Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 050

[effataigus]

More importantly, we have reports on what one can recall from the two kinds of links. Jack remembered what he learned from the Eyebooks. They wouldn't have attempted that if Jack would come back and say "So I checked for flaws on the eyebooks, and its all kind of fuzzy". Tri-links left Sizemore with a fuzzy memory though. Vanna also had a fuzzy memory.

So that means its likely a trimancer link. Due to the (perceived) risk of such links he must have hired people who were willing to accept the risk to stop G.K. Introducing someone like that retroactively is bad form, especially if there is someone else you can use who already exists. That leaves Jojo, the changeamancer, and the findamancer. Jojo is absolutely the best canidate since ending your opponents turn is pretty clearly cheating, plus we already know he has linked with Charlie. (The Charlie-carnymancy scroll.)

While I don't really object to the line of speculation as a whole (as speculation), I wanted to poke at two bits of this:
1. A changeamancer and a turnamancer is a more sensible fit for a spell that changed which turn it is than a turnamancer and a carnymancer... to my mind at least.
2. The fact that a carnymancer has a scroll with carnymancy on it does not imply anything about whether said carnymancer has linked with anyone... again to my mind.

I'd love to see this worked out in the amateur predictamancy thread! Screw quatloos... the loser has to make a new account named either "Oh"beron or "Zero"beron!

[Oberon]

Actually there IS evidence, I just offered it, but sure I'll bet on it if you want.

You offered some speculation, but nothing that falls under the definition of evidence. By the sheer weight of your speculation any other caster could equally have been involved with Kingworld (*ptui!*), since Charley is well known for hiring MK casters.

[0beron]

No, what I offered as evidence is this:
Casters who we know participated in Tri-links have fuzzy memories and cannot understand fully the spells they cast while linked, whereas duo-links have been shown to not cause this symptom. Vanna had a fuzzy memory of Kingworld, therefore we know she was tri-linked to perform it. THIS is hard evidence.

Where we get into "speculation" is deducing who that third caster was. Given our knowledge of magic, Carnymancy makes sense as the school of this third caster, because Kingworld rigged a mechanic. And as Lamech described above, by Occam's razor, it would then follow that JoJo was the Carnymancer involved. The term speculation implies more guesswork, whereas this is a conclusion reached through logical deduction.

[Lamech]

More importantly, we have reports on what one can recall from the two kinds of links. Jack remembered what he learned from the Eyebooks. They wouldn't have attempted that if Jack would come back and say "So I checked for flaws on the eyebooks, and its all kind of fuzzy". Tri-links left Sizemore with a fuzzy memory though. Vanna also had a fuzzy memory.

So that means its likely a trimancer link. Due to the (perceived) risk of such links he must have hired people who were willing to accept the risk to stop G.K. Introducing someone like that retroactively is bad form, especially if there is someone else you can use who already exists. That leaves Jojo, the changeamancer, and the findamancer. Jojo is absolutely the best canidate since ending your opponents turn is pretty clearly cheating, plus we already know he has linked with Charlie. (The Charlie-carnymancy scroll.)

While I don't really object to the line of speculation as a whole (as speculation), I wanted to poke at two bits of this:
1. A changeamancer and a turnamancer is a more sensible fit for a spell that changed which turn it is than a turnamancer and a carnymancer... to my mind at least.

Agreed. Our changamancer is also a good possibility.

2. The fact that a carnymancer has a scroll with carnymancy on it does not imply anything about whether said carnymancer has linked with anyone... again to my mind.

Okay in one of the comics this happened:
1) Isaac looks at the carny scroll
2) He says "Jojo..." in what I took as disappoint.
3) He tells Parson the scroll was crafted by Charlie to destroy him.

So it isn't just a carnymancy scroll, its a Charlie-Carny scroll. Unless there was a second Carny Charlie had working for him he and Jojo linked to make the scroll.

[0beron]

2. The fact that a carnymancer has a scroll with carnymancy on it does not imply anything about whether said carnymancer has linked with anyone... again to my mind.

Okay in one of the comics this happened:
1) Isaac looks at the carny scroll
2) He says "Jojo..." in what I took as disappoint.
3) He tells Parson the scroll was crafted by Charlie to destroy him.
So it isn't just a carnymancy scroll, its a Charlie-Carny scroll. Unless there was a second Carny Charlie had working for him he and Jojo linked to make the scroll.

The disappointment was because he knew JoJo had GIVEN it to Parson. Issac doesn't know if JoJo helped craft it, but he knows it is from Charlie, and Parson had told him JoJo delivered it.

[Housellama]

2. The fact that a carnymancer has a scroll with carnymancy on it does not imply anything about whether said carnymancer has linked with anyone... again to my mind.

Okay in one of the comics this happened:
1) Isaac looks at the carny scroll
2) He says "Jojo..." in what I took as disappoint.
3) He tells Parson the scroll was crafted by Charlie to destroy him.
So it isn't just a carnymancy scroll, its a Charlie-Carny scroll. Unless there was a second Carny Charlie had working for him he and Jojo linked to make the scroll.

The disappointment was because he knew JoJo had GIVEN it to Parson. Issac doesn't know if JoJo helped craft it, but he knows it is from Charlie, and Parson had told him JoJo delivered it.

Uhm. Maybe I missed something here. While I realize that we don't know if Queen Bea's pledge is binding, Charlescomm is most definitely not a royal side. Just because Charlie crafted the scroll doesn't mean that Jojo's working for him. Jojo's got plenty of his own reasons to hurt GK. It could have been another carny. Jojo doesn't strike me as the type that would get in bed with someone like Charlie like that. Take something from him with no strings, sure. But trust him enough to link with him? No way. I just don't see it in his character.

Also, I still maintain that Charlie isn't a Thinkamancer.

She was sure that if the message were received, then the Thinkamancers would protect Parson's passage, for the same reason that her message must be coded in the first place.

That reason was not part of the close-knit fraternity of Thinkamancers, but it knew their secrets and more. That reason had the whole world by its G-Strings.

That reason called itself, "Charlie."

Charlie can do some impressive stuff, including Thinkamancy, because he has the Arkendish, but that doesn't make him a Thinkamancer. Keep that in mind. It makes a difference.

[0beron]

The disappointment was because he knew JoJo had GIVEN it to Parson. Issac doesn't know if JoJo helped craft it, but he knows it is from Charlie, and Parson had told him JoJo delivered it.

Uhm. Maybe I missed something here. While I realize that we don't know if Queen Bea's pledge is binding, Charlescomm is most definitely not a royal side. Just because Charlie crafted the scroll doesn't mean that Jojo's working for him. Jojo's got plenty of his own reasons to hurt GK. It could have been another carny. Jojo doesn't strike me as the type that would get in bed with someone like Charlie like that. Take something from him with no strings, sure. But trust him enough to link with him? No way. I just don't see it in his character.

I'm not sure if you're refuting my bit about Issac, but I'll address that anyway. I was actually pointing out that Issac's statement is NOT proof of JoJo being in the Kingworld link. Issac's statement is only proof that he is disappointed JoJo would have given this scroll to Parson, and it implies JoJo could/does know it was Charlie's work.

However, your comment about Bea's pledge has definitely been clarified. Either it was not binding, or JoJo cheated it, because he is definitely working for Charlie right now in Portal Park. Which means he coulda been working for Charlie back during Kingworld too. In fact now that I think about it, that could be how he is "cheating" the pledge if it was binding. Kingworld worked "for" a Royal side...and delivering the scroll/holding up Parson also helps Jetstone. Both times we suspect him to be working for Charlie are situations that allow him to "work for" a Royal Side.

[Lamech]

The disappointment was because he knew JoJo had GIVEN it to Parson. Issac doesn't know if JoJo helped craft it, but he knows it is from Charlie, and Parson had told him JoJo delivered it.

Uhm. Maybe I missed something here. While I realize that we don't know if Queen Bea's pledge is binding, Charlescomm is most definitely not a royal side. Just because Charlie crafted the scroll doesn't mean that Jojo's working for him. Jojo's got plenty of his own reasons to hurt GK. It could have been another carny. Jojo doesn't strike me as the type that would get in bed with someone like Charlie like that. Take something from him with no strings, sure. But trust him enough to link with him? No way. I just don't see it in his character.

I'm not sure if you're refuting my bit about Issac, but I'll address that anyway. I was actually pointing out that Issac's statement is NOT proof of JoJo being in the Kingworld link. Issac's statement is only proof that he is disappointed JoJo would have given this scroll to Parson, and it implies JoJo could/does know it was Charlie's work.

However, your comment about Bea's pledge has definitely been clarified. Either it was not binding, or JoJo cheated it, because he is definitely working for Charlie right now in Portal Park. Which means he coulda been working for Charlie back during Kingworld too. In fact now that I think about it, that could be how he is "cheating" the pledge if it was binding. Kingworld worked "for" a Royal side...and delivering the scroll/holding up Parson also helps Jetstone. Both times we suspect him to be working for Charlie are situations that allow him to "work for" a Royal Side.

If it is binding, it could very easily be Charlie working for them. They are buying the order of battle, assistance with spells, and help making scrolls from Charlescomm. The only reason all the plans came from Charlie is they paid Charlie for said plans. (He tried this with Tram in fact.)

[Housellama]

The disappointment was because he knew JoJo had GIVEN it to Parson. Issac doesn't know if JoJo helped craft it, but he knows it is from Charlie, and Parson had told him JoJo delivered it.

Uhm. Maybe I missed something here. While I realize that we don't know if Queen Bea's pledge is binding, Charlescomm is most definitely not a royal side. Just because Charlie crafted the scroll doesn't mean that Jojo's working for him. Jojo's got plenty of his own reasons to hurt GK. It could have been another carny. Jojo doesn't strike me as the type that would get in bed with someone like Charlie like that. Take something from him with no strings, sure. But trust him enough to link with him? No way. I just don't see it in his character.

I'm not sure if you're refuting my bit about Issac, but I'll address that anyway. I was actually pointing out that Issac's statement is NOT proof of JoJo being in the Kingworld link. Issac's statement is only proof that he is disappointed JoJo would have given this scroll to Parson, and it implies JoJo could/does know it was Charlie's work.

Not refuting per se. Questioning and clarifying. Unless I've missed something (which is entirely possible), you are speculating about the cause of the disappointment but I agree with the rest. All we know is that Isaac said that Charlie was involved in the creation, that Sizemore said it's a form of Carnymancy and that Jojo gave it to Parson. From what we have been told, the only part that Charlie is necessarily involved in is the scroll's creation, and we only have Isaac's word for that. He's not exactly unbiased in this particular situation. Jojo could have obtained that scroll from anywhere. Jojo doesn't have to be in direct contact with Charlie. In fact, as I will show below, there's some pretty compelling evidence against the idea that Jojo is directly involved with Charlie.

However, your comment about Bea's pledge has definitely been clarified. Either it was not binding, or JoJo cheated it, because he is definitely working for Charlie right now in Portal Park. Which means he coulda been working for Charlie back during Kingworld too. In fact now that I think about it, that could be how he is "cheating" the pledge if it was binding. Kingworld worked "for" a Royal side...and delivering the scroll/holding up Parson also helps Jetstone. Both times we suspect him to be working for Charlie are situations that allow him to "work for" a Royal Side.

Vanna was working for FAQ. Charlie donated FAQ the funds required to pay her bills. That's not a loophole. Vanna wasn't working for Charlie. She's working for FAQ. So far, we've seen units upholding Bea's pledge. The Rulers that have been involved with them have been shady, but the Casters themselves have been straight up. The only thing we have linking Charlie to the events in Portal Park is Isaac's word that Charlie was involved in the scroll's creation. (And as I said, we have reason to believe that Isaac may be less than honest here. He could be taking advantage of an opportunity that presented itself.) Everything else is speculation. Unless you can point at direct evidence that Jojo and Charlie are in direct collaboration, you can't say that he is "definitely working" for him.

[0beron]

Well considering that the disappointment comment came right after being told JoJo had given the scroll, I'd call it a safe assumption that was the reason.

As for the rest, I agree it's somewhere between deduction and speculation. Like I pointed out before, Kingworld had the hallmarks of being a Tri-link, and the most logical 3rd caster would be a Carny. Given that the only Carny we actually know in any degree of detail is JoJo, it then follows that he was linked with them to do Kingworld. Again, it's not stated, but it's a logical deduction.

[Housellama]

Well considering that the disappointment comment came right after being told JoJo had given the scroll, I'd call it a safe assumption that was the reason.

As for the rest, I agree it's somewhere between deduction and speculation. Like I pointed out before, Kingworld had the hallmarks of being a Tri-link, and the most logical 3rd caster would be a Carny. Given that the only Carny we actually know in any degree of detail is JoJo, it then follows that he was linked with them to do Kingworld. Again, it's not stated, but it's a logical deduction.

It's not deduction. Deduction goes from a whole to an individual unit. This would be closer to induction. Going from an individual unit to an unseen whole. And as long as you realize that that it's not solid, there's no problem. Everyone's got a right to their own opinions. Even if they are wrong.

[0beron]

Well if we're debating semantics, then yes it's induction because I am (loosely speaking) using data to predict another point within the range, rather than extrapolating out to a point beyond the range. (I know the difference between the 2 in mathematical terms, so sorry if that seems like odd wording haha)

[Housellama]

Well if we're debating semantics, then yes it's induction because I am (loosely speaking) using data to predict another point within the range, rather than extrapolating out to a point beyond the range. (I know the difference between the 2 in mathematical terms, so sorry if that seems like odd wording haha)

It's alright. I've been debating with philosophy majors for three semesters now. The difference between the two matters a lot in that kind of crowd.

[Arky]

It seems to me to be highly likely that Kingworld was a tri-mancer link based on the "fuzzy memory" evidence and the power of the spell.

It seems unlikely that Jojo was involved, simply because he had plenty of juice left to continue enacting Charlie's will in the Magic Kingdom. I'm sure Charlie has more than one operative.

[Oberon]

No, what I offered as evidence is this:
Casters who we know participated in Tri-links have fuzzy memories and cannot understand fully the spells they cast while linked, whereas duo-links have been shown to not cause this symptom. Vanna had a fuzzy memory of Kingworld, therefore we know she was tri-linked to perform it. THIS is hard evidence.

You can't call this "hard evidence." They may be true facts, but there is a big difference between a true fact and evidence from which a non-speculative conclusion can be drawn. Let me demonstrate (this is a hypothetical, in case anyone wonders):
I own a rifle. A murder was committed in my neighborhood with the same caliber rifle. These are facts, but they are not evidence. You cannot use these two facts to conclude that either I or someone using my rifle committed the crime. And yet this is the exact same stretch you are using to conclude that the K-word was a trimancer link.

Even granting you for the sake of discussion that Kingworld (*Ptui!*) was a trimancer link, that puts the grand total of trimancer links at three (Table, Volcano, and the K-word). In addition we have, what? One single example of a bimancer link where we've actually had some characters discuss how it felt? So, if you're right then the count is tri: 3 and bi: 1. And if you're wrong then the count is tri: 2 and bi: 2. An awfully small sample size to be reaching conclusions based upon such very scant and very subjective descriptions of the experience of being linked.

Here's evidence just as strong as yours, as in they are facts from which one can arrive at a conclusion, but are not true evidence:
Vanna: "Charlie...freed me when the turn started."
Not freed us, just freed me. For an experience that merges three people into almost a single mind, that choice of pronoun suggests (just suggests, it's not proof by any means) that the link only contained she and Charlie. And she only ever mentions Charlie as being a part of the link, no mention at all of a third party, another exclusion which also is not proof. We do know that Vanna and Charlie were involved in the link, and we have no mention of any other being involved. So with these facts one could conclude that the K-word was only a bimancer link. But you couldn't claim that there was evidence for it not being a trimancer link, just the same as you couldn't claim that that there was evidence for it not being a quadmancer link.

Also, I'm not finding any statements from Vanna that her memory was fuzzy and she couldn't remember details. Can you provide the source of that for me, please? And please tell me you aren't arriving at a hard conclusion that Vanna had a fuzzy memory of the experience from Vanna's "That was like, whoa," which is all I found of her describing the link experience.

[Oberon]

Charlie can do some impressive stuff, including Thinkamancy, because he has the Arkendish, but that doesn't make him a Thinkamancer. Keep that in mind. It makes a difference.

What is that difference? Charlie has "unmatched" powers of thinkamancy, granted by the 'dish. So much so that there is a coalition of powerful thinkamancers allied against him. Whether he was a thinkamancer or not prior to gaining these "unmatched" powers, I see no practical difference. The only real difference that I see is that if the 'dish can be removed from Charlie's possession, then he'll either have reduced thinkamancy capabilities if he was already a thinkamancer, or he'll have no thinkamancy capabilities if he was not a thinkamancer.

Since we've seen no casters as rulers of a side, and since casters would otherwise make excellent rulers due to the risk of losing them if they do not remain in the capital, I'm happy to assume until shown otherwise that Charlie was not a thinkamancer before he got the 'dish. But I'm not invested in it either way.

[WaterMonkey314]

Since we've seen no casters as rulers of a side, and since casters would otherwise make excellent rulers due to the risk of losing them if they do not remain in the capital, I'm happy to assume until shown otherwise that Charlie was not a thinkamancer before he got the 'dish. But I'm not invested in it either way.

Technically we have seen a caster-ruler, as Wanda was briefly Overlord of Goodminton before (during) its fall.

[0beron]

Even granting you for the sake of discussion that Kingworld (*Ptui!*) was a trimancer link, that puts the grand total of trimancer links at three (Table, Volcano, and the K-word). In addition we have, what? One single example of a bimancer link where we've actually had some characters discuss how it felt?

We have 2 known bi-links actually. Maggie/Sizemore and Maggie/Jack. The latter talks about their feelings very distinctly, and in the former they also discuss what they did quite clearly. And regardless, this isn't a world where "sample size" matters, it is a game with specified mechanics such that X will always be X and never Y.

[effataigus]

Okay in one of the comics this happened:
1) Isaac looks at the carny scroll
2) He says "Jojo..." in what I took as disappoint.
3) He tells Parson the scroll was crafted by Charlie to destroy him.

This could also plausibly be short for Charlie had the scroll crafted. I don't dispute that Charlie was a party to this scroll... just that it was necessairly done in a linkup.

Even granting you for the sake of discussion that Kingworld (*Ptui!*) was a trimancer link, that puts the grand total of trimancer links at three (Table, Volcano, and the K-word). In addition we have, what?

Not that it is terribly pertinent, but I believe Summon Perfect Warlord was also a t-link.

[Oberon]

Technically we have seen a caster-ruler, as Wanda was briefly Overlord of Goodminton before (during) its fall.

An excellent point, and one I had forgotten. So Charley can be a thinkamancer.

We have 2 known bi-links actually. Maggie/Sizemore and Maggie/Jack. The latter talks about their feelings very distinctly, and in the former they also discuss what they did quite clearly. And regardless, this isn't a world where "sample size" matters, it is a game with specified mechanics such that X will always be X and never Y.

If you were speaking of mechanics and not a subjective feeling about an experience, I'd agree with you. But you're not. You're using a subjective description and attempting to translate that into a mechanic. This is not science, it's philosophy.

Did you have any opportunity to find your citation of Vanna's "fuzzy memory" about the K-word?