Talk:Sword of Ruthlessness

From ErfWiki

Revision as of 09:51, 4 June 2011 by 76.3.44.141 (Talk)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

I'm not sure we've actually seen the sword used in combat. The link connected to the page shows the golem taking down the attacker, not Parson.

but he killed the wiener rammer.Xewleer 07:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
It was speculated that Parson killed the Wiener-Rammer, while the golem killed the warlord. -- Muzzafar 05:35, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
So we agree it is lethal then? Xewleer 07:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Not much point in a sword that isn't ...
Not much of a sword if it isn't... after all, Ruthlessness needs an outlet.--Ichthus 08:52, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

You know, it could be interpreted that the progression of the sword parts Parson received were a reflection of his current state. He got the hilt when he finally had really gotten a handle on his situation, he got the forte when he was really hitting his stride and in his strongest area, and he got his foible at about the time he he was forced to face his mixed feelings about wanting to command armies in all sorts of battles while not wanting to actually kill. - No one in particular

[edit] "ruthelessness"

Removing this sentence from Spec:
Parson appears to refer to his sword as being named "ruthlesness". Erf-b1-p148Same-site.PNG He at least appears to identify his ruthless actions with the completion of his sword.

Parson states, 'What's "Ruthlessness?" Does this control my mind? Or what.' First, note that he places quotes around ruthlessness. He then calls the sword "this". Proper English, if he were referring to the sword in the first sentence would be "Does it control my mind?" The first question, then, is a Metaphysical and Mechanical one. Parson knows of Natural Thinkamancy. He's asking if Ruthlessness is a Natural Thinkamancy, like Loyalty, Duty, or Obedience. And he's asking if Ruthlessness would change his actions. And, ladies and gentlemen, so you really think Rob would name the sword, not tell us, and then destroy it so we never knew the name? Give the author some credit. Parson is asking about the effect of the sword, not naming it. --Kreistor 01:11, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Good point about the grammar. The "ladies and gentlemen" appeal is cute too. Dudecon 01:49, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Welp, it was named. Magugag 04:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Source: Erf-b2-p11Same-site.PNG JET73L 04:50, 04 June 2011
Go To:
Personal tools