Talk:Parson Gotti

From ErfWiki

Revision as of 06:26, 29 June 2009 by Kreistor (Talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search


Who controls Parson?

I've seen some debate over who actually Parson most obey, Wanda or Stanley. I haven't seen this comic mentioned before but in the last panel of it looks like Wanda is issuing a command that P. should use Tool, not Lord. What do you think of that?

-Nope. Wanda's comment "you'll only use that word again," is a response to Parson's question, not a command. She means, "If I tell you how bad it is, you'll only swear ("use that word," boop) again."


I removed a sentence that someone added suggesting that Parson was disbanded without being "removed from the world". Sorry, man, but we do not know the effect of Disbanding. We do know that there is a Barbarian state. Disbanding may be a process whereby a unit becomes a barbarian. But that it disappears? Disbanding in our world merely means leaving the group you're in and wandering off home, not death. We do know that units are required to run farms, so disbanding to leave the military can mean the unit stops being military and becomes rural. We just do not know what the term means, and so using the term must be open enough to cover all possible definitions.
--Kreistor 14:01, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

We don't know for sure, but it doesn't seem to me that Sizemore would be all that alarmed about being disbanded (if they crossed Stanley's path after he told them to get out of his sight) if it just meant becoming a barbarian. SteveMB 15:05, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
A barbarian without money to provide upkeep? Being a barbarian is not easy. Parson, as a barbarian, may die from starvation fairly quickly. In teh MK, they've got friends that may help them out, but that's not for Parson, as we saw. I'm not saying that being a barbarian is easy: it's hard, and a lot harder if you lack any units to support you, and have no reputation you can use to gain mercenary employment. Further, he'd be an unallied unit, in the midst of thousands of unled troops. Auto-attack rules come into effect -- he will die if disbanded inside GK, but not from the effect of disbanding, but from basic sword thrusts. --Kreistor 16:19, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't think either Sizemore or Parson would have any trouble quickly striking an alliance or turning to a side if they went barbarian. Also, as noted above, Sizemore could probably just go to the MK (if he could make it to a portal... not sure how that would go). Sizemore definitely seemed in fear for their lives, and Parson surmizes in a Klog that Stanley has the ability to essentially kill him with a thought. Together, this seems to me enough evidence to guess that Disbanding is equivalent to death (or at least appears that way to the denizens of Erfworld), though we don't know the exact mechanics of how it works. Commander I. Heartly Noah June 10 2009, 17:51 (UTC)

Disbanding came back again, this time while "still working for Stanley". Snip as being a purely theoretical state of existence unsupported by the comic. If he had disbanded, he would not be on Side, and he would be getting auto-attacked by any unlead unit. Parson is still on GK Side. Oh, yeah... Stanley wouldn't have to pay his upkeep anymore, he'd have to do that himself, and that would get noticed. --Kreistor 06:50, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Why, exactly...

Why exactly is there a book 1 plot summary on Parson's character page? Seems really out of place. --Jerichothebard 21:58, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


Removed "Garrison" from Parson's special abilities. Though he has not left the city yet, there is no reason to assume now that he can't. I would be much surprised if any Warlord could be a Garrison unit. Commander I. Heartly Noah June 22, 2009, 17:59 (UTC)

I agree with that decision, but on the subject of Garrison... it may be a temporary thing. Bogroll is a Garrison unit, but nothing physically stops him from leaving GK. Garrison may be added when assigned to the Garrison, and not a permanent state. So Parson might have Garrison for the moment, but not later. We will see.--Kreistor 06:59, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
He has difficulty moving around one hex, it's unlikely he can get to another. Plus, given all of his similarities to Bogroll, it seems likely that the unit type he is, is more likely not to go off around the world when he's controlling everything from the capitol. I think he should be considered garrison until proven in the story otherwise. - 19:15, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
But he hasn't attempted to leave the City yet. There's no reason to believe he's incapable of it until we see some evidence. Oh wait, yeah, he did - when he went through the portal to the Magic Kingdom. Not a long hike, but definitely out of the hex. His similarities to Bogroll? You mean that they're both tall and fat? How about that other twoll who was out in the field, and therefore clearly not a Garrison unit? Isn't he more similar than Parson? And to Parson, come to think of it, since they both have two eyes. Plus, getting around so laboriously is supposed to be evidence of him not fitting the rules, not of him being constrained by them. Maybe, instead of having a Move value, he can move as far as he's physically able. Oh yeah - Bogroll is a Garrison unit and doesn't get tired, so why is Parson's poor fitness indication that he's a Garrison unit? And the idea that Parson would be best served by staying in the city is no evidence that he can't leave. And all of that aside, we should default to assuming a special circumstance (like having a particular Natural Ability) is not the case until shown otherwise, not the other way around. Commander I. Heartly Noah June 23, 2009, 01:43 (UTC)
Additionally, by breaking the hold of the Thikamancy in the Summon Spell, might he have begn the process of freeing himself from the game mechanics? As a player, he needs to remove the limitation of operating inside the system. He has to operate from above it. He may, ultimately, have to breach a Hex Wall. --Kreistor 06:59, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

We are allowed to speculate, yes? I hereby speculate that he is a garrison unit, and he may also potentially be a noble. When asked by Stanley on page 24, he is officially named Lord Hamster. Ansom later claims that this title means nothing, but Ansom is not infallible. Given Parson's quick adapting skills and his ability to attempt to metagame (when he meets Misty, he's trying to) it could be said that he's doing things better, and potentially levelling (without visible stats, nobody can tell) both are things Ansom has said nobles do better. - NemFX 06:24, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

There's a difference between Speculation and Pet Theories. If you want to pull somethign out of thin air, try it on the Forum first, and then if there's some positive feedback, consider putting it here. But if it's not got any support at all, there are a lot more people that disagree that can remove it than will put it back. Fantasize as much as you want, just not whee people are supposed to come to answer their questions. --Kreistor 06:40, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
There is a place for pet theories on the wiki, as well.--Doran 16:29, 27 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. - NemFX 05:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Sword provided "Combat", so can't say anything for certain about Parson's personal prowess. 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. --Kreistor 06:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Go To:
Personal tools