Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Page by page discussion of the comic.

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby Lilwik » Sun Dec 15, 2013 7:11 pm

Oberon wrote:In those cases "who" isn't predicting things outside of the subject of the prediction itself.
So then Predictamancy can handle some who, but not other who. That is pretty vague. How can we know which people in a Prediction are allowed to be subjects and which are just whos who can't be Predicted? We need to clarify that or else the rule that says Predictamancy can't say who doesn't mean much.

Oberon wrote:Instead, Marie was looking at each second and attempting to predict the chance that Olive will be hit. This is not a prediction of "when", since it was real time.
It's still a prediction of a when, even though it happens to be very soon. Marie was Predicting to herself, "If I tell her to shoot now, will she hit Olive now?" If Predictamancy couldn't handle when, then the question would have to be something like: "If I tell her to shoot now, will she hit Olive?" The difference is that a yes to the first question means Olive doesn't escape, while a yes to the second question could mean that Wanda misses her shot, Olive escapes, everyone glares at Marie, and then sometime in the future the unpredicted when comes around and Wanda shoots Olive in an entirely different situation. If Predictamancy were really vulnerable to that sort of failure, I think that Marie would have warned people at the time that she couldn't be trusted as much as they seemed to trust her. The reputation of Predictamancy must be a very fragile thing, so I expect Predictamancers take great care with it.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby Oberon » Sun Dec 15, 2013 9:42 pm

Lilwik wrote:
Oberon wrote:In those cases "who" isn't predicting things outside of the subject of the prediction itself.
So then Predictamancy can handle some who, but not other who. That is pretty vague. How can we know which people in a Prediction are allowed to be subjects and which are just whos who can't be Predicted? We need to clarify that or else the rule that says Predictamancy can't say who doesn't mean much.
Come on now, this isn't hard, is it? The only "who" a prediction is about is for the subject, all other bets are off. Jillian will kill the ruler of Haffaton. Who will be the ruler of Haffaton when Jillian kills that person? Predictamancy does not know. Wanda will attune to a tool of the titans. Who is the current owner of that tool? Predictamancy does not know. It is not vague to say that predictamancy can not say "who" except for the subject of a prediction, it is how the magic appears to work. The subject and the result are the only things known, all other things such as who, what, when, where, and why, are unknowns.
How using capslock wins arguments:
Zeroberon wrote:So we know with 100% certainty that THIS IS HOW TRI-LINKS WORK, PERIOD END OF STORY.
Oberon
 
Posts: 1191
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 7:59 am

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby Lilwik » Sun Dec 15, 2013 10:50 pm

Oberon wrote:The subject and the result are the only things known, all other things such as who, what, when, where, and why, are unknowns.
But how do we define subject? For example: Jillian will kill the ruler of Haffaton. Is Jillian the subject of that prediction because she is personally specified? Is the ruler of Haffaton not the subject because that person is left unspecified? That doesn't work, because it's the other way around. According to the rule, Predictamancy can only determine the subjects of the Prediction, not the other people, so Jillian is specified because she's the subject. It's not that she's the subject because she's specified, unless we want to get circular, so I don't know why she's the subject. If the rule is going to be that only the subject of a Prediction is known, then we need a rule to tell us who can be the subject of a Prediction. Why couldn't the ruler of Haffaton have been the subject? Otherwise the rule doesn't really say anything, except that the subjects of a Prediction are known, and the people who are known are the subjects of the Prediction.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby Lipkin » Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:22 am

Maybe predictamancy works like this. The future is a jigsaw puzzle, or several puzzles mixed together. A predictamancer can try looking at the picture on the box, but without looking at the pieces, they only know the shape of things to come, not how it goes together, not how things will come to pass. Alternatively, the predictamancer can try looking at the pieces, but they only focus on one piece at a time, so they are working off shape, not image.

Marie looks at the piece that is Wanda, and sees she fits with an Arkentool. Marie tries looking at the box to see when she can shoot down Olive, but that isn't a part of the picture.

Just a thought, and probably an incorrect one. But it would make sense that there would be multiple types of Predictamancy, with different types of focuses.
User avatar
Lipkin
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 1048
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:36 am

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby Oberon » Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:57 am

Lilwik wrote:But how do we define subject? For example: Jillian will kill the ruler of Haffaton. Is Jillian the subject of that prediction because she is personally specified?
The same way that subject is defined anywhere else, of course. Yes, Jillian is the subject because she is the one who will do the killing. Yes, Wanda is the subject because she is the one who will attune to a tool of the titans. We don't need to make this any harder to understand.
How using capslock wins arguments:
Zeroberon wrote:So we know with 100% certainty that THIS IS HOW TRI-LINKS WORK, PERIOD END OF STORY.
Oberon
 
Posts: 1191
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 7:59 am

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby Lilwik » Mon Dec 16, 2013 7:07 am

Oberon wrote:The same way that subject is defined anywhere else, of course.
Subject is defined many ways and has several different uses depending on context. I see what you mean now, though. You mean the active one in a Prediction is known, the one who is doing things, while the others are unknown. Perhaps it would be clearer to call them actors rather than subjects. Unfortunately the actor theory doesn't seem to be correct since Delphie Predicted that Wanda would serve Olive. (Book 0, Episode 9). Wanda is certainly active in that Prediction, but how could Delphie know about Olive?
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby Oberon » Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:29 am

That is an interesting prediction. We don't hear the actual prediction itself, which obscures things a bit. All we hear is Delphie talking about what is fated to be. It does name two specifics, if Delphie can be considered to be a reliable narrator. But Delphie also says that Olive is fated to be Wanda's chief caster for a long time. Which is of course a very subjective statement. Olive wasn't Wanda's chief caster for very long at all, as I would measure it.
How using capslock wins arguments:
Zeroberon wrote:So we know with 100% certainty that THIS IS HOW TRI-LINKS WORK, PERIOD END OF STORY.
Oberon
 
Posts: 1191
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 7:59 am

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby NYbear » Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:07 am

Oberon wrote:That is an interesting prediction. We don't hear the actual prediction itself, which obscures things a bit. All we hear is Delphie talking about what is fated to be. It does name two specifics, if Delphie can be considered to be a reliable narrator. But Delphie also says that Olive is fated to be Wanda's chief caster for a long time. Which is of course a very subjective statement. Olive wasn't Wanda's chief caster for very long at all, as I would measure it.


Olive was Wanda's chief caster for Wanda's entire time as part of Haffaton...hundreds if not thousands of turns worth. That qualifies for a "long time" by most subjective measures. (Olive was only the ruler of Haffaton for a short time, but she was Chief Caster of Haffaton for a very long time - perhaps you are confusing the titles)
NYbear
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:50 am

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby effataigus » Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:20 am

Howdy,

Curious if any of ya'll could point me to discussion of how:

http://www.erfworld.com/book-2-archive/ ... -12-24.jpg

... jives with the most recent page. Something seems a bit odd. Listing the predictions, we have: 98.4% to defeat JS without the spell, "99 something to take airspace, tower, and garrison" without Faq at all,"70s to 90s depending a lot on what that caster is" to defeat JS with Faq. Collectively, these seem to imply two things... 1. Faq's airforce (caster aside) could have tilted the odds in JS's favor by a maximum of ~1.5%, and 2. Kingworld aside, turnamancers are just about worthless in combat... also a maximum of 1.5%.
Last edited by effataigus on Thu Jun 30, 2011 9:31 am, edited 239044 times in total.
User avatar
effataigus
 
Posts: 944
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 12:49 pm

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby Ytaker » Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:28 am

effataigus wrote:Howdy,

Curious if any of ya'll could point me to discussion of how:

http://www.erfworld.com/book-2-archive/ ... -12-24.jpg

... jives with the most recent page. Something seems a bit odd. Listing the predictions, we have: 98.4% to defeat JS without the spell, "99 something to take airspace, tower, and garrison" without Faq at all,"70s to 90s depending a lot on what that caster is" to defeat JS with Faq. Collectively, these seem to imply two things... 1. Faq's airforce (caster aside) could have tilted the odds in JS's favor by a maximum of ~1.5%, and 2. Kingworld aside, turnamancers are just about worthless in combat... also a maximum of 1.5%.


I imagine turnamancers can turn units, seeding chaos in battles.

As long as their loyalty is low.

And decrypted units...

Turnamancers may be effective against less loyal troops.
Ytaker
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 10:23 am

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby Lipkin » Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:42 am

Oberon wrote:That is an interesting prediction. We don't hear the actual prediction itself, which obscures things a bit. All we hear is Delphie talking about what is fated to be. It does name two specifics, if Delphie can be considered to be a reliable narrator. But Delphie also says that Olive is fated to be Wanda's chief caster for a long time. Which is of course a very subjective statement. Olive wasn't Wanda's chief caster for very long at all, as I would measure it.

She was her chief caster long enough for Wanda to cultivate an impressive garden, and for her signamancy to change. Signs point to Wanda being with Haffaton quite a while before Jillian kills the manikin.
User avatar
Lipkin
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 1048
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:36 am

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby victor227 » Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:34 pm

Lipkin wrote:
Oberon wrote:That is an interesting prediction. We don't hear the actual prediction itself, which obscures things a bit. All we hear is Delphie talking about what is fated to be. It does name two specifics, if Delphie can be considered to be a reliable narrator. But Delphie also says that Olive is fated to be Wanda's chief caster for a long time. Which is of course a very subjective statement. Olive wasn't Wanda's chief caster for very long at all, as I would measure it.

She was her chief caster long enough for Wanda to cultivate an impressive garden, and for her signamancy to change. Signs point to Wanda being with Haffaton quite a while before Jillian kills the manikin.


How many cities was it that Haffaton had when Wanda was turned to their side? Fourteen or something? Before Jillian captures El-Efbaum, they're up to seventy. And as is mentioned, Haffaton is a very slow and patient side. They crept forward and built up their territory through either 'peaceful' means, or surprise ambushes, both of which take a bit of time.
victor227
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 4:26 am

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby Lilwik » Mon Dec 16, 2013 8:01 pm

effataigus wrote:Listing the predictions, we have: 98.4% to defeat JS without the spell, "99 something to take airspace, tower, and garrison" without Faq at all,"70s to 90s depending a lot on what that caster is" to defeat JS with Faq. Collectively, these seem to imply two things... 1. Faq's airforce (caster aside) could have tilted the odds in JS's favor by a maximum of ~1.5%, and 2. Kingworld aside, turnamancers are just about worthless in combat... also a maximum of 1.5%.
That's very well spotted. Thank you! Of course, there's a tricky issue of just how the effectiveness of a Turnamancer is being measured because Charlie's question wasn't stated as precisely as it could have been. I'm sure that like any discipline Turnamancy has many subtle spells with fine distinctions. We've seen this especially with Thinkamancy in Book 2, Text 38. So then what if Kingworld was only one of a half dozen spells that would have had practically the same effect on the second Spacerock the Battle? I would presume that Charlie meant the odds if none of those were cast, and I expect so would Parson, which means that they are effectively forcing the Turnamancer to sit on all her most effective spells.

There's yet another way in which Charlie's question was imprecise. Jillian and the Turnamancer both left the area before the fighting began. If we're assuming that the Kingworld spell didn't happen, are we also assuming that Jillian and the Turnamancer stayed to fight, or are we still imagining that they left? Parson might be excluding Faq entirely from his calculations instead of just excluding Kingworld.

On the other hand, maybe Faq's fliers and Turnamancer really do make nothing more than a 1.5% difference. We're not talking about how many casualties they could cause, only their chance of actually changing the final outcome. They could put up an enormously ferocious fight, giving Gobwin Knob heavy casualties, and still have no chance of winning in the end.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby Lamech » Mon Dec 16, 2013 9:59 pm

Lilwik wrote:
effataigus wrote:Listing the predictions, we have: 98.4% to defeat JS without the spell, "99 something to take airspace, tower, and garrison" without Faq at all,"70s to 90s depending a lot on what that caster is" to defeat JS with Faq. Collectively, these seem to imply two things... 1. Faq's airforce (caster aside) could have tilted the odds in JS's favor by a maximum of ~1.5%, and 2. Kingworld aside, turnamancers are just about worthless in combat... also a maximum of 1.5%.
That's very well spotted. Thank you! Of course, there's a tricky issue of just how the effectiveness of a Turnamancer is being measured because Charlie's question wasn't stated as precisely as it could have been. I'm sure that like any discipline Turnamancy has many subtle spells with fine distinctions. We've seen this especially with Thinkamancy in Book 2, Text 38. So then what if Kingworld was only one of a half dozen spells that would have had practically the same effect on the second Spacerock the Battle? I would presume that Charlie meant the odds if none of those were cast, and I expect so would Parson, which means that they are effectively forcing the Turnamancer to sit on all her most effective spells.

There's yet another way in which Charlie's question was imprecise. Jillian and the Turnamancer both left the area before the fighting began. If we're assuming that the Kingworld spell didn't happen, are we also assuming that Jillian and the Turnamancer stayed to fight, or are we still imagining that they left? Parson might be excluding Faq entirely from his calculations instead of just excluding Kingworld.

On the other hand, maybe Faq's fliers and Turnamancer really do make nothing more than a 1.5% difference. We're not talking about how many casualties they could cause, only their chance of actually changing the final outcome. They could put up an enormously ferocious fight, giving Gobwin Knob heavy casualties, and still have no chance of winning in the end.

Parson seems to be excluding the Turnamancer from his calculations completely. Parson was specifically asked to exclude the Kingworld spell. Arguably he could have assumed that without Kingworld other Tri-linked turnamancy would have been cast instead, but I do not think he did so. (Ironically that might have make the odds even worse. If Kingworld is not cast it must be because Charlie had a better spell.)

I also note its possible that FAQ might have only given a slightly better chance for a lucky strike on Wanda, while in all actuality worsening the probable outcome. (Without Kingworld.) 95% chance that Jillian and co. die and are decrypted while inflicting significantly less than they added to GKs forces. 3% chance they inflict more than they give. 1% chance they make the decisive anti-Wanda blow.
Lamech
 
Posts: 1450
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 9:23 am

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby Shai_hulud » Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:02 pm

Or without Kingsworld to allow her to ditch and go chase after Ansom, Jillian would've turned, killed everyone, and then banged Wanda on top of a huge pile of corpses.
Shai_hulud
Pins Supporter!
Pins Supporter!
 
Posts: 698
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2012 11:57 pm

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby Finwe » Thu Jan 16, 2014 2:56 pm

Lilwik wrote:On the other hand, maybe Faq's fliers and Turnamancer really do make nothing more than a 1.5% difference. We're not talking about how many casualties they could cause, only their chance of actually changing the final outcome. They could put up an enormously ferocious fight, giving Gobwin Knob heavy casualties, and still have no chance of winning in the end.



Actually, that would make some sense. That "1.5%" is essentially the chance of stopping the decryption snowball. That 1.5% could simply be the probability of Jillian's air-force making a successful decapitation strike against Wanda's stack.
Finwe
Tool + YOTD + Erfabet Supporter!
Tool + YOTD + Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2010 9:14 am

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby 0beron » Tue Jan 21, 2014 6:58 pm

On a different note, I think I just came up with a rather devestating tool Parson has at his disposal.

Link Wanda, Maggie, and Marie. Predict when a unit will die, or more importantly, "kill" their future. Either croaking them on the spot, or freeing them from whatever Fate they had been bound to.
"I'm afraid I don't understand. And also afraid that I do."
GJC wrote:Two guys with basically the same name in a discussion about a character getting cloned.
There's gotta be a good joke in here somewhere.
User avatar
0beron
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
 
Posts: 3169
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
Location: Morlock Wells

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby Lilwik » Tue Jan 21, 2014 7:37 pm

0beron wrote:Link Wanda, Maggie, and Marie. Predict when a unit will die, or more importantly, "kill" their future.
Two problems with that: Croakamancy isn't in the business of croaking things; it's all about uncroaking, and Marie would be quick to say that what is fated cannot be changed. Those two working together aren't likely to accomplish what you are describing. Carnymancers are the ones who say that you can fight Fate, so one of the casters in the link should probably be a Carnymancer.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby 0beron » Tue Jan 21, 2014 7:43 pm

Marie is no Delphi, she is all about new approaches and being unconventional. And with Wanda wielding the 'Pliers, she's demonstrated she can easily expand the influence of Croakamancy. Think of it as Decrypting one's future, making it obey Wanda's will.
"I'm afraid I don't understand. And also afraid that I do."
GJC wrote:Two guys with basically the same name in a discussion about a character getting cloned.
There's gotta be a good joke in here somewhere.
User avatar
0beron
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
YOTD + Pins Supporter!
 
Posts: 3169
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
Location: Morlock Wells

Re: Epilogue 25 - Parson and Charlie

Postby Silversought » Tue Jan 21, 2014 8:01 pm

Not exactly the same objective, but definitely easier.

Link Predictamancer & Findamancer when striking high value targets: determine if a particular mission will result (among other effects) in the death of the target. Not perfect, and missions can still turn out to be pyrrhic victories, but at you probably wouldn't totally waste your resources?
Silversought
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 10:17 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Reactions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Man in the Mists and 3 guests