
Urf wrote:Zatanna?






Was this what she did to people? Perhaps she should order un-Larry to report here, to complete this set of empty shells she was creating.
Teddy Clothespin, the Dollamancer who had sold it to her, had helped her create something out of the depths of her own desires and imagination. She looked at it, wondering if she even dared to put it on.
"Olay,"
Kaed wrote:Though, Tommy is already starting to decay. I guess that means even with full attention uncroaked probably don't last more than maybe, 20 turns. And in the last few turns they'll be falling apart at the seams.
Whispri wrote:On the Olive front, I really am thinking that whatever relationship they'd have had has been smashed to pieces. She might become Wanda's life's regret, but...
Urf wrote:What is unique about Wanda —in the entire story of Erfworld— is that she has her own livery that translates to her uncroaked and decrypted. Not only is she dynamically fashionable, but that fashion magically disseminates among those loyal to her. This entry ...and to a certain extent this volume of the Erfworld story ...is about Wanda developing her her own distinct identity. She's not Goodminton blue. The Wanda we know is red and black and has her own brand logo. We can accept that the skull denotes her Croakamancy, but the offset pink blossom... one can assume it involves one Olive Branch's Flower Power.


She may now reconsider her previous stance with Olive that Motion was more important than Life.
But the treasury was dwindling. Shmuckers were tight.

Karadan wrote::Snip:
Especially considering that Maggie got a new raiment (Her safari one) at a time when I very much doubt Stanly would have spared her any Shmuckers for something as frivolous as raiments.
:Snip:

Housellama wrote:Wanda knows the power of appearance. At least Mirror-Wanda does. Interesting that. Is Mirror-Wanda a projection of Wanda's subconscious, or is it Fate being sneaky? Is there a difference?


Karadan wrote:I thought transactions in the magic kingdom didn't occur in Shmuckers so that moneymancers wouldn't have all the power. I figured raiments would fall under this as well.
So, have I missed this conversation somewhere else? Why do some things in magic kingdom cost rands and some Shmuckers, and sometimes the same thing can cost either/or?
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.


Urf wrote:Because raiment defines community and identity in Erfworld.
What is unique about Wanda —in the entire story of Erfworld— is that she has her own livery that translates to her uncroaked and decrypted. Not only is she dynamically fashionable, but that fashion magically disseminates among those loyal to her.

cloudbreaker wrote:They were poor three turns before Maggie bought her raiment. But when she bought her clothes, Gobwin Knob was filthy rich. And as for the mind control powder, it is entirely possible that Maggie makes it herself. It does seem to be a Thinkamancy-based magic item, after all.
Knight13 wrote:Wanda never claimed that Motion is more important than Life, only that it is equally important. Olive was the one that claimed that Life is the most important element.
drachefly wrote:It's got to convert to schmuckers eventually, to pay the upkeeps. For momentary transactions being funded by sides, they're fine. Rands are for holding long-term debts between casters.
cloudbreaker wrote:They were poor three turns before Maggie bought her raiment. But when she bought her clothes, Gobwin Knob was filthy rich. And as for the mind control powder, it is entirely possible that Maggie makes it herself. It does seem to be a Thinkamancy-based magic item, after all.
0beron wrote:I might even hazard a guess that in the MK, moneymancers are used to convert whatever schmuckers casters give them into rations or the like.
OR alternatively, because casters are leadership units and have purses, schmuckers in their purses might produce rations for them instead of having to eat what they grow in the MK, so perhaps casters who receive payment for something they produce just get to eat well for a while haha.
MarbitChow wrote:I'm not sure I'd say that this is unique, or even uncommon. After all, Wanda's mass uncroak in Gobwin Knob Book 1 has the uncroaked appearing in Parson's livery. Maggie mentions that "when a caster creates another unit, as in golem-making or uncroaking, the caster sets the livery and other features of the unit's appearance."
Don't read too much into rainment. I think you may be drawing an equivalence between Dollamancy (rainment, livery, clothing) with Signamancy (physical changes in the person that reflect their nature) that isn't warranted.
Karadan wrote:One question this does bring up though, is what happens when a side pays a huge amount of Shmuckers for a spell and/or services (ala the original summon spell). We know from Jillian that a barbarian (which any full time MK resident would be I believe) has to spend all Shmuckers on units or rations or it simply vanishes. So did the people who made the spell just pop themselves a few hundred turns worth of rations? Did they convert them into Rands somehow? Perhaps I'm overthinking things, but Erfworld is such a fascinating little place.


Kaed wrote:I'm not sure why Rob is making such a big deal about raiment change. Unless this new one has some sort of significance in the future...
I think the only thing I really got out of this is that Wanda definitely doesn't want anything to do with Olive anymore.
Though, Tommy is already starting to decay. I guess that means even with full attention uncroaked probably don't last more than maybe, 20 turns. And in the last few turns they'll be falling apart at the seams.
It's too bad croakamancers can't refresh the time. One use only for croaked units.

Users browsing this forum: Shai_hulud, Whispri and 17 guests