Book 2 – Text Updates 011

Page by page discussion of the comic.

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 011

Postby Paŭlo » Wed Jan 27, 2010 5:40 am

Oberon wrote:So, you're saying that a magic automatic teller card that lets you withdraw a million dollars is worth less than a million dollars? That is contrary to my point, and it makes perfect sense to me that the card is worth the million dollars. If you had the card, would you sell it to me for $100,000? Because I would be taking that offer!

The thing is, there is no such card.
Suppose I have a ATM card who maybe would give you 1 million, maybe 500 000, maybe nothing ... depending on the ATM and the secret number you use (and you don't know the details of how those factors influence this, nor know I) - and you would have only one try, of course.
How much would you pay for this card? How much should I ask for?
(Suppose also I could not use the card for myself, only you or other buyers could. [The magic kingdom has no use for warlords].)

(But this is only on the topic "the spell is worth much more than its price", which is totally independent of "mortals can create artifacts".)
Paŭlo
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 011

Postby robak » Wed Jan 27, 2010 8:44 am

You know, there's this guy in Nigeria who has a lot of money he wants to share with me, only he cannot get it himself and needs my help :mrgreen:
robak
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 7:31 am

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 011

Postby HandofShadows » Wed Jan 27, 2010 9:22 am

Lamech wrote: Kind of pathetic for the side claiming to be the good guys. Well, really pathetic actually.


Oh come on! Erfworld is almost totaly Grey and Grey Morality (Share the Misery of TV Tropes- http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/M ... ayMorality ) . There are no real good guys or real bad guys with the exception af Parson.
HandofShadows
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 12:38 pm

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 011

Postby dan2178 » Thu Jan 28, 2010 5:26 pm

HandofShadows wrote:
Lamech wrote: Kind of pathetic for the side claiming to be the good guys. Well, really pathetic actually.


Oh come on! Erfworld is almost totaly Grey and Grey Morality (Share the Misery of TV Tropes- http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/M ... ayMorality ) . There are no real good guys or real bad guys with the exception af Parson.


How is Parson a good guy?
dan2178
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 2:22 pm

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 011

Postby Jeivar » Thu Jan 28, 2010 5:57 pm

dan2178 wrote:
HandofShadows wrote:
Lamech wrote: Kind of pathetic for the side claiming to be the good guys. Well, really pathetic actually.


Oh come on! Erfworld is almost totaly Grey and Grey Morality (Share the Misery of TV Tropes- http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/M ... ayMorality ) . There are no real good guys or real bad guys with the exception af Parson.


How is Parson a good guy?


Well, he has become disgusted by the slaughter inherent in Erworld existence, he won't have sex with the Archons since they really have no say in the matter, and he was broken up over what happened to Misty but also opted not to make Maggie pay for it. Among other things. I'd say that makes him the CLOSEST to a traditional good guy in Erfworld.
Jeivar
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 2:50 pm

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 011

Postby Oberon » Sun Jan 31, 2010 1:51 am

Sinrus wrote:Oberon, I agree with everything you say but one thing. The only weak point I can find in your logic is that the bracer is undoubtedly an artifact. There is canon evidence from Sizemore that magic items are made by mortals, and heavy implications that artifacts are not. However, the basis of your argument is that Sizemore also said that the bracer may be an artifact.
Yes, we have what appears to be contradictory statements from the same person. If all artifacts are Titan made, then the implication of Sizemore saying that the bracer may be an artifact, is that the summoning scroll either created or transported an artifact to Parson. And also the context of Sizemore's analysis, which was potency and not origin: "This is a very powerful item, or maybe artifact."

We also have the history of Erf as hints: The Titans are absent. They are revered in much the same way as the Christian God is revered: As the creator(s), but creators who are not taking any apparent interest in their creation. Every reference to them reinforces this. The only interaction any Erf resident hopes for is after death, when if they were militant enough during life they enter the City of Heroes. Thus, any speculation that the Titans created the bracer is countered by the weight of evidence that the Titans do not take part in the operation of Erfworld. And if the summoning scroll created an artifact, and all artifacts are of Titanic origin, then the summoning scroll must be an artifact. And we know that the summoning scroll was created by caster units, and so there is a conflict here.

Nebulious wrote:As an upfront disclaimer, I haven't read the whole thread. But this line is the core of you argument: your personal definition of artifact. It is wrong, Sizemore explicitly states that magic items are made by mortals and artifacts by Titans. That's it. Done.
Not done. We have a contradictory statement by Sizemore also, see above.

Nebulious wrote:This brings us to the tricky question: is the bracer an artifact? Sizemore speculates that it's powerful enough to be Titanic. The spell could have summoned it to Parson via Findmancy, allowing it to be either mortal or Titan made, but still acquired by mortal means. (The inset for Parson's watch doesn't concern me, since even Stanley can do resizing of magic items.) So what we do know is that the bracer could be an artifact, but it has nothing to do with economics.
Be careful! Sizemore most definitely did NOT speculate that the bracer is powerful enough to be Titanic. This kind of retconning to support your position is dishonest in the extreme. Sizemore said that it was "a powerful item, maybe artifact." That's all. No reference to the Titans at all.

Sinrus wrote:Now before I continue, let me remind you that I agree wholeheartedly that if a scroll can bring you an artifact that it is as valuable as an artifact. Of course, that doesn't mean that it is an artifact. To use a previous analogy, the cup of coffee I bought with a dollar bill is in and of itself not a dollar bill. It is, of course, the same value as a dollar bill.
It does not have to mean that the summoning scroll is an artifact, I agree. But there is sufficient doubt, based upon Sizemore himself who is to date the sole source for this information. And see my above "absent Titans" thesis for further support of the doubt.

theseus2x wrote:Look, 'artifact' is a term. It has an actual meaning and definition based on what Sizemore said. No need to make more of it than it is.
And yet again, Sizemore himself calls into doubt his earlier statement. The definition you want to give absolute credence is not as absolute as you might hope.

theseus2x wrote:Agreed. We have no reason to think another scroll would result in an item being procured that could turn around and be sold for more than we paid for the scroll. For that matter, we don't know if the Bracer can work without Parson. For that matter, we don't know if there are more scrolls.
If we are to speculate, we must consider the story to hold the most valid information, yes? More valid than idle speculation, at the very least.

Within the story we have seen the following facts:

1) Items can be created by casters working together - The Eyebooks, the summoning scroll, and the laurel are all in-story examples of this.
2) Items can be created more than once, they are not unique - The Eyebooks and Hats are examples of this.
3) The summoning scroll was created by Findamancers and Predictamancers.

Taking these facts and applying them to our speculation, we quickly see that it is foolish to decide that there is "no reason" to believe that there could be additional summoning scrolls. It may be convenient for one's own pet theories, but it is not consistent to the story. Where was the page describing the sudden deaths of the Findamancers and Predictamancers? I must have missed that one. If they still exist, then they can make additional summoning scrolls. This is the ONLY conclusion supported within the story.
theseus2x wrote:Prior to the Battle in Book 1, if Stanley had one inkling that he could have sold Parson's bracer for 150k, he probably would have done it.
Again, look to the story before you speculate. We have the following facts:

1) Stanley wants more Arkentools - He went to war for this very reason.
3) Stanley supports his people's hobbies and interests.
4) Wanda is a unit under Stanley - He would instantly know if she was not, and any GK units not led by a Warlord in her presence would instantly attack her.
5) Wanda now has an Arkentool, the very one Stanley had insisted that Ansom was bringing to HIM.
6) Stanley has not ordered Wanda to give him the Arkenpliers. He is rather sulky about her ownership and attunement, but he hasn't even hinted that he might demand them from her.
7) Despite the update describing how a subordinate unit can be ordered to "pleasure" a superior unit, we have never seen Stanley order Wanda to do this. Or any other unit, for that matter.
8) We know that Stanley enjoys sex with Wanda, or at the very least does not turn it down when it is offered.

So again, within the story, there is NOTHING that suggests that Stanley would have ordered Parson to hand over the bracer, despite its great value.

So again, there is nothing, zilch, zip, zero, to support the speculation that "if Stanley had one inkling that he could have sold Parson's bracer for 150k, he probably would have done it." And a great deal of in-story facts to dispute that assertion.
How using capslock wins arguments:
Zeroberon wrote:So we know with 100% certainty that THIS IS HOW TRI-LINKS WORK, PERIOD END OF STORY.
Oberon
 
Posts: 1191
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 7:59 am

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 011

Postby regisminae » Sun Jan 31, 2010 6:23 pm

A thought just struck me: Date-a-mancy --> Datamancy? It is the hippiemancers' numbermancy, after all.

Aah, the puns. It's the little things that make a difference, sometimes.
regisminae
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:07 am

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 011

Postby theseus2x » Tue Feb 02, 2010 5:50 pm

Oberon wrote:Again, look to the story before you speculate. We have the following facts:

1) Stanley wants more Arkentools - He went to war for this very reason.


Agreed.

Oberon wrote:3) Stanley supports his people's hobbies and interests.


No. He supports Wanda's hobbies and interests. He says he supports others, but read Book 1. He loathes Parson. He's lucky if he remembers everyone else's name.

Oberon wrote:4) Wanda is a unit under Stanley - He would instantly know if she was not, and any GK units not led by a Warlord in her presence would instantly attack her.


Technically. Want to bet on what her Loyalty rating is?

Oberon wrote:5) Wanda now has an Arkentool, the very one Stanley had insisted that Ansom was bringing to HIM.


Yeah, and Stanley's been pissy about that. Check the Summer Updates.

Oberon wrote:6) Stanley has not ordered Wanda to give him the Arkenpliers. He is rather sulky about her ownership and attunement, but he hasn't even hinted that he might demand them from her.


As stupid as he is, Stanley grasps the principal of attunement. The pliers attuned to Wanda, NOT to Stanley. Even croaking Wanda wouldn't (presumably?) make them attuneable to Stanley. In his arrogance, Stanley assumed he was supposed to have them all. Yeah, that was a bitter pill to swallow, but he can adjust that much.

Oberon wrote:7) Despite the update describing how a subordinate unit can be ordered to "pleasure" a superior unit, we have never seen Stanley order Wanda to do this. Or any other unit, for that matter.


Wanda has had Stanley around her little finger for about the first half of Book 1 and everything before that. There's is a strange relationship, made more complicated via the pliers.

Oberon wrote:8) We know that Stanley enjoys sex with Wanda, or at the very least does not turn it down when it is offered.


Sure. Want to bet that they haven't done it since she got the pliers?

Oberon wrote:So again, within the story, there is NOTHING that suggests that Stanley would have ordered Parson to hand over the bracer, despite its great value.

So again, there is nothing, zilch, zip, zero, to support the speculation that "if Stanley had one inkling that he could have sold Parson's bracer for 150k, he probably would have done it." And a great deal of in-story facts to dispute that assertion.


I disagree. NONE of your points had anything to do with Parson. They had to do with Wanda. The Stanley/Wanda dynamic is VERY different than Stanley/Parson. Stanley has nothing but contempt for Parson. Stanley keeps threatening to disband Parson, and once was about to demote him to infantry. What's more, Parson doesn't generally kiss Stanley's ass. As Stanley like "yes men" types, their relationship has been one of constant conflict. Stanley's never truly given Parson credit for any of his successes, and have blamed him for several things (like the Gobwin shortage) that have little to do with Parson.

I think Stanley would sell Parson AND the Bracer for 500k. I think Stanley would make that deal for much less.

p.s. What the heck does Wanda and Stanley having sex have to do with Parson???
User avatar
theseus2x
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 11:01 pm

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 011

Postby Oberon » Sat Feb 06, 2010 5:48 pm

theseus2x wrote:
Oberon wrote:3) Stanley supports his people's hobbies and interests.

No. He supports Wanda's hobbies and interests. He says he supports others, but read Book 1. He loathes Parson. He's lucky if he remembers everyone else's name.
We were introduced to Sizemore while he was on a field trip to the MK to learn some Hippymancy. Stanley calls Sizemore "the turd guy", and completely disdains him. This speaks to Stanley's personality, but his crappy personality does nothing to disprove his statement that he supports his people's hobbies.

Parson is able to borrow Sizemore, Maggy, and Jack for walks around the city that Parson could do just as well alone. And Parson, Sizemore, and Maggy were able to have a picnic lunch together undisturbed by their duties. And Parson is able to consume a good amount of Jack's time running battle exercises. Hell, even the guards were able to waste time pulling pranks on Bogroll. All this, in a world with no weekend breaks, and where individual freedoms such as volunteering for a duty are unheard of concepts.

I'll say it again: You're going to have to start looking to the story if you hope to make the case that Stanley is more than just obnoxious. We know he is obnoxious, this is very clear from the story. But he is not a slave driver, and he does indeed allow his people a good amount of freedom and latitude to pursue their interests, spend time with friends, and take breaks from their duties. This is also very clear from the story, as well as from Stanley's words.

theseus2x wrote:
Oberon wrote:4) Wanda is a unit under Stanley - He would instantly know if she was not, and any GK units not led by a Warlord in her presence would instantly attack her.

Technically. Want to bet on what her Loyalty rating is?
Technically? What does that even mean, in this context? There is no middle ground. Wanda is either a GK unit, or she is not. She is a GK unit. Her loyalty may be a point of debate, but her status as a unit of GK is not any kind of "technicality", it is a fact.
theseus2x wrote:
Oberon wrote:5) Wanda now has an Arkentool, the very one Stanley had insisted that Ansom was bringing to HIM.

Yeah, and Stanley's been pissy about that. Check the Summer Updates.
You'll please note that I said as much myself, there is no need to repeat me. It is clear he isn't happy about it, but it's also clear that he hasn't ordered her to hand them over, nor disbanded her out of hand and picked them up himself.
theseus2x wrote:
Oberon wrote:8) We know that Stanley enjoys sex with Wanda, or at the very least does not turn it down when it is offered.

Sure. Want to bet that they haven't done it since she got the pliers?
We haven't seen it happen again at all, pliers notwithstanding. That is the point: That Stanley has not exercised his power over Wanda, even when she could not refuse and when it is something he enjoys.
theseus2x wrote:
Oberon wrote:So again, there is nothing, zilch, zip, zero, to support the speculation that "if Stanley had one inkling that he could have sold Parson's bracer for 150k, he probably would have done it." And a great deal of in-story facts to dispute that assertion.

I disagree. NONE of your points had anything to do with Parson. They had to do with Wanda.
No, they have to do with Stanley. Stanley hasn't been shown as an overlord who is grasping or greedy when it comes to his own people, and there is nothing in the story to back any assertion to the contrary. In fact, all evidence we've seen so far supports the fact that leaders do not "steal" from their subordinates. Every single piece of evidence:

1) Saline IV did not take the Hammer from Stanley;
2) Stanley did not take the sword from Parson;
3) Stanley did not take the bracer from Parson;
4) Stanley did not take the scrolls from Wanda;
5) Stanley did not take the Pliers from Wanda;
6) Slately did not take the teleforce bracer from Ossomer;
7) The Jitterati Overlord/King did not take the Laurel from Duncan;
8) Jillian did not take the Laurel from Duncan;

Really, how much more evidence do you need? I won't argue that King or Overlords can't take possessions from their units, but there does seem to be a very strong, tradition I guess is the word, to let your people keep possessions which they manage to acquire.

theseus2x wrote:I think Stanley would sell Parson AND the Bracer for 500k. I think Stanley would make that deal for much less.

p.s. What the heck does Wanda and Stanley having sex have to do with Parson???
You seem to have come to the conclusion that I was talking about Parson. I was talking about Stanley, and Kings/Overlords in general, and how they treat their people. Wanda and Stanley having sex only at Wanda's instigation shows that Stanley does not exercise the power over Wanda that he has to, as Parson put it, make her drop to her knees and pleasure him any time he commands it.

And as for Stanley selling Parson and the bracer for any amount of schmuckers, you'll have to show me some evidence within the story to support your conclusion. I think I've shown plenty of evidence from within the story that concludes just the opposite.
How using capslock wins arguments:
Zeroberon wrote:So we know with 100% certainty that THIS IS HOW TRI-LINKS WORK, PERIOD END OF STORY.
Oberon
 
Posts: 1191
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 7:59 am

Previous

Return to Reactions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Corieu, Google [Bot] and 12 guests