Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Page by page discussion of the comic.

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby multilis » Wed May 22, 2013 8:38 pm

Lilwik wrote:The burden of proof has got to be on the side that claims Active Fate is a real thing because it is an extraordinary claim that has huge implications..

In your opinion it is extraordinary claim. In Ansom and Stanley's opinion and some of others, is very believable that a Titan is directing things in their favor. Titans are portrayed as being like units but godlike Elvis. Thus Titans may be active fate player.

In Parson's opinion, is believable that last situation is like a second GM that is manipulating things against Charlie. In real world there is game scenario very like Erfworld/GK battle which would have had an active GM that Parson wanted his players to cheat. Parson the GM would have railroaded thus active fate.

In my opinion too little data to tell, and neither option is extraordinary compared to other. Some people play games with a GM/DM, some people play computer/board games with none, and Erfworld is very like either sort of game. A GM in a game may be more hands off, or more active in trying to cause a specific plot to happen.

Many games have (often active) gods or godlike forces that have goals and affect game, and in some cases if you side with one god you come in conflict with a different one. So for example there could be 3 active titans named "Erf", "Fate", "Numbers" and each of them wants to dominate the other 2 to win the "game". (Hero in such games can also often choose a none of above or balance option, eg Dungeon Master choose order, chaos or balance)
multilis
 
Posts: 545
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 2:57 am

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby Lipkin » Wed May 22, 2013 9:17 pm

Lilwik wrote:Active Fate can't be just a force, because the concept requires that it have plans and a desire to act to ensure the success of those plans. I admit that someone might be able to come up with a description of Active Fate that doesn't make it a fully traditional person, but it still needs to be a planner of some sort.

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Not everyone has a destiny. Those that do will reach it regardless of what they do, but there is an easy and a hard path. Had Wanda turned, her brother would have lived. Everything that someone with a destiny does will lead to their fate, and it's not because Fate is manipulating them.

To borrow from Dr. Who, it's fixed point in time. The things leading up to it may change or be in flux, but the event will happen. Parson was never going to be able to use the scroll, because his future is already written.
User avatar
Lipkin
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 1048
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:36 am

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby multilis » Wed May 22, 2013 9:25 pm

Lipkin wrote: Had Wanda turned, her brother would have lived.

We have opinion of Wanda who Parson describes to Jack as crazy for her some of her beliefs in fate. Do you trust Wanda's opinion?

One option is an old story about training an elephant. The trainer puts elephant on a chain linked to a stake when a baby. The baby struggles and struggles with all its might and can't break free. So it learns the chain can't be beaten.

When elephant grows up, it is 100 times as strong and could easily break free but doesn't try because it "learned" it is impossible.

No matter what Wanda did, her brother may have died. In "Ender's game" tragedy is used as a tool to mold the future Ender tool. Wanda may have been manipulated to be burned by "opposing fate" no matter what she did so that she would obey fate when she grew up. No matter what the wrong choice, fate "wanted the other one" and thus her brother died.

Fate's goal may have been to create the Wanda we know, an unquestioning servant of fate willing to do nasty things.
Last edited by multilis on Wed May 22, 2013 9:39 pm, edited 5 times in total.
multilis
 
Posts: 545
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 2:57 am

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby Lilwik » Wed May 22, 2013 9:31 pm

multilis wrote:So for example there could be 3 active titans named "Erf", "Fate", "Numbers" and each of them wants to dominate the other 2 to win the "game".
That's a fascinating possibility! We know that the Titans are real and not just creatures of the imaginations of Erfworlders, so if Active Fate were ever proven to exist then it would make the most sense to suppose that Active Fate is the direct involvement of a Titan or Titans in Erfly events. At least that makes more sense than us constructing our own new character, and in the beginning of Book 1 we saw exactly three Titans. We don't actually have any evidence connecting the three Titans we've seen with the three axes of magic, but it's an interesting coincidence that is worth keeping in mind. Someday we may learn more about the axes or the Titans and the pieces of that puzzle may fall into place.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1324
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby almondsAndRain » Wed May 22, 2013 9:43 pm

Aster Azul wrote:... Which dragon color was lost to retconjuration?

Black dwagons- http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/Black_dwagon
almondsAndRain
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:43 am

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby drachefly » Wed May 22, 2013 9:55 pm

effataigus wrote:
drachefly wrote:Occam's razor can do way more than break ties.

Like, a theory that a coin tossed 1000 times in a row will produce this particular random-looking but predetermined sequence has a tiny prior, such that unless there's some reason to elevate it to your attention*, even if every prediction is fulfilled perfectly it has negligible weight as an explanation compared to 'it was random', primarily because of its high information content. This is pure Occam, and it does way more than break a tie.
In the interests of keeping an off-topic discussion going...

1. That sounds like a tie breaker to me.


No, Occam's razor accounts for a 10^300 factor in the relative weights of these theories. If you call that a tiebreak, I have no idea what isn't.
To be more specific, the evidence favors the more specific theory by a factor of 2^1000. If you don't use the razor, you see that the theory is absolutely favored. However, since the more specific theory was in an equivalence class with 2^1000 elements, it gets a 2^1000 penalty, which lowers the overall probability down to the general probability that someone has somehow rigged a coin to produce arbitrary results.

effataigus wrote:Given that, I think Occam is fine as rule of thumb, but needs to be swallowed with a big dose of "but we don't really know for sure"... Sometimes the universe really is a little complicated.

Yes. You will need evidence to establish just which way it's complicated. In cases where evidence is plentiful, priors are nearly irrelevant.


MarbitChow wrote:
Salem wrote:I've always had that trouble too. Especially with coin flips and die rolls, saying it's random is like saying "The power you put behind the flip, the shape of the coin, the effect of 'gravity', the rotation, air resistance, wind, etc some how play no role in the end result. Then again I've never had someone tell me something that was actually random other than at the sub atomic level. Even then it's also often followed by "We may just not know the reasons."

You're attributing determinism to disqualify randomness when randomness doesn't actually have that as a requirement. Think of random as "you can't determine the outcome based on the initial parameters" rather than "non-deterministic".


Exactly. The next card on top of a deck of cards? Random, even though given the state of the universe it's already completely fixed, with no nondeterminism available. Randomness is a statement of your ignorance.
User avatar
drachefly
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 1640
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:36 pm

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby Lipkin » Wed May 22, 2013 10:50 pm

multilis wrote:
Lipkin wrote: Had Wanda turned, her brother would have lived.

We have opinion of Wanda who Parson describes to Jack as crazy for her some of her beliefs in fate. Do you trust Wanda's opinion?


No, we have the opinion of Clay Dice, the Luckamancy, who seems to know what he's talking about.

http://www.erfworld.com/2012/01/inner-p ... isode-022/

And the opinion of Delphie Temple, the Predictamancer, who SHOULD know what she's talking about.

http://www.erfworld.com/2012/02/inner-p ... isode-024/


Parson could cast the scroll, but the chances of him casting it were nil, because he has a fate.
User avatar
Lipkin
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 1048
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:36 am

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby Shai_hulud » Wed May 22, 2013 11:00 pm

Clay admits he doesn't really know much, and Delphie is sort of a known liar. Also, just because Wanda might be crazy doesn't mean Parsons right. Or that she's wrong for that matter.
Shai_hulud
Pins Supporter!
Pins Supporter!
 
Posts: 698
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2012 11:57 pm

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby BanzaiJoe » Wed May 22, 2013 11:05 pm

Not Me wrote:
BanzaiJoe wrote:This made me wonder. Does Erfwold have to reconcile the manipulations of Fate. In other words, the more "GM Fate" stacks the numbers against Parson, is there a Karma for Fate? I was inspired by the conversations with Wanda and the Luckamancer about how you just take one number from here and put it over there but it still evens out in the end. Does Erfworld respond to GM Fate's manipulations. Although Charlie called up Parson, could Erfworld have made it possible because of Fate messing with the "deck". I wish I had a better way to explain it.



If I got it right, what you are looking at might be in this update:

For when the price was paid, it was Erfworld which processed the transaction. The world would produce the unit that was called for...more or less. There was the matter of the Fate Axis as well, and this unit was turning out to be very special. This unit would be worth far more than the buyer had paid for.

That was no violation of Numbers, though. It simply meant that this unit carried a balance due. And though it was an astronomically high figure, someone would pay.

Zero always called, and someone would have to pay.


And to add to other discussions in this thread, here is a specific mention of "Erfworld" as being able to "process the transaction" so might not be far-fetched to assume "Erfworld" can be considered a sort of "entity" for some purposes.


Perfect-o. That was the other part of my thinking. Someone would have to pay. Much of the theme is about free will versus destiny. Much the way one set of heroes is playing out as destiny to croak someone so it is playing out in another storyline. The real fun in any story is that we know the protagonist will defeat the antagonist, it is the destination of the story. How will he/she get there is the fun part.
BanzaiJoe
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 7:17 pm

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby Lilwik » Wed May 22, 2013 11:21 pm

multilis wrote:In Ansom and Stanley's opinion and some of others, is very believable that a Titan is directing things in their favor.

That's actually evidence against Active Fate. Stanley and the royals can't both be right about the Titans, so at least one of them has to be delusional, and that raises doubts about anyone who claims to be allied with Fate. Ansom got croaked, which suggests that Fate wasn't helping him, but when Stanley brags about how he knows the Titans are on his side all he can do is wave around his Arkentool, which makes it look like he has no better evidence to offer, which means he is also delusional and doesn't know the Titans any better than we do.

This is why I never trust Erfworlders when they talk about the Titans. If they were all in agreement or we had clear reason to expect that one side or the other knows the Titans better, then I'd be more trusting.

Lipkin wrote:And the opinion of Delphie Temple, the Predictamancer, who SHOULD know what she's talking about.

http://www.erfworld.com/2012/02/inner-p ... isode-024/
I'm certain that Delphie knows exactly what she is talking about. She seems to be right about everything.

"Choice is the path you pick to your Fate. Luck is mainly about how hard or easy you have it along the way." It's a wonderful irony that Delphie is making perfect sense and explaining things clearly when she says these things, but Wanda is incapable of understanding at the time it is said. Of course, at that moment Wanda doesn't actually want to understand.

I notice that Delphie's explanation is in conflict with the theory of Active Fate. The Fate that Delphie describes is simply the way the world will go, the inevitable outcome of all choices rather than a plan that must be enforced with punishments for those who stray from the assigned path. If Fate were an active manipulator of people's lives like a puppeteer in the sky, Delphie would surely have told Wanda exactly that. Instead Delphie takes literal pains to explain that Fate is just where choices lead.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1324
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby name lips » Wed May 22, 2013 11:50 pm

Fate exists in some manner. It's the stuff Predictamancers can Predict. If it's not Fated, they can't Predict it.

It's possible there's no "will" or "consciousness" behind it. Just a glimpse of the future... if all possible futures contain the same event, and that event is unavoidable, it can be said to be "Fated," and a Predictamancer will be able to Predict it.

But some events are not Predictable. These events may or may not occur. Some "possible futures" exist where they happen, and some exist where they do not. This is the realm of Mathamancy and Luckamancy -- the realm of magical statistics. Mathamancy can tell you what the odds are that an event will occur, and Luckamancy can stack those odds in your favor.
name lips
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby Lipkin » Thu May 23, 2013 12:18 am

Lilwik wrote:
multilis wrote:In Ansom and Stanley's opinion and some of others, is very believable that a Titan is directing things in their favor.

That's actually evidence against Active Fate. Stanley and the royals can't both be right about the Titans, so at least one of them has to be delusional, and that raises doubts about anyone who claims to be allied with Fate. Ansom got croaked, which suggests that Fate wasn't helping him, but when Stanley brags about how he knows the Titans are on his side all he can do is wave around his Arkentool, which makes it look like he has no better evidence to offer, which means he is also delusional and doesn't know the Titans any better than we do.

This is why I never trust Erfworlders when they talk about the Titans. If they were all in agreement or we had clear reason to expect that one side or the other knows the Titans better, then I'd be more trusting.

Lipkin wrote:And the opinion of Delphie Temple, the Predictamancer, who SHOULD know what she's talking about.

http://www.erfworld.com/2012/02/inner-p ... isode-024/
I'm certain that Delphie knows exactly what she is talking about. She seems to be right about everything.

"Choice is the path you pick to your Fate. Luck is mainly about how hard or easy you have it along the way." It's a wonderful irony that Delphie is making perfect sense and explaining things clearly when she says these things, but Wanda is incapable of understanding at the time it is said. Of course, at that moment Wanda doesn't actually want to understand.

I notice that Delphie's explanation is in conflict with the theory of Active Fate. The Fate that Delphie describes is simply the way the world will go, the inevitable outcome of all choices rather than a plan that must be enforced with punishments for those who stray from the assigned path. If Fate were an active manipulator of people's lives like a puppeteer in the sky, Delphie would surely have told Wanda exactly that. Instead Delphie takes literal pains to explain that Fate is just where choices lead.
Fate is not where choices lead. It's when all choices lead to the same thing. When you try to choose something that leads away from your fate, you encounter hardship, and are turned back to your fate. The bracer knew that Parson was fated not to use the scroll. So it told him he had 98% chance to be able to cast it, but a 0% chance that he would. When he tried, he encountered hardship.
User avatar
Lipkin
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 1048
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:36 am

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby Lilwik » Thu May 23, 2013 12:28 am

name lips wrote:It's possible there's no "will" or "consciousness" behind it. Just a glimpse of the future... if all possible futures contain the same event, and that event is unavoidable, it can be said to be "Fated," and a Predictamancer will be able to Predict it.
That's exactly how I interpret Delphie's explanation of Predictamancy, too. It's tragic that even after Wanda's experience with Delphie and Fate, Wanda still doesn't understand what Delphie was trying to say. Wanda wasn't sure whether or not Olive could croak Jillian, but Wanda was confident that if Olive did somehow croak Jillian then Olive would be punished for it just as Wanda imagines she was punished for fighting her own Fate.

If Delphie had been there, she would have explained that Olive might be able to croak Jillian, but would either choose not to or be prevented. Either way, Jillian croaked by Olive was not a possible outcome. Delphie might explain that Fate is not a master that punished disobedience, but rather it is a tool that should be respected. Delphie tried to use Fate, tried to get shmuckers from Haffaton while at the same time avoiding the probable destruction that would come from taking Wanda by force. That's how Fate should be used. Instead, Wanda took the lesson to be that she should plow head-first toward fate as fast as possible so that she would win Fate's favor, even if that means engineering the destruction of Faq, which is the exact opposite of what Delphie would have told Wanda to do in that situation. Wanda created hardship instead of avoiding it in her misguided idea that trying to help Fate happen is always best.

name lips wrote:Mathamancy can tell you what the odds are that an event will occur, and Luckamancy can stack those odds in your favor.
That seems to be the way it is, but it's curious that Luckamancy should be so closely connected to Mathamancy when they are aligned with entirely different axes. Also, let's not forget Carnymancy which seems to allow a caster to control Fate somehow. I wish we could hear more about that from a Carnymancer, because it is quite mysterious. At least I doubt that a Carnymancer can undo a Prediction, because Predictamancers always seem 100% sure of their Predictions.

Lipkin wrote:When you try to choose something that leads away from your fate, you encounter hardship, and are turned back to your fate.
That's what Wanda thinks, but I think we're better off trusting Delphie. Wanda is crazy, probably from a tragic early life and too many heroine buds.
Last edited by Lilwik on Thu May 23, 2013 9:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1324
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby Lipkin » Thu May 23, 2013 1:06 am

Lilwik wrote:
name lips wrote:It's possible there's no "will" or "consciousness" behind it. Just a glimpse of the future... if all possible futures contain the same event, and that event is unavoidable, it can be said to be "Fated," and a Predictamancer will be able to Predict it.
That's exactly how I interpret Delphie's explanation of Predictamancy, too. It's tragic that even after Wanda's experience with Delphie and Fate, Wanda still doesn't understand what Delphie was trying to say. Wanda wasn't sure whether or not Olive could croak Jillian, but Wanda was confident that if Olive did somehow croak Jillian then Olive would be punished for it just as Wanda imagines she was punished for fighting her own Fate.

If Delphie had been there, she would have explained that Olive might be able to croak Jillian, but would either choose not to or be prevented. Either way, Jillian croaked by Olive was not a possible outcome. Delphie might explain that Fate is not a master that punished disobedience, but rather it is a tool that should be respected. Delphie tried to use Fate, tried to get schmuckers from Haffaton while at the same time avoiding the probable destruction that would come from taking Wanda by force. That's how Fate should be used. Instead, Wanda took the lesson to be that she should plow head-first toward fate as fast as possible so that she would win Fate's favor, even if that means engineering the destruction of Faq, which is the exact opposite of what Delphie would have told Wanda to do in that situation. Wanda created hardship instead of avoiding it in her misguided idea that trying to help Fate happen is always best.

name lips wrote:Mathamancy can tell you what the odds are that an event will occur, and Luckamancy can stack those odds in your favor.
That seems to be the way it is, but it's curious that Luckamancy should be so closely connected to Mathamancy when they are aligned with entirely different axes. Also, let's not forget Carnymancy which seems to allow a caster to control Fate somehow. I wish we could hear more about that from a Carnymancer, because it is quite mysterious. At least I doubt that a Carnymancer can undo a Prediction, because Predictamancers always seem 100% sure of their Predictions.

Lipkin wrote:When you try to choose something that leads away from your fate, you encounter hardship, and are turned back to your fate.
That's what Wanda thinks, but I think we're better off trusting Delphie. Wanda is crazy, probably from a tragic early life and too many heroine buds.
Explain the difference between what Delphie said and what Wanda comes to learn. Because what we have seen so far backs up Wanda.
User avatar
Lipkin
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 1048
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:36 am

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby Lilwik » Thu May 23, 2013 1:21 am

Lipkin wrote:Explain the difference between what Delphie said and what Wanda comes to learn. Because what we have seen so far backs up Wanda.

Delphie said that people can choose their own path to Fate. You will always get there in the end, but the way forward is up to you. If you choose a path of violence in attempting to resist Fate than all you will accomplish is violence that achieves nothing, because Fate cannot be resisted. But it's just as bad if you choose a path of violence in service of Fate, because again you have achieved nothing with all your violence; Fate was going to happen with or without your help. Wanda has obviously missed that bit of the lesson. Wanda thought that Delphie was trying to help Fate happen, but all Delphie was trying to do was choose a path that didn't involve the destruction of Goodminton. Wanda destroyed Faq in a misguided attempt to help Fate, but if Wanda had been paying attention to Delphie's lesson, Wanda would have tried to choose a path that avoided the destruction of Faq. Wanda's choice is a perfect example of how helping Fate isn't always the best path.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1324
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby Lipkin » Thu May 23, 2013 1:32 am

Lilwik wrote:
Lipkin wrote:Explain the difference between what Delphie said and what Wanda comes to learn. Because what we have seen so far backs up Wanda.

Delphie said that people can choose their own path to Fate. You will always get there in the end, but the way forward is up to you. If you choose a path of violence in attempting to resist Fate than all you will accomplish is violence that achieves nothing, because Fate cannot be resisted. But it's just as bad if you choose a path of violence in service of Fate, because again you have achieved nothing with all your violence; Fate was going to happen with or without your help. Wanda has obviously missed that bit of the lesson. Wanda thought that Delphie was trying to help Fate happen, but all Delphie was trying to do was choose a path that didn't involve the destruction of Goodminton. Wanda destroyed Faq in a misguided attempt to help Fate, but if Wanda had been paying attention to Delphie's lesson, Wanda would have tried to choose a path that avoided the destruction of Faq. Wanda's choice is a perfect example of how helping Fate isn't always the best path.

But the lesson is still that fighting fate is futile. Helping fate is equally as futile.

That doesn't mean that it wasn't fate that caused Parson to get brained by a falling plank.
User avatar
Lipkin
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 1048
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:36 am

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby Oberon » Thu May 23, 2013 1:54 am

Lilwik wrote:
Lilwik wrote:Weren't we all surprised when the promotion made it easier to climb them?

Oberon wrote:Yes, that's my entire point.

I'm not sure I understand your point, but one thing I know is that without Like Reality Unless Noted, there would be no reason for you to be surprised. The thing that surprised you was a break between reality where promotions have nothing to do with stair climbing ability and Erfworld where they are strongly connected. Everyone assumes Like Reality Unless Noted because you can't understand fiction without it, and the author knows this.
I'll try to explain. Maybe we're thinking in tangents to each other, so bear with me.

If the reader assumes that Erfworld operates as does Stupidworld*, then climbing stairs is just...climbing stairs. There are no 'mechanics' around it, there is no easier or harder depending on unit type. You just walk up the freaking stairs, right? Seems simple enough, and easy to relate to how Stupidworld operates. But, wait!

We learned that this isn't the case at all. If a unit is a garrison unit (as Parson was), stairs are, for whatever reason given that climbing them is a free action within your own city, somehow harder than it is if the unit is a field unit.

Not an Erf shattering revelation, but it still serves to drive home the point that Erfworld is very, very different from Stupidworld.

spriteless wrote:For example, it makes sense that firefighters could screen someone else from fire damage. I'm picturing a fireman picking someone up and throwing them out of the way or something, but once you have that rule that the can screen someone else from fire damage, you no longer have to have them do that specifically, Parson just acts while they fight fire and they take fire hits for him. So their actions are reflections of the rule, without any assumptions that irl needs for the rule.
But it's deeper than that. Units fighting fire can somehow transfer their actions to other units. That doesn't convey in any way to Stupidworld. Sure, a Stupidworld fireman fighting a fire might allow people trapped in that fire to escape, but it's not a transfer of his actions to theirs, it's his actions enabling theirs. He is spending actions, and so are they. The difference may seem trivial, but I believe that it is significant. Some unit beating out flames would have no impact on a person's ability to act in Stupidworld, but in Erfworld Parson suddenly has extra actions. That is no transfer to Stupidworld mechanics, Parson is acting because he knows he is being given extra actions.

Werebiscuit wrote:
Oberon wrote:For the part prior to the comma: It was always a trivial thing (did you ever even wonder about the potential game mechanics of climbing stairs?) until we learned that it could be influenced by unit specials, wasn't it?
For the part after the comma: Yes, that's my entire point.

Climbing stairs is only a trivial thing in stupidworld, when you're fit and healthy enough to climb stairs. There are many instances where it is not a trivial thing (wounds, illness, disability to name but a few).
Meh, in no case was Parson climbing the stairs under those instances you cite. So I don't think you have a case.








* Erm, Earth, in case the reference is vague. Stupidworld is what Stanley called Earth when Parson described it.
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 059

Postby Chit Rule Railroad » Thu May 23, 2013 5:13 am

Lilwik wrote:I notice that Delphie's explanation is in conflict with the theory of Active Fate. The Fate that Delphie describes is simply the way the world will go, the inevitable outcome of all choices rather than a plan that must be enforced with punishments for those who stray from the assigned path. If Fate were an active manipulator of people's lives like a puppeteer in the sky, Delphie would surely have told Wanda exactly that. Instead Delphie takes literal pains to explain that Fate is just where choices lead.

On the other hand, Delphie is directly asserting that Fate is not the same as Erfworld being deterministic, explicitly saying that only some units have Fate while others have possibilities that are affected by choices (and also by luck). Wanda allegedly could have chosen differently and kept Tommy alive.

I'm not seeing how to reconcile free will and Fate without imagining that Fate or an agent of Fate (e.g., Rob Balder) tweaks things to respond to people's choices.


At another level, if Earth is deterministic, then Erfworld is of course deterministic - being a work of fiction authored here - but Fate would only be a subset of that determinism; specifically, the part of the plot that the rest of the plot is written around (barring iterations of retconjuration). In a deterministic Erfworld, the plausibility of free will (convincing even to the predictamancers) would be dependent on Illusionism: Finding your GM-ing style: A flowchart


Note that Parson('s author) now has the option of choosing Participationism, and might be inclined to, since Charlie has set himself up as opposing Fate (whether or not that's really true).
User avatar
Chit Rule Railroad
YOTD + Erfabet Supporter!
YOTD + Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:44 pm

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby Werebiscuit » Thu May 23, 2013 6:13 am

Oberon wrote:Meh, in no case was Parson climbing the stairs under those instances you cite. So I don't think you have a case..

Meh, I know Parson was not in any of 'those' instances but under the instance of changing from garrison ( movement disability) to field ( less movement limitations) units...so I don't think you understand 'my case' if you cannot see the parallels between a garrison unit climbing stairs and an impaired person climbing stairs compared to a field unit or fit person climbing stairs
Werebiscuit
 
Posts: 1137
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:45 am

Re: Book 2 – Text Updates 059

Postby Lilwik » Thu May 23, 2013 7:19 am

Chit Rule Railroad wrote:I'm not seeing how to reconcile free will and Fate without imagining that Fate or an agent of Fate (e.g., Rob Balder) tweaks things to respond to people's choices.
I know what you mean. It is hard to imagine perfect infallible predictions of the future even with magic. Even though Dirtamancy can do a hundred impossible things a day, the impossible things of Predictamancy can seem like a step too far. Wanda struggled with this and used the example of throwing herself out of a window. If she actually did that, Fate would either have to make a major tweak (such as creating a magical barrier to prevent her from falling) or else have to accept being wrong for the first time ever.

As it happened, Fate didn't need to tweak anything because Wanda was never going to croak herself just to prove a point about Fate. It's not hard to imagine that Fate would know that in advance about Wanda, since most people would guess that even without magic. Maybe some people would actually jump out of a tower for just the satisfaction of being right; that's just one of those choices people get to make. Those people probably aren't Fated very often, because Fate would know about them in advance, too. Looking at it that way, Fate could always avoid tweaking because it knows everyone so well that it always knows what's coming and who would need tweaking.

Fate must have known that Olive wasn't just going to immediately croak Jillian because Olive wanted Jillian to kill Judy. You don't need to be a master thinkamancer to figure that out, and Olive certainly didn't need any tweaking. Is it so hard to imagine that whatever predictamancer made the prophecy could magically plot out how each person would react to the situations they were presented? I'm sure some people in the forums correctly predicted that Jillian wasn't going to break in the box. That wasn't hard to guess even without magic! And so on, step-by-step, all the way. In fact, the prophecy must have been easy because everyone involved actually wanted to see it fulfilled, so no one was working to thwart it, at least until it was too late. That could be part of why it was such a long-ranged Prediction. That's probably also why the prediction specified only the ruler of Haffaton instead of naming the ruler; not because there was any chance that Jillian might croak Judy, but because of how Olive would have reacted if the prophecy had named her.

Prediction without tweaking in the presence of free will is no more amazing than crap golems. Free will just means that you can't always make Predictions about everyone all the time. Like the people who would croak themselves rather than accept Fate: they don't get Predictions. And a Prediction that specified that Jillian would kill Olive would never have worked because of Olive's free will. Fortunately for predictamancers, free will doesn't mean that people are constantly doing random stuff all over the place, so sometimes people are Predictable, and when that happens Predictamancers are magically aware of it.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1324
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Reactions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CarniDollMancer, Lilwik, Yahoo [Bot] and 9 guests