Talk:Parson Gotti - Revision history

108.20.118.11: /* Parson the natural Carnymancer? */ new section

2013-05-07T14:26:36Z

Parson the natural Carnymancer?: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:26, 7 May 2013
Line 55:		Line 55:

	It's mentioned twice that Parson bleeds {{blog\|2009\|00\|summer-updates-025}} {{blog\|2009\|00\|summer-updates-032}} , however it's suggested that Erfworlders do not bleed {{WoT\|4047518}}. This could lead to/support some good speculation regarding Parson and how he is different from other inhabitants of Erfworld; as such, should it be listed on the mainpage, and if so, where and how? [[User:Sorator\|Sorator]] 11:37, 11 April 2011 (UTC)		It's mentioned twice that Parson bleeds {{blog\|2009\|00\|summer-updates-025}} {{blog\|2009\|00\|summer-updates-032}} , however it's suggested that Erfworlders do not bleed {{WoT\|4047518}}. This could lead to/support some good speculation regarding Parson and how he is different from other inhabitants of Erfworld; as such, should it be listed on the mainpage, and if so, where and how? [[User:Sorator\|Sorator]] 11:37, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Parson the natural Carnymancer? ==
		+
		+	I'd like to offer up the idea that parson may be a natural carnymancer. This (similar to natural signmancer) would allow him to enter the Magic Kingdom, but also explain the way he sees through and exploits/abuses the rules of the game by using them in unconventional ways; similar to explanations describing his natural signamancy allowing Parson to learn more from something's appearance that other inhabitants of Erfworld in a way that seems magical, Parson's novel interpretation and modification of the rules governing Erfworld seem otherwise magical to normal inhabitants.
		+
		+	Additionally, Charlie also seems to be from the 'real world' and is described as a Carnymancer.
		+
		+	Finally, Carnymancy involves a lot of trickery and deception, if Parson is a natural Carnymancer, he may be able to deceive the normal senses and appraisals of those around him so that they believe he is what he appears to be (a warlord, a heavy unit, a garrison unit, etc.) but yet he is able to act differently. Stanley even notes Parson's ability in Book 2 Text Update 58 "(Parson) did whatever he wanted, and screw the rules," bending the rules seems to be Parson's greatest power, even more so than his ability to interpret signs.

Sorator: /* Regarding his bleeding... */

2011-04-11T11:37:37Z

Regarding his bleeding...

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:37, 11 April 2011
Line 54:		Line 54:
	== Regarding his bleeding... ==		== Regarding his bleeding... ==

-	It's mentioned twice that Parson bleeds {{blog\|2009\|00\|summer-updates-025}} {{blog\|2009\|00\|summer-updates-032}} , however it's suggested that Erfworlders do not bleed {{WoT\|4047518}}. This could lead to/support some good speculation regarding Parson and how he is different from other inhabitants of Erfworld; as such, should it be listed on the mainpage, and if so, where and how?	+	It's mentioned twice that Parson bleeds {{blog\|2009\|00\|summer-updates-025}} {{blog\|2009\|00\|summer-updates-032}} , however it's suggested that Erfworlders do not bleed {{WoT\|4047518}}. This could lead to/support some good speculation regarding Parson and how he is different from other inhabitants of Erfworld; as such, should it be listed on the mainpage, and if so, where and how? [[User:Sorator\|Sorator]] 11:37, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorator: /* Regarding his bleeding... */ new section

2011-04-11T11:37:05Z

Regarding his bleeding...: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:37, 11 April 2011
Line 51:		Line 51:

	Someone had mentioned that Parson bares the resemblance of a Deus ex machina plot device: i.e. A plot device whereby a seemingly inextricable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new character, ability, or object. In the case of Parson Gotti, he is the "unexpected" object (although summoned the actual result of the spell is fairly unknown) and solves the "Gobwin Knob" problem (eventually). I am not entirely in agreement but I can see their point. --[[User:Darakat\|Darakat]] 10:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)		Someone had mentioned that Parson bares the resemblance of a Deus ex machina plot device: i.e. A plot device whereby a seemingly inextricable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new character, ability, or object. In the case of Parson Gotti, he is the "unexpected" object (although summoned the actual result of the spell is fairly unknown) and solves the "Gobwin Knob" problem (eventually). I am not entirely in agreement but I can see their point. --[[User:Darakat\|Darakat]] 10:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Regarding his bleeding... ==
		+
		+	It's mentioned twice that Parson bleeds {{blog\|2009\|00\|summer-updates-025}} {{blog\|2009\|00\|summer-updates-032}} , however it's suggested that Erfworlders do not bleed {{WoT\|4047518}}. This could lead to/support some good speculation regarding Parson and how he is different from other inhabitants of Erfworld; as such, should it be listed on the mainpage, and if so, where and how?

Commander I. Heartly Noah at 22:10, 24 September 2010

2010-09-24T22:10:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:10, 24 September 2010
Line 46:		Line 46:

	Quick question- Stanley mentions [http://www.erfworld.com/2009/06/summer-updates-009/ here] that Parson might need to be "promoted" from being a garrison unit. Is this possible? Would he be able to gain move if Stanley promoted him, or due to his unique conditions is it unlikely that Stanley would know how to promote him? I think it's safe to assume that regardless of whether he's able to or not, Stanley currently doesn't ''want'' to promote him. [[Special:Contributions/86.25.217.235\|86.25.217.235]] 11:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)		Quick question- Stanley mentions [http://www.erfworld.com/2009/06/summer-updates-009/ here] that Parson might need to be "promoted" from being a garrison unit. Is this possible? Would he be able to gain move if Stanley promoted him, or due to his unique conditions is it unlikely that Stanley would know how to promote him? I think it's safe to assume that regardless of whether he's able to or not, Stanley currently doesn't ''want'' to promote him. [[Special:Contributions/86.25.217.235\|86.25.217.235]] 11:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
-	:Well, I guess that question's half answered. Now we just need to figure out how much move he's got. - No on in particular	+	:Well, I guess that question's half answered. Now we just need to figure out how much move he's got. - [[User:No one in particular\|No one in particular]]

	==Parson as Deus ex machina==		==Parson as Deus ex machina==

	Someone had mentioned that Parson bares the resemblance of a Deus ex machina plot device: i.e. A plot device whereby a seemingly inextricable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new character, ability, or object. In the case of Parson Gotti, he is the "unexpected" object (although summoned the actual result of the spell is fairly unknown) and solves the "Gobwin Knob" problem (eventually). I am not entirely in agreement but I can see their point. --[[User:Darakat\|Darakat]] 10:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)		Someone had mentioned that Parson bares the resemblance of a Deus ex machina plot device: i.e. A plot device whereby a seemingly inextricable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new character, ability, or object. In the case of Parson Gotti, he is the "unexpected" object (although summoned the actual result of the spell is fairly unknown) and solves the "Gobwin Knob" problem (eventually). I am not entirely in agreement but I can see their point. --[[User:Darakat\|Darakat]] 10:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

No one in particular: /* Garrison? */ Idle speculation chatter

2010-09-24T20:37:06Z

Garrison?: Idle speculation chatter

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:37, 24 September 2010
Line 46:		Line 46:

	Quick question- Stanley mentions [http://www.erfworld.com/2009/06/summer-updates-009/ here] that Parson might need to be "promoted" from being a garrison unit. Is this possible? Would he be able to gain move if Stanley promoted him, or due to his unique conditions is it unlikely that Stanley would know how to promote him? I think it's safe to assume that regardless of whether he's able to or not, Stanley currently doesn't ''want'' to promote him. [[Special:Contributions/86.25.217.235\|86.25.217.235]] 11:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)		Quick question- Stanley mentions [http://www.erfworld.com/2009/06/summer-updates-009/ here] that Parson might need to be "promoted" from being a garrison unit. Is this possible? Would he be able to gain move if Stanley promoted him, or due to his unique conditions is it unlikely that Stanley would know how to promote him? I think it's safe to assume that regardless of whether he's able to or not, Stanley currently doesn't ''want'' to promote him. [[Special:Contributions/86.25.217.235\|86.25.217.235]] 11:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
		+	:Well, I guess that question's half answered. Now we just need to figure out how much move he's got. - No on in particular

	==Parson as Deus ex machina==		==Parson as Deus ex machina==

	Someone had mentioned that Parson bares the resemblance of a Deus ex machina plot device: i.e. A plot device whereby a seemingly inextricable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new character, ability, or object. In the case of Parson Gotti, he is the "unexpected" object (although summoned the actual result of the spell is fairly unknown) and solves the "Gobwin Knob" problem (eventually). I am not entirely in agreement but I can see their point. --[[User:Darakat\|Darakat]] 10:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)		Someone had mentioned that Parson bares the resemblance of a Deus ex machina plot device: i.e. A plot device whereby a seemingly inextricable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new character, ability, or object. In the case of Parson Gotti, he is the "unexpected" object (although summoned the actual result of the spell is fairly unknown) and solves the "Gobwin Knob" problem (eventually). I am not entirely in agreement but I can see their point. --[[User:Darakat\|Darakat]] 10:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

71.188.255.197: /* Parson as Dues ex machina */ Give him his dues, it's spelled "deus"

2010-07-15T07:54:57Z

Parson as Dues ex machina: Give him his dues, it's spelled "deus"

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:54, 15 July 2010
Line 47:		Line 47:
	Quick question- Stanley mentions [http://www.erfworld.com/2009/06/summer-updates-009/ here] that Parson might need to be "promoted" from being a garrison unit. Is this possible? Would he be able to gain move if Stanley promoted him, or due to his unique conditions is it unlikely that Stanley would know how to promote him? I think it's safe to assume that regardless of whether he's able to or not, Stanley currently doesn't ''want'' to promote him. [[Special:Contributions/86.25.217.235\|86.25.217.235]] 11:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)		Quick question- Stanley mentions [http://www.erfworld.com/2009/06/summer-updates-009/ here] that Parson might need to be "promoted" from being a garrison unit. Is this possible? Would he be able to gain move if Stanley promoted him, or due to his unique conditions is it unlikely that Stanley would know how to promote him? I think it's safe to assume that regardless of whether he's able to or not, Stanley currently doesn't ''want'' to promote him. [[Special:Contributions/86.25.217.235\|86.25.217.235]] 11:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

-	==Parson as ~~Dues~~ ex machina==	+	==Parson as Deus ex machina==

-	Someone had mentioned that Parson bares the resemblance of a ~~Dues ed~~ machina plot device: i.e. A plot device whereby a seemingly inextricable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new character, ability, or object. In the case of Parson Gotti, he is the "unexpected" object (although summoned the actual result of the spell is fairly unknown) and solves the "Gobwin Knob" problem (eventually). I am not entirely in agreement but I can see their point. --[[User:Darakat\|Darakat]] 10:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)	+	Someone had mentioned that Parson bares the resemblance of a Deus ex machina plot device: i.e. A plot device whereby a seemingly inextricable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new character, ability, or object. In the case of Parson Gotti, he is the "unexpected" object (although summoned the actual result of the spell is fairly unknown) and solves the "Gobwin Knob" problem (eventually). I am not entirely in agreement but I can see their point. --[[User:Darakat\|Darakat]] 10:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

173.165.1.121 at 14:13, 16 June 2010

2010-06-16T14:13:14Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:13, 16 June 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	== Parson as a light unit ==
		+
		+	It is known that Heavy units cannot fly, but I was under the impression that Heavy units cannot enter tunnels either, but isn't Parson in the tunnel with Sizemore in this comic? http://www.erfworld.com/book-1-archive/?px=%2F078.jpg Could it be that Parson couldn't fly because either he was trying to change zones off turn or maybe Garrison units can't fly? --[[Special:Contributions/173.165.1.121\|173.165.1.121]] 14:13, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
		+
	== Who controls Parson? ==		== Who controls Parson? ==

Darakat at 10:25, 10 May 2010

2010-05-10T10:25:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:25, 10 May 2010
Line 42:		Line 42:

	Quick question- Stanley mentions [http://www.erfworld.com/2009/06/summer-updates-009/ here] that Parson might need to be "promoted" from being a garrison unit. Is this possible? Would he be able to gain move if Stanley promoted him, or due to his unique conditions is it unlikely that Stanley would know how to promote him? I think it's safe to assume that regardless of whether he's able to or not, Stanley currently doesn't ''want'' to promote him. [[Special:Contributions/86.25.217.235\|86.25.217.235]] 11:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)		Quick question- Stanley mentions [http://www.erfworld.com/2009/06/summer-updates-009/ here] that Parson might need to be "promoted" from being a garrison unit. Is this possible? Would he be able to gain move if Stanley promoted him, or due to his unique conditions is it unlikely that Stanley would know how to promote him? I think it's safe to assume that regardless of whether he's able to or not, Stanley currently doesn't ''want'' to promote him. [[Special:Contributions/86.25.217.235\|86.25.217.235]] 11:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	==Parson as Dues ex machina==
		+
		+	Someone had mentioned that Parson bares the resemblance of a Dues ed machina plot device: i.e. A plot device whereby a seemingly inextricable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new character, ability, or object. In the case of Parson Gotti, he is the "unexpected" object (although summoned the actual result of the spell is fairly unknown) and solves the "Gobwin Knob" problem (eventually). I am not entirely in agreement but I can see their point. --[[User:Darakat\|Darakat]] 10:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

86.25.217.235 at 11:11, 20 November 2009

2009-11-20T11:11:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:11, 20 November 2009
Line 40:		Line 40:
	Speculation - Stronger than a Wiener-Rammer, though it may have already been weakened by the effort of breaking through the wall. Further speculation; Parson can now swear because he's a declared Player, as opposed to just another in-game unit. - [[User:NemFX\|NemFX]] 05:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)		Speculation - Stronger than a Wiener-Rammer, though it may have already been weakened by the effort of breaking through the wall. Further speculation; Parson can now swear because he's a declared Player, as opposed to just another in-game unit. - [[User:NemFX\|NemFX]] 05:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
	:Sword provided "Combat", so can't say anything for certain about Parson's personal prowess. (Give me a sword and let me swing at John Cena's neck... when it comes off, does that mean I'm stronger than he?) Declaring oneself a "player" is only useful if there are other players, and they agree to your inclusion. Haven't seen any "players" yet. Parson has never been "just another in-game unit". He has always been different. He tires. He has no visible stats. He can't see Unit stats. He can be deleted just for being disloyal. He suffered from much greater Natural Thinkamancies (not really natural, they come from spells, but similar effects) than normal, popped units. Fact is: we haven't seen him even try to break rules himself personally. He never tried to walk through a Hex Wall (something I would have done first day, just to prove there was a hex wall at all.) He may have been less restricted than he thought all along, but more restricted in different ways. Parson threw the sword away: that could have broken the Thinkamancy. He may have merely summoned the mental will, or the anger to overwhelm the Thinkamancy. There are many options: all that is important is that he broke it, somehow. The why may be revealed someday, but most authors wouldn't, leaving it as a great unknown, not even deciding so that in the future, if they need to use something like it, they haven't restricted themselves. --[[User:Kreistor\|Kreistor]] 06:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)		:Sword provided "Combat", so can't say anything for certain about Parson's personal prowess. (Give me a sword and let me swing at John Cena's neck... when it comes off, does that mean I'm stronger than he?) Declaring oneself a "player" is only useful if there are other players, and they agree to your inclusion. Haven't seen any "players" yet. Parson has never been "just another in-game unit". He has always been different. He tires. He has no visible stats. He can't see Unit stats. He can be deleted just for being disloyal. He suffered from much greater Natural Thinkamancies (not really natural, they come from spells, but similar effects) than normal, popped units. Fact is: we haven't seen him even try to break rules himself personally. He never tried to walk through a Hex Wall (something I would have done first day, just to prove there was a hex wall at all.) He may have been less restricted than he thought all along, but more restricted in different ways. Parson threw the sword away: that could have broken the Thinkamancy. He may have merely summoned the mental will, or the anger to overwhelm the Thinkamancy. There are many options: all that is important is that he broke it, somehow. The why may be revealed someday, but most authors wouldn't, leaving it as a great unknown, not even deciding so that in the future, if they need to use something like it, they haven't restricted themselves. --[[User:Kreistor\|Kreistor]] 06:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	Quick question- Stanley mentions [http://www.erfworld.com/2009/06/summer-updates-009/ here] that Parson might need to be "promoted" from being a garrison unit. Is this possible? Would he be able to gain move if Stanley promoted him, or due to his unique conditions is it unlikely that Stanley would know how to promote him? I think it's safe to assume that regardless of whether he's able to or not, Stanley currently doesn't ''want'' to promote him. [[Special:Contributions/86.25.217.235\|86.25.217.235]] 11:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Kreistor: /* Garrison? */

2009-07-02T03:05:16Z

Garrison?

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:05, 2 July 2009
Line 35:		Line 35:
	:In this case, "Lord" is short for Chief Warlord. Not all warlords are nobles. Noble titles include things like King, Prince, Duke, and Count (Slately, Ansom, Nozzle, and Vinny Doombats). These men are Rulers, Warlords, and Chief Warlord in addition to having their noble/royal titles. We don't know Parson's stats and we don't know if he's levelled. Moreover, we don't know any other Warlord's stats, so comparisons are impossible. Parson's main asset is his mind, which is not governed by stats anyway. [[User:Commander I. Heartly Noah\|Commander I. Heartly Noah]] June 29 2009		:In this case, "Lord" is short for Chief Warlord. Not all warlords are nobles. Noble titles include things like King, Prince, Duke, and Count (Slately, Ansom, Nozzle, and Vinny Doombats). These men are Rulers, Warlords, and Chief Warlord in addition to having their noble/royal titles. We don't know Parson's stats and we don't know if he's levelled. Moreover, we don't know any other Warlord's stats, so comparisons are impossible. Parson's main asset is his mind, which is not governed by stats anyway. [[User:Commander I. Heartly Noah\|Commander I. Heartly Noah]] June 29 2009
	:Speculation proved. Point. - [[User:NemFX\|NemFX]] 02:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC)		:Speculation proved. Point. - [[User:NemFX\|NemFX]] 02:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
		+	::Now, now... this isn't a competition. Noah was right to remove it at the time. Garrison being a temporary ability was completely speculative, and was not appropriate for Prop C. There's evidence now, but not then. This is, and always will be, a work in progress. --[[User:Kreistor\|Kreistor]] 03:05, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


	Speculation - Stronger than a Wiener-Rammer, though it may have already been weakened by the effort of breaking through the wall. Further speculation; Parson can now swear because he's a declared Player, as opposed to just another in-game unit. - [[User:NemFX\|NemFX]] 05:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)		Speculation - Stronger than a Wiener-Rammer, though it may have already been weakened by the effort of breaking through the wall. Further speculation; Parson can now swear because he's a declared Player, as opposed to just another in-game unit. - [[User:NemFX\|NemFX]] 05:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
	:Sword provided "Combat", so can't say anything for certain about Parson's personal prowess. (Give me a sword and let me swing at John Cena's neck... when it comes off, does that mean I'm stronger than he?) Declaring oneself a "player" is only useful if there are other players, and they agree to your inclusion. Haven't seen any "players" yet. Parson has never been "just another in-game unit". He has always been different. He tires. He has no visible stats. He can't see Unit stats. He can be deleted just for being disloyal. He suffered from much greater Natural Thinkamancies (not really natural, they come from spells, but similar effects) than normal, popped units. Fact is: we haven't seen him even try to break rules himself personally. He never tried to walk through a Hex Wall (something I would have done first day, just to prove there was a hex wall at all.) He may have been less restricted than he thought all along, but more restricted in different ways. Parson threw the sword away: that could have broken the Thinkamancy. He may have merely summoned the mental will, or the anger to overwhelm the Thinkamancy. There are many options: all that is important is that he broke it, somehow. The why may be revealed someday, but most authors wouldn't, leaving it as a great unknown, not even deciding so that in the future, if they need to use something like it, they haven't restricted themselves. --[[User:Kreistor\|Kreistor]] 06:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)		:Sword provided "Combat", so can't say anything for certain about Parson's personal prowess. (Give me a sword and let me swing at John Cena's neck... when it comes off, does that mean I'm stronger than he?) Declaring oneself a "player" is only useful if there are other players, and they agree to your inclusion. Haven't seen any "players" yet. Parson has never been "just another in-game unit". He has always been different. He tires. He has no visible stats. He can't see Unit stats. He can be deleted just for being disloyal. He suffered from much greater Natural Thinkamancies (not really natural, they come from spells, but similar effects) than normal, popped units. Fact is: we haven't seen him even try to break rules himself personally. He never tried to walk through a Hex Wall (something I would have done first day, just to prove there was a hex wall at all.) He may have been less restricted than he thought all along, but more restricted in different ways. Parson threw the sword away: that could have broken the Thinkamancy. He may have merely summoned the mental will, or the anger to overwhelm the Thinkamancy. There are many options: all that is important is that he broke it, somehow. The why may be revealed someday, but most authors wouldn't, leaving it as a great unknown, not even deciding so that in the future, if they need to use something like it, they haven't restricted themselves. --[[User:Kreistor\|Kreistor]] 06:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:11, 20 November 2009
Line 40:		Line 40:
	Speculation - Stronger than a Wiener-Rammer, though it may have already been weakened by the effort of breaking through the wall. Further speculation; Parson can now swear because he's a declared Player, as opposed to just another in-game unit. - [[User:NemFX\|NemFX]] 05:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)		Speculation - Stronger than a Wiener-Rammer, though it may have already been weakened by the effort of breaking through the wall. Further speculation; Parson can now swear because he's a declared Player, as opposed to just another in-game unit. - [[User:NemFX\|NemFX]] 05:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
	:Sword provided "Combat", so can't say anything for certain about Parson's personal prowess. (Give me a sword and let me swing at John Cena's neck... when it comes off, does that mean I'm stronger than he?) Declaring oneself a "player" is only useful if there are other players, and they agree to your inclusion. Haven't seen any "players" yet. Parson has never been "just another in-game unit". He has always been different. He tires. He has no visible stats. He can't see Unit stats. He can be deleted just for being disloyal. He suffered from much greater Natural Thinkamancies (not really natural, they come from spells, but similar effects) than normal, popped units. Fact is: we haven't seen him even try to break rules himself personally. He never tried to walk through a Hex Wall (something I would have done first day, just to prove there was a hex wall at all.) He may have been less restricted than he thought all along, but more restricted in different ways. Parson threw the sword away: that could have broken the Thinkamancy. He may have merely summoned the mental will, or the anger to overwhelm the Thinkamancy. There are many options: all that is important is that he broke it, somehow. The why may be revealed someday, but most authors wouldn't, leaving it as a great unknown, not even deciding so that in the future, if they need to use something like it, they haven't restricted themselves. --[[User:Kreistor\|Kreistor]] 06:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)		:Sword provided "Combat", so can't say anything for certain about Parson's personal prowess. (Give me a sword and let me swing at John Cena's neck... when it comes off, does that mean I'm stronger than he?) Declaring oneself a "player" is only useful if there are other players, and they agree to your inclusion. Haven't seen any "players" yet. Parson has never been "just another in-game unit". He has always been different. He tires. He has no visible stats. He can't see Unit stats. He can be deleted just for being disloyal. He suffered from much greater Natural Thinkamancies (not really natural, they come from spells, but similar effects) than normal, popped units. Fact is: we haven't seen him even try to break rules himself personally. He never tried to walk through a Hex Wall (something I would have done first day, just to prove there was a hex wall at all.) He may have been less restricted than he thought all along, but more restricted in different ways. Parson threw the sword away: that could have broken the Thinkamancy. He may have merely summoned the mental will, or the anger to overwhelm the Thinkamancy. There are many options: all that is important is that he broke it, somehow. The why may be revealed someday, but most authors wouldn't, leaving it as a great unknown, not even deciding so that in the future, if they need to use something like it, they haven't restricted themselves. --[[User:Kreistor\|Kreistor]] 06:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	Quick question- Stanley mentions [http://www.erfworld.com/2009/06/summer-updates-009/ here] that Parson might need to be "promoted" from being a garrison unit. Is this possible? Would he be able to gain move if Stanley promoted him, or due to his unique conditions is it unlikely that Stanley would know how to promote him? I think it's safe to assume that regardless of whether he's able to or not, Stanley currently doesn't ''want'' to promote him. [[Special:Contributions/86.25.217.235\|86.25.217.235]] 11:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:05, 2 July 2009
Line 35:		Line 35:
	:In this case, "Lord" is short for Chief Warlord. Not all warlords are nobles. Noble titles include things like King, Prince, Duke, and Count (Slately, Ansom, Nozzle, and Vinny Doombats). These men are Rulers, Warlords, and Chief Warlord in addition to having their noble/royal titles. We don't know Parson's stats and we don't know if he's levelled. Moreover, we don't know any other Warlord's stats, so comparisons are impossible. Parson's main asset is his mind, which is not governed by stats anyway. [[User:Commander I. Heartly Noah\|Commander I. Heartly Noah]] June 29 2009		:In this case, "Lord" is short for Chief Warlord. Not all warlords are nobles. Noble titles include things like King, Prince, Duke, and Count (Slately, Ansom, Nozzle, and Vinny Doombats). These men are Rulers, Warlords, and Chief Warlord in addition to having their noble/royal titles. We don't know Parson's stats and we don't know if he's levelled. Moreover, we don't know any other Warlord's stats, so comparisons are impossible. Parson's main asset is his mind, which is not governed by stats anyway. [[User:Commander I. Heartly Noah\|Commander I. Heartly Noah]] June 29 2009
	:Speculation proved. Point. - [[User:NemFX\|NemFX]] 02:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC)		:Speculation proved. Point. - [[User:NemFX\|NemFX]] 02:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
		+	::Now, now... this isn't a competition. Noah was right to remove it at the time. Garrison being a temporary ability was completely speculative, and was not appropriate for Prop C. There's evidence now, but not then. This is, and always will be, a work in progress. --[[User:Kreistor\|Kreistor]] 03:05, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


	Speculation - Stronger than a Wiener-Rammer, though it may have already been weakened by the effort of breaking through the wall. Further speculation; Parson can now swear because he's a declared Player, as opposed to just another in-game unit. - [[User:NemFX\|NemFX]] 05:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)		Speculation - Stronger than a Wiener-Rammer, though it may have already been weakened by the effort of breaking through the wall. Further speculation; Parson can now swear because he's a declared Player, as opposed to just another in-game unit. - [[User:NemFX\|NemFX]] 05:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
	:Sword provided "Combat", so can't say anything for certain about Parson's personal prowess. (Give me a sword and let me swing at John Cena's neck... when it comes off, does that mean I'm stronger than he?) Declaring oneself a "player" is only useful if there are other players, and they agree to your inclusion. Haven't seen any "players" yet. Parson has never been "just another in-game unit". He has always been different. He tires. He has no visible stats. He can't see Unit stats. He can be deleted just for being disloyal. He suffered from much greater Natural Thinkamancies (not really natural, they come from spells, but similar effects) than normal, popped units. Fact is: we haven't seen him even try to break rules himself personally. He never tried to walk through a Hex Wall (something I would have done first day, just to prove there was a hex wall at all.) He may have been less restricted than he thought all along, but more restricted in different ways. Parson threw the sword away: that could have broken the Thinkamancy. He may have merely summoned the mental will, or the anger to overwhelm the Thinkamancy. There are many options: all that is important is that he broke it, somehow. The why may be revealed someday, but most authors wouldn't, leaving it as a great unknown, not even deciding so that in the future, if they need to use something like it, they haven't restricted themselves. --[[User:Kreistor\|Kreistor]] 06:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)		:Sword provided "Combat", so can't say anything for certain about Parson's personal prowess. (Give me a sword and let me swing at John Cena's neck... when it comes off, does that mean I'm stronger than he?) Declaring oneself a "player" is only useful if there are other players, and they agree to your inclusion. Haven't seen any "players" yet. Parson has never been "just another in-game unit". He has always been different. He tires. He has no visible stats. He can't see Unit stats. He can be deleted just for being disloyal. He suffered from much greater Natural Thinkamancies (not really natural, they come from spells, but similar effects) than normal, popped units. Fact is: we haven't seen him even try to break rules himself personally. He never tried to walk through a Hex Wall (something I would have done first day, just to prove there was a hex wall at all.) He may have been less restricted than he thought all along, but more restricted in different ways. Parson threw the sword away: that could have broken the Thinkamancy. He may have merely summoned the mental will, or the anger to overwhelm the Thinkamancy. There are many options: all that is important is that he broke it, somehow. The why may be revealed someday, but most authors wouldn't, leaving it as a great unknown, not even deciding so that in the future, if they need to use something like it, they haven't restricted themselves. --[[User:Kreistor\|Kreistor]] 06:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)