Book 2 – Page 62

[WallySumGai]

That idea sounds unlikely.

That applies to 90% of these forums.

To be fair, it also applies to 90% of the things that have actually happened...

[Doctor Grumpus]

A spell that would summon Parson would most likely be as expensive as the spell that did summon him, so I doubt that's it.

I have to go with Jojo having been went by Marie, and the scroll? Not so much eliminating loyalty, but perhaps educating Parson as to perhaps a Zeroth ErfLaw of Loyalty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Laws_of_Robotics)

We've already seen the First Erflaw at work...

[teratorn]

True, but then that would completely negate the entire premise of Parson treating all Erfworlders as real people instead of pawns in a game. If Parson was that callous, he wouldn't even be in the tunnel in the first place.

What about not being stupid? He's seen Maggie easily dispatch enemy units, she made the ruler of her side obey her. He's seen Sizemore finishing thousands of enemies. And yet he stops to talk to a caster who is running after him. It's idiocy to a large exponent. If jojo is at least as dangerous as Maggie he is dead meat unless Sizemore or the great minds save him.

He's going to cross into a portal to end tens of thousands of lives, he's callous.

[pendell]

Hello, everyone. What an excellent strip this was ! I registered just to comment on it.

I apologize if I haven't gone through all 9 pages, but has anyone else noticed the irony?

The irony being that Parson Gotti and the carnymancer DON'T have free will. They are characters in a comic strip, projections of Rob's own imagination. They can do nothing other than what Rob wills them to do, speak no lines that Rob does not put in their mouths. They truly ARE puppets, driven where the whim of the writer takes them, and have no more power to resist than I have to stop the sun coming up in the morning.

So whatever Parson believes about free will, in reality he doesn't.

And I thought that was ironic.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[nth]

That idea sounds unlikely.

That applies to 90% of these forums.

That sounds unlikely. Except the smiley.

[BLANDCorporatio]

Hello, everyone. What an excellent strip this was ! I registered just to comment on it.

I apologize if I haven't gone through all 9 pages, but has anyone else noticed the irony?

The irony being that Parson Gotti and the carnymancer DON'T have free will. They are characters in a comic strip, projections of Rob's own imagination.

...

...

Wow.

That was such a deep insight that I- nah, I'll stop being a douche here. Instead, I'll comment on that directly.

First off, duh.

Second, irrelevant. As characters in Rob's head, arguably none of the debates that rage here about the attitudes/emotions/hopes/fears of them make sense. They don't exist! But still, we debate them. Not because we're fools who don't get that Parson and co. are figments of someone's imagination (or are they?), but because we make a tacit qualification- "assume this is for reals, then what?".

Thirdly, and most bizarrely of all, characters inside an author's head may, in fact, have free will. Depends on how much of a stretch/constrain you apply to the term*, and how much you allow yourself, as a writer, to use momentary inspiration, rather than rigidly stick to a plan. Many authors would claim that stories grow in their heads as if the characters had a mind of their own. It's common practice to recommend fledgling authors to know their characters. In a sense, treat them as people; what would these people then do, when faced with such and such.

*: a big chunk of confusion on free will comes from people defining differently what free means. Obviously, many factors influence someone's decision, there's physical laws and causation to add at least some determinism in the mix etc. So for argument's sake, your decisions, my decisions etc are determined. As long as the domain of those determining factors is restricted enough (that is, "you" are the cause for "your" actions, rather than, say, the planet Mars) you are free. Now just define what "you" and "your actions" mean.

[nth]

A spell that would summon Parson would most likely be as expensive as the spell that did summon him, so I doubt that's it.

I... dunno about that. Seems to me that here in stupidworld, natural findamancy makes it trivially simple to find things you already have & or have had in the past. It's things that are new that are hard to recognize.

Even a scroll designed to "bring me a warlord who has beaten Parson in the past" seems like it would be easier (cheaper) than one designed to "bring me a warlord who will beat Parson in the upcoming confrontation."

That said, I also doubt Parson is going home. Jojo's banter seems to suggests...

Okay, screw it. I scrapped a wall of text in favor of a bit of wild-ass speculation:

Spoiler: show

Parson isn't a signamancer or a hippiemancer. He's the first practitioner of an entirely new field of magic, hinted at by his name and now by Jojo's patter: Parson Gotti, Lord Hamster is an "everymancer".

[joosy]

Hello, everyone. What an excellent strip this was ! I registered just to comment on it.

I apologize if I haven't gone through all 9 pages, but has anyone else noticed the irony?

The irony being that Parson Gotti and the carnymancer DON'T have free will. They are characters in a comic strip, projections of Rob's own imagination.

...

...

Wow.

That was such a deep insight that I- nah, I'll stop being a douche here. Instead, I'll comment on that directly..

Heh - I had a written a wall of text chiding Pendell's post but you were nicer and more succint as always, Bland. Besides my post might have broken the one forum rule so its probably for the best.

[teratorn]

As characters in Rob's head, arguably none of the debates that rage here about the attitudes/emotions/hopes/fears of them make sense. They don't exist! But still, we debate them. Not because we're fools who don't get that Parson and co. are figments of someone's imagination (or are they?), but because we make a tacit qualification- "assume this is for reals, then what?".

Should fully rational beings care about fiction?

[BLANDCorporatio]

Should fully rational beings care about fiction?

I don't know. What's a "fully rational being"? As far as I can tell, rationality is tied with some kind of goal function to optimize. This can make it a very broad concept. Like, two agents of completely different behaviour still being perfectly reasonable, because they're after different things.

That said, I won't try and cook up a goal function that is improved by caring about fiction. Whether we are or should be fully rational is a whole different kettle of fish, and I for one think that enjoyment of fiction does not require a logical reason. It's a given. Now proceed from this to find good, enjoyable fiction would be a rational policy. Or going to find good enjoyable bad fiction

[haviel]

Pendell, I think you forgot to suspend disbelief when you wrote that question!

Man, I can't wait to find out more on Jojo. Are Carneymancers casters that misdirect fate? hmm...

[Jinren]

Are Carneymancers casters that misdirect fate? hmm...

Are Carnymancers invisible to Predictamancers?

In fact, while writing this, I have to wonder... does this mean Stanley is invisible to Predictamancers? Would this have helped him destroy Faq?

[gameboy1234]

So has anyone commented on the song references on this page? I'll mention a couple:

"Here comes the sun" - Obvious, a Beatles song. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6tV11acSRk

"A mighty wind." - According to wikipedia: "A Mighty Wind is a 2003 mockumentary about a folk music reunion concert in which three folk bands must reunite for a television performance for the first time in decades." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Mighty_Wind

I don't think "free will" and the 1993 film Free WIlly have anything to do with each other. Just a coincidence of names.

[coyotenose]

All right, let's try this:

Queen Bea sent Jeftichew. She has specific knowledge of Gobwin Knob only shared by Charlie and Tramennis among GK's enemies, gleaned from negotiating with her Decrypted daughter.

In which case, Bea might not be dead. Royals, Rulers, or Leadership, or some other particular group that enters the Magic Kingdom do not disband in that case; they become Barbarians (thus ending their side) and are taken away by TGMTTA under cover of suggestion. Bea effectively still has one to four agents in the MK, and has begun her own agenda.

Or she might have extracted vows from her Casters that she did not inform Slately about before she Disbanded herself.

There are probably fifty reasons why I can't be right, given my spotty memory for things of Erf. But imagine if Parson allies with a side that is nothing but a Shmuckerless Ruler and four very subtle and devious Casters... who can all use any portal, anytime.

[TXChris]

Is it just me or does Parson switch the arms his equipment is on mid panel (bracer and staff in the right hand as he's running then they switch to the left as he draws his sword).

Normally I would say it's an art error, but with the introduction of a carnimancer and with the odd art for when Parson draws his sword, anyone think maybe some funhouse-amancy or something during that scene?

The bracers are on the same arms the whole way through. Pretty sure he passes the staff from his right hand to his left just off the edge of panel three so he can draw his sword.

I suspect there is some funhouse-amancy going on just based on the question. This is a carnie we're talking about here, and I know quite a few. They would never ask a question like that (In full banter) without being on the winning side of both answers.

Spoiler: show

Switching the portals, or even just telling Parson that he switched the portals, would present the fate/choice conundrum. Whichever way you choose to go, you could not argue that it was not fate. Likewise, wherever you ended up, you cannot argue that you did not have a choice. A predictamancer could tell you which is which, and likely which you will choose; but I suspect a carnymancer can rig the game. (Remind you of a warlord we know?)

Ah, Carnymancy at it's finest.

[Menlo Marseilles]

As characters in Rob's head, arguably none of the debates that rage here about the attitudes/emotions/hopes/fears of them make sense. They don't exist! But still, we debate them. Not because we're fools who don't get that Parson and co. are figments of someone's imagination (or are they?), but because we make a tacit qualification- "assume this is for reals, then what?".

Should fully rational beings care about fiction?

Absolutely. Fictional scenarios and worlds are built so as to explore hypotheticals. We discuss them because they are interesting; they are interesting because thinking about how people think, and whether their modi operandi are rightly formed, help us to understand and build on our own methodologies and philosophical frameworks.

Spoiler: show

Parson isn't a signamancer or a hippiemancer. He's the first practitioner of an entirely new field of magic, hinted at by his name and now by Jojo's patter: Parson Gotti, Lord Hamster is an "everymancer".

I don't necessarily buy into this theory, but I do think the pun deserved a round of applause.

[BakaGrappler]

Well, I posted my idea of what a Carnymancer is before:

Carnymancy is the Fate specialty of Stagemancy which controls Life, Motion, AND Matter. Carnymancers have a predisposition towards Fate magic, so perhaps they can feel the threads of fate themselves, but in a way different to Predictamancers?

A Predictamancer looks at the lines of fate and tells what will happen, suggesting that it WILL happen, and you'd better be ready for the storm when it hits.

A Carnymancer...? Well, what is a carnival? A stage show? Side shows? A magic act with smoke, mirrors, and card tricks? Boil aaaaaall of that down to it's core, and it's about surprise and redirection. You set someone up and then surprise them even when they know what is coming. You get someone to look left, and then make a woman appear on your arm from out of nowhere.

Carnymancy is the Magic of changing the expected outcome, and leaving their audience awed and surprised.

I stand by this. The Erf section of specialties deals with tangible matter. The Numbers section deals with measurable values. Fate deals with the alteration of the X factor within said Faction of ability.

Staying in Stagemancy, Hatomancy is the production of items from nowhere. Giving solid form. Rhyme-o-mancy is the production of beats, music, which can be broken down into a measurable rhythm that somehow increases a side's ability to fight. Fate? In all the other forms of magic it is the manipulation of Life, and I doubt in Carnymancy it is any different.

Croakamancers bring the dead back to fight. Healomancers preserve the living to prevent death. Thinkamancy reads and influences the mind. Dollamancy give the ability to move to the inanimate, which is typically only allowed for the living. It's all about the X factor that makes up life.

So Carnymancy HAS to be about throwing unpredictability into the threads of Fate and the manipulation of life. In a way that acts like a show, distracting you with stage pyrotechnics and then pulling a woman out of a closet when she had been sealed in a hole. It CHANGES things in a way that one should not be able to predict. I would guess that the Carnymancers are the natural enemy of the Predictamancers, as the latter is about following the lines of fate and the former are altering it.

The Predictamancers right now are all, "So what if people die? Let nature runs it's course and it will be fine, no matter who or what is destroyed. That's frikkin' fate." Jojo may be there to fling one in the eye of Marie and give Parson a way to win the fight without destroying Jetstone. A way to stack the deck so that Parson, the wildcard, can win without destroying everything around him like the end of Book 1.

And people are saying, "Jojo was forced by Queen Bea to only work for Royal sides." Working is a relative term, you know? He's not in Parson's employ, so technically this would be a favor. Jojo never promised to NOT help a side that was not Royal. All that means is that Jojo will never be on GK's payroll. Oh, and there is no way Jojo has been hired by Charlie, because Charlie isn't a royal, and Charlie only thinks in terms of cash. That means Jojo's being there is all him.

[Smoker]

The thing I dont like about seeing Charlie's hand in everything, is it runs the risk of him turning into one of those Evil-Overlordy types..

Charlie wants GK stopped, and Parson either captured or dead. Since the start of the story, Charlie has been raising the bar bit by bit to try to stop Parson. Surely by now Charlie must realise that the best and possibly only way to defeat GK is to send a friggen Zerg-rush of Archons along with the finest elite forces of every side you can bribe/threaten/ally with. And to disband them when they get to 1hp.

And yeah there are some good reasons why Charlie doesn't want to go directly against any side, much less GK, but think of what he could gain:
1) GK's treasury, along with whatever's left in the mountain
2) The 'hammer
3) The 'pliers
4) The mathamancy bracer
5) Parson himself
6) A capital site, capable of popping dwagons (even if he only wanted it until the mountain was mined out, then he could sell it off)
7) Total confirmation of his stance on Toolism.

So yeah, if Charlie is behind the missing gobwins, Faq, Kingword, free advice to Jetstone, free allies for Jetstone AND Jojo... well... hrm. What next? Bracerwraiths?

80. If my weakest troops fail to eliminate a hero, I will send out my best troops instead of wasting time with progressively stronger ones as he gets closer and closer to my fortress.

[MarbitChow]

And yeah there are some good reasons why Charlie doesn't want to go directly against any side, much less GK, but think of what he could gain:

As soon as Charlie appears to be taking a side, and not just acting as a disinterested and neutral resource, other sides will stop using him (causing him to lose revenue) and may actually attack. Charlie knows that if enough sides team up against him, he's still toast. Even grabbing all of those nice toys from GK doesn't guarantee him a win against overwhelming odds, and the more menacing he appears, the more likely people team up against him. He's tolerated now because he only has 1 arkentool, and he uses it to assist everyone equally. He won't abandon his current strategy of avoiding attention and acting helpful until it's too late for anyone to stop him.

[Jinren]

Charlie wants GK stopped, and Parson either captured or dead. Since the start of the story, Charlie has been raising the bar bit by bit to try to stop Parson. Surely by now Charlie must realise that the best and possibly only way to defeat GK <snip>

You're confusing "defeat GK" with "defeat Parson".

GK may be the strongest side in the current conflict (which probably makes them the strongest side on Erfworld at the moment), but they're not invincible. Had Parson not intervened, the most recent encounter would have ended in total defeat of their expeditionary force. In other words, the combined forces of the RCC2 are still quite capable of matching GK on paper (let's assume for the moment that Jetstone will survive the turn - there are at least several ways this could happen, and they wouldn't be in their current state had Parson not taken command).

It's Parson who is the one who can show up to a fight and not only perfectly calculate but also completely reverse the odds in a single movement, which 1) is a skill Charlie would very much like to control and 2) is the threat to his continued business as long as he doesn't. Without him, GK is just a large army, nowhere near large enough to risk permanently affecting the balance of power. Attacking GK only makes sense if it's part of an attack on Parson as the primary target.

As for the volcano and gems... how deep are those mines? There are a lot of Schmuckers there, but by taking and pillaging the city (assuming he could), Charlie permanently destroys his side's reputation for neutrality - he now has Interests. He would essentially be unable to operate his business as he currently does until long after every currently operating ruler and warlord has forgotten the action (croaked), which would be a very, very long time. Would he trust the money to last that long? It's a huge risk in the long run.