I can't decide what's worse. That you just made that reference, or that I didn't think of making it first.
ah, the schroedinger forum effect
mcw0933 wrote:I'm not sure I'm convinced Parson's totally with Marie at this point. I think he may have just caught a glimpse of what exactly she's all about - "That helps a lot, actually. Thanks, Marie." is open to interpretation, IMHO.
zuche wrote:drachefly wrote:There are a thousand representations of Cassandra...
I don't believe you.
zuche wrote:I'm not clear on why people don't see Parson's motivation here. I can understand why people wouldn't agree with either it or the decision he's made based on it, but survivor's guilt alone covers the motivation.
Suzdal wrote:Personally, I think Punxsutawney Phil would more likely be a carnymancer than a predictomancer.
mcw0933 wrote:oslecamo2_temp wrote:Findmancers? What findmancers? They're never mentioned here.
Sure, except that Bill Murray was simply reporting on Puxatawney Phil, he wasn't the mayor who was relaying the prediction.mmooneybsa wrote:Should have had Bill Murray holding Puxatawney Phil.
How could they not be?junovalkyrie wrote:I'm less curious about the references and more about the implications of these Predictamancers coming to Marie's aid. Are they also aware of whatever she prophesied about Parson and willing to defend him based on that, or is it just that they're coming to the aid of a fellow Predictamancer in need?
Because they aren't predictamancers?Radagast wrote:Can the Thinkamancers not enter the tunnel for some reason? Why haven't they decided that they will obviously need to resort to force?
Patience, grasshopper! Many stories introduce new characters. These have not yet influenced it in any significant way any more than the new raft of thinkamancers has. All this page did was to draw a dividing line between predictamancers and thinkamancers, no more and no less. And there is still a awful lot of leeway there, as both schools of magic have as goals different agendas which are not necessarily in conflict with each other.Swodaems wrote:I am not excited about this storyline development. A bunch of characters with no development just stepped into the story very late into the game and want to influence the plot in a major way.
Panel 3 "[...] only the stot" Panel 12 "Only the stot." We have a winner here, and it isn't Parson's disbelief.mcw0933 wrote:I'm not sure I'm convinced Parson's totally with Marie at this point. I think he may have just caught a glimpse of what exactly she's all about - "That helps a lot, actually. Thanks, Marie." is open to interpretation, IMHO.
Zeroberon wrote:So we know with 100% certainty that THIS IS HOW TRI-LINKS WORK, PERIOD END OF STORY.
asparagus wrote:mcw0933 wrote:oslecamo2_temp wrote:Findmancers? What findmancers? They're never mentioned here.
Maybe people should not be allowed to post about book 2 until they have passed an exam on book 1.
oslecamo2_temp wrote:You're right. Only somebody who just skimmed the first 5 pages would think Wanda is telling the 100% of the truth there.
However if you bother to actualy reading book 1 and then book 2 one finds out that Wanda has little problem lying to her own rulers to advance her own agenda, and that the summon perfect warlord spell didn't actualy have any findmancers involved.
Fiendishrabbit wrote:The three chicks in panel eight, I believe, are the Weird Sisters. Specifically I recognized them from the Gargoyles show.
They most definitely are
Zeku wrote:Thinkamancers are never specifically named in the two panels that were quoted: 5 and 36. So I'm wondering whether thinkamancers were involved in the creation of the spell at all, or whether they just became aware of it through their lookamancy buddies.
Users browsing this forum: bladestorm and 4 guests