining things restricts future possibilities, so you want to define as little as possible. That is why great swaths of Magic Schools have at best a general description of capacity. They have names, but no specifics on limitations. While it remains undefined, Rob can define it as the plot requires later. Any Dungeon Master (such as myself) quickly learns that.

... What? Charlie doesn't have any power he needs. Charlie gets the powers that make a good story. If the story calls for Charlie NOT having the resources to pull something off, Charlie won't get those resources.

Second show that there actually is a master-class dirtamancer running around for Charlie to hire.

Another Straw Man. The Master Class Dirtamancer was only an example that indicated a broad array of solutions to the problem, beyond murdering Parson outright.

... So what are some examples of these options that most definitely ARE viable for Charlie to use. NOT things that might be viable, since Rob can simply decide they aren't. Also I have said a couple times anything that might as well be considered lethal by GK or the conspiracy, (such as trapping him forever, or having him work for Charliescomm) counts as lethal. If Parson is unable to continue to work for GK he is as good as dead. And of course anything less than that fails to help Charlie or anyone else outside of the MK in anyway shape or form. So unless the dirtamancer traps Parson forever and somehow stops his thinkamancy communications, then it would be as far as anyone cares (except for Parson) lethal.

Charlie uses plans that fail. A lot.

See Parson's rant about plans and the Perfect Warlord in Book 1. Plans do fail. That doesn't indicate Charlie doesn't fail, nor that he doesn't do his best to ensure success.

This was your claim about what Charlie would have done.

Charlie would have enacted a plan that ensured success.

And its completely false. So what do you think Charlie would have done again?

No, Ansom is removed from the field and no longer influencing the battle. That plan did succeed in having the desired effect, though not using the expected vector (Jillian instead of Sammy).

This seems to pretty heavily imply that he wanted Ansom dead.

I also note he used a similarly unreliable person, Jillian, as a keystone of his Kingworld plot.

As previously mentioned, no one else would even talk to him, so he had no choice. But he did succeed in half of the plan: Ansom is out of the picture, and GK ground forces utterly annihilated, all at no cost to Jetstone. he is back in the good books with the Royal Sides, and back in the game, if not entirely trusted. Only half of the plan failed, and even that might have succeeded had Parson not been put in command. Remember that Parson recommended someone in Wanda's group, not himself. It was Maggie that forced his ascension.

He is back in good standing with... Jetstone and Translovito, and in even worse with Haggar. Of course, Jetstone is broke, and Translovito is about to be broke as well. And both are about to fall shortly. And as I have been arguing for quite a while, the MK casters would not have helped with a plan to take Parson

So what you are saying is that Charlie would have used a plan that would work? So come up with a better plan.

Obviously, I don't have to. Plans fail, for even the best prepared arlords, as Parson clearly states. Charlie does not need to have a 100% success rate in order to be fastidious about achieving his goal of not losing.

Your saying that Charlie would have used a better plan than what Jojo did, right?

No peaceful trade? Review Slately attempting to get a loan from Don King. No kissing? Review Parson's discussion about sex with Maggie. Fabrication is mentioned a Special, not a unique ability of twolls.

Kissing is not sex, loans are not really trade, and I'm pretty sure foolamancy is a unique special of foolamancers, so just because something is called a special doesn't mean it isn't unique.

It comes down to this: it is impossible to disprove a negative.

Its impossible to prove anything? Your seriously claiming that? And yes that is exactly what you are claiming. For example take the negative "not A" to disprove "not A" I would have to prove "A". Therefore if a negative can not be disproved "A" can not be proved. Also a negative is the same as a positive. Let "B" be "not A". When you claim something is false you claim the converse is true. And if you disprove something you prove the converse. So is one of your claims going to be "proof" is impossible?

Inside the context of the comic, something that does not exist in Erfworld will never be mentioned inside the comic to not exist, because they don't know it could exist. Consequently, we can list a thousand things that might explain something that will never be disproven, because they don't exist as a concept in the minds of Erfworlders. By your expectation, Rob would have to spend months of comics listing everything that doesn't exist, but that would cover a small fraction of the nearly infinite possible, yet implausible, alternatives.

The point is that something is not implausible simply because it hasn't been mentioned. Yes, it makes things like showing "X did not do Y" really hard to do unless Rob shows Z was the one that actually did Y.

That means that if you continue trying to find alternatives that have no foundation in the comic, I'm just going to wave, "Seeya," because I simply have no time or interest in dealing with the infinite. I know you can find possibilities. Considering your previous limitations, I rather expect I can find a lot more than you. I reject all of them, no matter how reasonable you think they may be, untilt hey have a foundation in the comic.

Define "foundation". And make it so I can't exclude things like kissing. Do remember that if you want to make a claim like "Charlie could have done Y" you need to show that he does have the capability. Which will be really hard unless he actually did Y once.

And this does nothing to counter the point that any such agreement would need to be non-lethal due to the conspiracy. (And once again lethal includes anything that might as well be lethal to GK or the conspiracy.)

Who said it was supposed to? Perhaps such an agreement exists. Perhaps it doesn't. We should find out fairly soon, so there's absolutely no reason to waste ink on this detail. I'm not attacking that pet theory, because there's no evidence for or against it in the comic.

You do kind of need to show that the agreement includes lethal force, if you expect Charlie to get lethal force used on Parson.

And finally even if they do want to ban Parson and they will use lethal force, I would argue that they any caster who heard about Parson's return would do so effectively. They will get the help of other casters, they will make sure they are screened by summoned/created units, they would block the portal, they would have weapons ready, ect.

[snipped Straw Man accusation]

First how in the hell is that a straw man. I'm am not claiming "Kreistor said the MK caster would do A,B, and C." I'm claiming that "If contacted and warned of Parson any MK caster who wanted him kept out of the MK would do X, Y, and Z." A straw man is I claim someone else's argument is "A" and then tear down "A".

A Straw Man is a case you present that you expect the opponent to limit his defense to. I am not going to defend your concept of how such an attack on Parson would occur. I could present half-a-dozen completely dissimilar, and still not touch the thousands of possibilities.

No again not how this works. If there are a thousand possible ways for the MK to be defended against and YOU want to claim that the one likely to be used is one that won't tip of Parson you need to show that. More to the point we have seen how the casters act when they are worried about the MK. We have Parson's first entrance, and weapons are readied. His second, other casters are alerted. Janice starts proclaiming to another caster about how the war will be brought to the MK. Its not even remotely subtle.

When we saw Parson explaining to the casters the first time he entered the MK they were most definitely NOT surprised.

You seriously need to re-read that page. It is blatantly obvious that we're seeing into an incident well after it has been going on for some time, since I'm pretty certain Casters in Portal Park don't stand around evenly spaced around every portal constantly, which strongly suggests that they have had time to gather 8 casters and array against him, a GMTTA (Spock), and Janis. Further, Parson answers a question that was asked by someone before the comic starts, "Look I don't know why i didn't disband, okay?" He wouldn't phrase it that way if no one hadn't asked, "Why didn't you disband, Warlord?" So we can't tell how startled they were, since we never see the moment Parson stepped into MK.

Maybe you should re-read what I wrote? When we actually saw Parson those casters were not surprised. Not the first three seconds Parson spent in the MK. When we actually saw him.


Kriestor if what your trying to claim is that Charlie could have had a better plan, its not actually showable. Any number of things could get in the way. Maybe all the casters in the MK have agreed to the "Parson response plan", which involves calling the thinkamancers to send him back to GK. So we don't know that Charlie has any more effective options. Worse if the conspiracy can recast the SPW spell, killing Parson alone is pointless unless he can keep the conspiracy from trying again.

[Kreistor]

It comes down to this: it is impossible to disprove a negative.

Astually, I misqquoted that. "It is impossible to prove a negative." You should have recognized that mistake.

Its impossible to prove anything?

No, that is not what I said in the slightest. Obviously, you're missing a big piece of your philosophical education.

"Prove that a Bigfoot doesn't exist." You can't. Why not? because you can always retreat to the position, "We just haven't found the evidence that it exists yet." You can't prove a negative. If it doesn't exist, it leaves no evidence that it doesn't exist, and so it can never be proven that it doesn't exist.

You can only prove that something exists. This is because something that exists leaves evidence that it exists.

Consequently, I reject anything that has no evidence from the comic.

And that is the only response worth my time from that whole message. If you don't recognize that extremely basic philosophical truth, we are so totally done. You completely twisted what I said completely out of it's recognized, extremely well known intent. I am not arguing basic philosophical truths with you. If you don't accept them, I'm not wasting my time where the Greats have already tread and failed to convince you.

[Tachyon]

No, Ansom is removed from the field and no longer influencing the battle. That plan did succeed in having the desired effect, though not using the expected vector (Jillian instead of Sammy).

This seems to pretty heavily imply that he wanted Ansom dead.

Because Ansom was GK's Chief Warlord; he provides a part of an insane leadership bonus to GK's units when he's in the hex alongside Wanda and the 'pliers. It was a decapitation plan, similar to when Parson first tried to kill Ansom in Book 1. Ultimately, Jillian cooperated in her own way, granted it was not acceptable to Charlie, but as far as we can see, they haven't broken their "alliance" over it. Vanna, as far as we know, is still in Jillian's employ, and on Charlie's paycheck.

In Book 1, Ansom, as the heir of Jetstone and leader of the coalition, did have sole discretion on Charlie's employment. But Charlie wasn't desperate for allies or to keep his secrets safe, back then; he would not have shared actual valuable secrets with Jetstone. Quite the contrary, Jetstone would've shared valuable secrets with Charlie, thus making them vulnerable. It was in Charlie's best interest to keep things that way in all conflicts he chose to involve himself in. Thus, he has no reasonable interest in killing Ansom aside from the fact that he is enemy leadership, and as you'll recall, having to promote a new Chief Warlord from the ranks costs Shmuckers, so it's also a resource war. He would have the same interests in dispatching GK's Chief Warlord, no matter which warlord it happened to be. This is still a wargame-styled world, with wargame-styled rules and strategies. Just because Charlie thinks of Parson as the "Perfect Warlord", that doesn't have anything to do with strategic decisions intended to resolve the immediate conflict at hand; if anything, that would be more of a long-term plan. You're putting a lot of thought into something that is essentially a backburnered strategy that suddenly became a realistic attack of opportunity due to circumstances beyond Charlie's control.

Additionally, Ansom was provoking Charlie via claiming that Toolism is the new Divine Mandate, thus making a lot of people immediately and unexpectedly distrust Charlie; silencing this mouthpiece would be almost as good as croaking Wanda, for him. However, the more productive thing to do in that case would be to first croak Wanda, and then Ansom, if he didn't fall immediately after she did (which is a theory that, to Charlie and most of the Royals, is worth testing).

That's your Straw Man. I never said that they must want Parson dead. My options included capturing him and transferring him to Charlie, a known non-aggressive mercenary side with no Armies to lead, just Archons that Parson cannot travel with easily.

That still does jack-squat if the conspiracy can simply recast SPW. Parson gets resummoned, and goes back to work.

You forget that the spell was cast situationally. That means that any new "Perfect Warlord" spell would summon a warlord that is perfect for the situation at hand, right now. Parson would be a morale case without spell effects, which would make someone else the perfect warlord for this situation before Parson would be for Gobwin Knob, or even for Jetstone or Charlie's side.

We have seen that the warlord spell did enforce a Loyalty effect on Parson, to some extent, but the other problem with Parson serving as the "Perfect Warlord" for ANY side right now is the deployment of troops on that side (which we can assume, given that it was Wanda's suggestion to summon Parson in the first place, she took into consideration when she summoned him - especially since Parson was *just about to game a scenario like TBFGK* when she snatched him up), the available leadership, and available casters. He might still be capable of winning the scenario, but he would still be less well-prepared for it than someone who was planning a war around a situation more similar to the current one (he hasn't recently prepared to "game" the scenario, as he had with TBFGK). Moreover, Parson is no longer under the effects of the Sword of Ruthlessness; he's thinking emotionally and letting himself get into an immediately dangerous situation.

Additionally, not every side has as competent a caster as Wanda (she is a Master-class Croakamancer, as well as being capable of managing many types of magic outside her specialty reasonably well) - thus, they'd probably pay for the support plan (assuming that another copy of the spell exists, which is a failure of an assumption if you take into account who commissioned it and how powerful the group of spellcasters that created the scroll had to be), have someone come in and see exactly what all that side is dealing with and what they have to work with already, prior to casting, and then cast the spell to find a new Perfect Warlord (not to mention one who's capable of taking on Parson, if it were another side, since by all rights no one is saying there can't be more than one; this isn't Highlander). Presently, Gobwin Knob is rolling in Shmuckers, so they'd pay for the support plan too, just to make sure it worked right this time.

So no. I think you're just flat-out wrong.

This still doesn't mean Parson isn't the "Perfect Warlord" for Gobwin Knob, or their current scenario - but I'm reasonably sure that without Ruthlessness (which includes the notion of self-preservation at the expense of others' lives), he is slightly less inclined to preserve his own life over someone else's (the proverbial pudding in which the truth lies: Parson is rushing headlong into a warzone) which in effect means he would be less-than-perfect if he were on a different side. If you still think of the title "Perfect Warlord" as an absolute imperative after having read this, then you are underestimating the extent to which a good writer is inclined to risk their own main characters' lives. There could be a million different leaders who were capable of winning and surviving TBFGK, and some of them might even be twelve years old, but not all of them are possessed of the emotional faculties and detachment to win a war from behind a desk.

I'm not going to bother with the rest of your argument since it clearly wasn't directed at me and I can't make sense of it anyway... no offense intended.

[Lamech]

It comes down to this: it is impossible to disprove a negative.

Astually, I misqquoted that. "It is impossible to prove a negative." You should have recognized that mistake.

Yeahh...see that is still equivalent to it is impossible to prove anything. Every negative is the positive of the converse. If "B" is "not A" proving is equivalent to proving "A". So the only way for it to be impossible to prove a negative if it would be impossible to prove anything at all.

You can only prove that something exists. This is because something that exists leaves evidence that it exists.

There is not a green sky over the earth. There is not a sphere of solid glass covering the earth. There is not a square triangle. There is not an amount of force that can overcome a black holes gravity past the event horizon. There is not a law of physics that says for every action there equal and same direction reaction. Are we done here?

Consequently, I reject anything that has no evidence from the comic.

And that is the only response worth my time from that whole message. If you don't recognize that extremely basic philosophical truth, we are so totally done. You completely twisted what I said completely out of it's recognized, extremely well known intent. I am not arguing basic philosophical truths with you. If you don't accept them, I'm not wasting my time where the Greats have already tread and failed to convince you.

I've been trying to show that there was not a better plan to get rid of the perfect warlord that Charlie could have used. But if I can't prove a negative I guess that is impossible.
Fine, whatever. Prove that Charlie can come up with a better plan. Prove that Charlie can hire casters to do violence on MK soil. That is the core of your argument against Charlie being the one behind Jojo right? That Charlie would have used a better plan right? And that they could have removed Parson from play?

You forget that the spell was cast situationally. That means that any new "Perfect Warlord" spell would summon a warlord that is perfect for the situation at hand, right now. Parson would be a morale case without spell effects, which would make someone else the perfect warlord for this situation before Parson would be for Gobwin Knob, or even for Jetstone or Charlie's side.

We have seen that the warlord spell did enforce a Loyalty effect on Parson, to some extent, but the other problem with Parson serving as the "Perfect Warlord" for ANY side right now is the deployment of troops on that side (which we can assume, given that it was Wanda's suggestion to summon Parson in the first place, she took into consideration when she summoned him - especially since Parson was *just about to game a scenario like TBFGK* when she snatched him up), the available leadership, and available casters. He might still be capable of winning the scenario, but he would still be less well-prepared for it than someone who was planning a war around a situation more similar to the current one (he hasn't recently prepared to "game" the scenario, as he had with TBFGK). Moreover, Parson is no longer under the effects of the Sword of Ruthlessness; he's thinking emotionally and letting himself get into an immediately dangerous situation.

Additionally, not every side has as competent a caster as Wanda (she is a Master-class Croakamancer, as well as being capable of managing many types of magic outside her specialty reasonably well) - thus, they'd probably pay for the support plan (assuming that another copy of the spell exists, which is a failure of an assumption if you take into account who commissioned it and how powerful the group of spellcasters that created the scroll had to be), have someone come in and see exactly what all that side is dealing with and what they have to work with already, prior to casting, and then cast the spell to find a new Perfect Warlord (not to mention one who's capable of taking on Parson, if it were another side, since by all rights no one is saying there can't be more than one; this isn't Highlander). Presently, Gobwin Knob is rolling in Shmuckers, so they'd pay for the support plan too, just to make sure it worked right this time.

So no. I think you're just flat-out wrong.

First its possible to specify characteristics, so I see no reason why a large number of characteristics couldn't be specified 'till Parson was recovered. But suppose that can't be done, and your right. If GK got the spell cast again you are claiming it would get a warlord better than Parson right? (Note I assume that GK gets the next spell too.) It would do even better than just summoning Parson again? So on one side we have a) Parson get summoned and option b) Something even better gets summoned? Now option a) would mean that GK is in the same position is was before; about to conquer the world via Parson and force Charlie out of business. Situation b) would mean it is in an even better position. But... that means that GK has an even better chance of conquering the world and forcing Charlie out of business. Which means instead of accomplishing nothing Charlie has gotten himself in even worse trouble.

[Tachyon]

Here's a wall of better plans for Charlie, or anyone opposed to GK: summon your own Perfect Warlord. Summon a walking superweapon the size of a fortress. Summon the Arkenpliers right out of Wanda's hand, or the Arkenhammer out of Stanley's, breaking their hold over the units that are loyal to their tools. Or, create a deadly situation for your enemies by doing what they least expect. Attack Gobwin Knob while its Chief Warlord and the majority of its forces are away, while they don't expect anyone to try again. Create morale issues for enemy troops by forcing them to take losses they aren't emotionally prepared to accept. Do the same for their leadership.

Here's a better question: Why doesn't Charlie withdraw his scouting Archons from most of the sides he has been spying on (example: Haggar, or any of the RCC2 members) and make a second pass at GK with Jillian? She's roughly headed in that direction as she makes her way back to Faq; she could resupply at home, subtly appraise Don King of the plan, and then devastate GK. Charlie knows Parson is on the run, presumably, and the only opposition he would face is Stanley, with a small group of dwagons and some Hobgobwins, and Maggie, and some throwaway Twolls. For that matter, why doesn't Charlie get out of the fight entirely? He has nothing to gain by remaining in it, except his former reputation of neutrality.

I don't know. You tell me.

For the record, empirical investigation (actively seeking out truths) and self-evident truths noticed by observers are the only things that make it possible to prove anything exists at all - and we still technically have no proof that anything actually does exist. Welcome to existentialism.

If you're going to stick to the scientific method, though, we'll assume for now that things do exist.
Depending on which scientist you're asking (reasonably sure an engineer familiar with computer science would give you a run for your money with Boolean logic), If A = B, then C. If A != B, then {D, E, F, ...}. If none of the above, put on your parachute and make your way to the egress; it's time to vamoose.

First its possible to specify characteristics, so I see no reason why a large number of characteristics couldn't be specified 'till Parson was recovered. But suppose that can't be done, and your right. If GK got the spell cast again you are claiming it would get a warlord better than Parson right? (Note I assume that GK gets the next spell too.) It would do even better than just summoning Parson again? So on one side we have a) Parson get summoned and option b) Something even better gets summoned? Now option a) would mean that GK is in the same position is was before; about to conquer the world via Parson and force Charlie out of business. Situation b) would mean it is in an even better position. But... that means that GK has an even better chance of conquering the world and forcing Charlie out of business. Which means instead of accomplishing nothing Charlie has gotten himself in even worse trouble.

We're assuming that GK would take the risk of spending that much money, too, while Jillian is busy ransacking their outlying, recently claimed cities, which are not yet defenisvely fortified against any sort of attack. But before that, let's also assume Charlie knows Parson can go through the portals. If he can just hire a caster to work within the MK, why not send that caster into GK to assassinate Stanley? He would already be violating one taboo, why not two?

Simple. Charlie can't risk being attached to the infamy that even hiring Jojo for what he already attempted would spread. Attending to Charlie's potential gains by remaining in the fight at all, that goes against all reason.

[Kreistor]

If A = B, then C. If A != B, then {D, E, F, ...}. If none of the above, put on your parachute and make your way to the egress; it's time to vamoose.

Not exactly.

If "All Mammals have hair" and "Bob is a Mammal", then "Bob has Hair"

But

If "All Mammals have hair" and "Bob is a Reptile", then we can draw no conclusions of any type.

[Tachyon]

If A = B, then C. If A != B, then {D, E, F, ...}. If none of the above, put on your parachute and make your way to the egress; it's time to vamoose.

Not exactly.

If "All Mammals have hair" and "Bob is a Mammal", then "Bob has Hair"

But

If "All Mammals have hair" and "Bob is a Reptile", then we can draw no conclusions of any type.

That would fall somewhere under the given set, since one does not stop at "does A = B", but instead continues asking questions. Often, when you do not get the desired answer to your question, the solution is another formula entirely.

Unless Lamech percieved that "Bob is a mammal who looks like a Reptile", in which case it is time for me to vamoose.