Book 2 – Page 110

Page by page discussion of the comic.

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby ftl » Mon Jun 10, 2013 11:47 pm

Here are some things Delphie has said about Wanda's popping.

“I want to tell you something, Wanda. Listen closely.” She still smiled, but her eyes had lost all humor. “I want to tell you two things. The first is: you have a role to play here, and you will play it. You answer to me. You’ll do as I tell you to. Your Fate,” she said, her voice dropping to a whisper, “is larger than this side. Your life has meaning. The same can’t be said of everyone walking these corridors. Do you understand me?”


“Fate has a plan for you. I do as well,” said Delphie behind her. “I will explain what I can, but you’d do well to trust me.”


"Exactly!" said Delphie. "As I Predicted, Lord, to be blessed with a third caster is a true turning point for us."

Her father's eyes released Wanda at last, as he trained them on Delphie with sudden venom. "You Predicted a warlord!"

Delphie shrugged, as if immune to his wrath. "You know that casters pop as Fate decrees. Fate has taken an active hand in the affairs of Goodminton. That isn't a bad thing, my Lord."


The Luckamancer turned away and dipped his tiny paintbrush. “[Delphie] you don’t need [boosts]. You’re the one unit on this whole side that doesn’t need any of my help. S’what she says about you. You got some kinda Fate crap on you.”


"Wanda, the reason that Predictamancers do not say everything we know is not because it would change the future, but because it usually will make it longer and more painful to reach those future outcomes. The less you know about what is to come, about your Fate, then the easier it will be for you to get there, the less...you and others will have to suffer, to lose."


I think that last one is how I think of Delphie's role in Wanda's life. She didn't make Fate happen, but is trying to smooth the path over for her Side.
ftl
Erfabet Supporter!
Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 5:15 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby Lilwik » Tue Jun 11, 2013 2:22 am

ftl wrote:Maybe I'm missing something from the beginning - was it said that Delphie was able to actually manipulate who was going to pop? I thought she just lied about it but wasn't actually the one who made it happen. Or am I just wrong on that, did Delphie claim responsibility for a caster being popped instead of a Warlord?

Delphie never claimed responsibility, but her responsibility seems like the only possibility. Firebaugh wouldn't have blamed Delphie for this if it hadn't been Delphie's idea to pop a commander. Delphie must have told Firebaugh that this was the right moment to pop a new warlord that would turn the war in their favor or whatever else Firebaugh needed to hear, and that was all lies, which means that Delphie had some plan of her own in mind. It makes no sense unless Delphie foresaw that popping a commander at that moment would give them a valuable unit for Delphie's plan to make a deal with Haffaton.

I'm not saying that Predictamancy can actually manipulate the features of units before they pop, but Delphie is the one who caused Wanda to pop just when she did instead of earlier or later, so Delphie really was controlling who Wanda would be by using Predictamancy to examine what sort of commander would pop at each turn until she found one that she liked, just like Marie controlling when Wanda fired the shot that dismounted Olive. Surely there would be a lot of luck in that process, but Delphie must have gotten lucky and saw a commander who would be worth trading, then manipulated Firebaugh to make it happen.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby ftl » Tue Jun 11, 2013 3:27 am

Or that she foresaw that "The city of Goodminton will pop a Caster who will serve under Olive Branch". If that's been Predicted, better go about popping that caster before Haffaton just wipes you out and pops the caster themselves. Or something. Trying to make the most of the fact that you're in the way of Fate.

Maybe I'm just hesitant to give Delphie that much credit. She's never struck me as being that competent at things, and I'm reluctant to belive that she had a hand in getting this whole thing started - when it really does go so far beyond Goodminton, far into the future, to Haffaton and Jillian and FAQ and the Arkentools, and to who knows what else in the future of the comic. Could Delphie, a level 5 Adept-class caster working on her own, really have set that all in motion? I have an easier time believing that she was just in the right place at the right time, and that all that Fate stuff was gonna happen whether Delphie liked it or not. Or, rather, at the wrong place at the wrong time, given how it ended for her. She tried to smooth it over and not get steamrolled by it, and failed.
ftl
Erfabet Supporter!
Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 5:15 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby Lilwik » Tue Jun 11, 2013 3:50 am

ftl wrote:Or that she foresaw that "The city of Goodminton will pop a Caster who will serve under Olive Branch". If that's been Predicted, better go about popping that caster before Haffaton just wipes you out and pops the caster themselves.
You're right; that works too. That's a good theory for people who don't think Delphie could come up with ideas of her own, because then it would be the Predictamancy that inspired her plan. Of course she would need to lie to Firebaugh because he'd never agree to pop a caster for Haffaton.

Edit: It's even better if it's "The next commander popped by the city of Goodminton will be a caster who will serve under Olive Branch." That way Delphie would know that she would be popping the right caster instead of some random caster that has nothing to do with the Prediction.

ftl wrote:I'm reluctant to believe that she had a hand in getting this whole thing started - when it really does go so far beyond Goodminton, far into the future, to Haffaton and Jillian and FAQ and the Arkentools, and to who knows what else in the future of the comic. Could Delphie, a level 5 Adept-class caster working on her own, really have set that all in motion?
I'm sure she didn't do it deliberately. All Delphie wanted was to save Goodminton. Even if she did use Predictamancy to find the perfect moment to pop a commander with great Fate, she was still just in the right place at the right time to even have an opportunity to pop Wanda; all her Predictamancy did was allow her to seize that opportunity when a non-Predictamancer would have missed it. Delphie might not have even been aware of half of the things that would ultimately be Predicted for Wanda.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby Denar » Tue Jun 11, 2013 8:00 am

Thought that these were funny Dilbert strips, slightly relevant to the content here. Nothing else really to add at the moment.

http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1993-05-30/
http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2008-11-04/
Denar
 
Posts: 121
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:01 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby drachefly » Tue Jun 11, 2013 11:41 am

(Edited to preface: As to whether I'm mixing up fiction and reality... all this is about reality. Obviously all fictional characters have seriously impaired free will at best, even if they manage to borrow some from their authors. And in Erfworld-as-reality, the same arguments apply)

Lipkin wrote:Carl having a shotgun to Bob's back doesn't remove Bob's free will. Bob is still free to do whatever he wants. Carl is just free to do whatever he wants in response.


A) Try running that idea by the judge when he refuses to marry them.

B) Great, so you agree that he has free will. Looks like the main points of our argument are over.

Denar wrote:Just because it's a definition you don't like, doesn't make it ridiculous.


Straw man... no, not even that. Simply ignoring the argument. I pointed out specific flaws that make it ridiculous. Namely, being a self-contradicting property in all imaginable universes.

What would you want free will to do, besides have wants, intentions, desires, plans, aspirations, wishes, and dreams (WIDPAWD), and the means to try to carry them out? Brains have all that.

If it's the ability to do something other than to follow your WIDPAWD, that's not freedom and it's not a will.

Denar wrote:It's the only definition of free will.


See A above for a trivial example, and the philosophy literature for dozens more.

Denar wrote:I have no idea what you're describing with HTTP requests and quarks and "do chairs exist?" Yes? Because it seems to me, that you're agreeing with me, and saying that "Well, if you ignore all the tiny things that decide everything we do, then voila, you have free will." Which is how the illusion works.


Yes, you didn't understand it. Let me try again.

Chairs and HTTP requests exist. You don't need to forget or ignore that they're made of subatomic particles. You just need to also pay attention to the right level of abstraction to notice them. Wills also exist. They are made of component parts. Those component parts are what make them work.

We do not have the illusion of sitting on the illusion of a chair. We sit on chairs. We do not have the illusion of WIDPAWD. We have WIDPAWD. We do not have the illusion of free will. We have free will.
User avatar
drachefly
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 1646
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:36 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby Denar » Tue Jun 11, 2013 12:27 pm

Well, you're ignoring the fact that brains have no say in their construction, for starters. You've defined your own point against yourself by implying that brains "want" these things.

And you're ignoring that sub atomic particles do exist, and have imagined that "their sum is greater than their parts", and that this sum is "free will". It's a nice idea but it's not real - it's not there - like a chair.
Denar
 
Posts: 121
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:01 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby arkerpay » Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:25 pm

Denar wrote:Well, you're ignoring the fact that brains have no say in their construction, for starters. You've defined your own point against yourself by implying that brains "want" these things.

And you're ignoring that sub atomic particles do exist, and have imagined that "their sum is greater than their parts", and that this sum is "free will". It's a nice idea but it's not real - it's not there - like a chair.


So if in real life any of you meet Denar and decide to punch him in the nose, Denar won't be upset at you. Denar will know that you didn't REALLY decide to punch him in the nose. The UNIVERSE decided to punch him in the nose.
arkerpay
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 11:07 am

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby drachefly » Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:26 pm

Denar wrote:Well, you're ignoring the fact that brains have no say in their construction, for starters. You've defined your own point against yourself by implying that brains "want" these things.


Demanding that Free Will bootstrap itself into existence is just another impossible demand made upon it for no clear reason. I don't make that demand. Why would you? (aside: it seems like it'd be easier to regain your true love by the conditions laid out in Scarborough Fair than to think of a consistent universe that can contain what you call Free Will) Once you exist as a person, you're eligible to have free will (subject to impairment). Before you existed, you couldn't have it. In Short Circuit, Number 5 had free will after being struck by lightning, and not before then.

Free will is not conserved. It can be created or destroyed. Why would you think that Free Will should be eternal, without beginning or end?

Denar wrote:And you're ignoring that sub atomic particles do exist, and have imagined that "their sum is greater than their parts", and that this sum is "free will". It's a nice idea but it's not real - it's not there - like a chair.


You're rushing here, stringing together an irrelevant false statement with painted-stupid words you put into my mouth, and a nonsequitur into one sentence. Then a flat denial and another false statement. This does not come across to me as a serious effort to get at the truth. I don't know what's going on here. The kindest interpretation is simply that you're really confident so you're not willing to put much effort in. If you're putting in this little effort, posting on the subject at all is disrespectful.

But I'll respond anyway...

1) "you're ignoring that sub atomic particles do exist"
No, I don't. I don't need to do that, because it doesn't impact my definition of free will. I'm explaining compatibilism and why your definition of free will is useless - why would subatomic particles make a difference? We are able to have free will because they are at least partly deterministic (pure randomness would not enable the machinery of consciousness; we can survive some random noise).

2) "have imagined that "their sum is greater than their parts", and that this sum is "free will"."
Do you have any freaking idea how much computation tiny amounts of matter are capable of? We are vastly underperforming the potential of our constituent parts in those terms.
The sum does have some properties not possessed by the parts, but that's not logically fallacious at all. In fact, assuming that this cannot be so is the Fallacy of Division, applied in contrapositive.

3) "It's a nice idea but it's not real - it's not there - like a chair."
Yes, what I've described isn't what you call free will - nothing is or could be. I'm explaining why what I've described fits the term. What I've described is made of stuff - our brains. If chairs exist, then surely you'll grant that brains exist. And if you grant that, then you probably grant that brains have the properties I've described.

It seems a little bit like you're jumping from determinism to the idea that since there's one fixed outcome, causality loses meaning. If X causes Y, then Y was going to happen anyway, so why would you say that X caused Y? Mechanistic determinism isn't a bunch of windowless monads following preprogrammed dances. There's causal structure. And Free Will is a kind of causal structure, made of stuff.


arkerpay wrote:So if in real life any of you meet Denar and decide to punch him in the nose, Denar won't be upset at you. Denar will know that you didn't REALLY decide to punch him in the nose. The UNIVERSE decided to punch him in the nose.


Moreover, it was just an illusion of pain and an illusion of being punched in the first place, because only chairs are real! :lol:
Last edited by drachefly on Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:36 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
drachefly
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 1646
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:36 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby arkerpay » Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:31 pm

drachefly wrote:
arkerpay wrote:So if in real life any of you meet Denar and decide to punch him in the nose, Denar won't be upset at you. Denar will know that you didn't REALLY decide to punch him in the nose. The UNIVERSE decided to punch him in the nose.


Moreover, it was just an illusion of pain and an illusion of being punched in the first place, because only chairs are real! :lol:


Just don't decide to hit Denar with a chair. Then you'll be free and clear!
arkerpay
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 11:07 am

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby Lipkin » Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:58 pm

There are two ideas of free will being used right now. There is the cosmic sense of free will, in which everyone is in control of their own faculties. Having the threat of death against you does not remove that. Then there is the legal sense, in which you can be made to act against your will under duress. In passive fate, you are making your own choices, but your choices are not truly your own, because there is a divine plan that everything fits into. This removes the first definition of free will, because you could never have chosen anything different, but the legal definition remains, because no one is forcing you to act that way. Active fate is the reverse. Your actions and choices are your own, and are not set in stone. But sometimes you are forced against your will to do something.

A man in a cage still has his cosmic free will, but not his legal free will. The difference is one has options that are denied to you, the other has no options at all.
User avatar
Lipkin
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 1056
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:36 am

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby Denar » Tue Jun 11, 2013 3:41 pm

arkerpay wrote:So if in real life any of you meet Denar and decide to punch him in the nose, Denar won't be upset at you. Denar will know that you didn't REALLY decide to punch him in the nose. The UNIVERSE decided to punch him in the nose.


drachefly wrote:Moreover, it was just an illusion of pain and an illusion of being punched in the first place, because only chairs are real!


arkerpay wrote:Just don't decide to hit Denar with a chair. Then you'll be free and clear!


hahaha, you guys are super funny. I would ask though, if you did meet me in real life, to leave my poor nose alone. It's pretty damaged already from all the face-palming.

Determinism doesn't imply solipsism or anything like that, so I don't know where you're getting the illusion of pain from, except from your own poor understanding. You also talk about the illusion of sitting on a chair (no one's denying that you can sit on a chair, lol). The illusion of free will is not literally an illusion. Also, don't let your thing with chairs become an obsession here.

Arkerpay, perhaps the universe would be "at fault", if something other than yourself is going to be blamed, if you're the type to shirk responsibility like that. But then I wouldn't be at fault for whatever I, also as an agent of the universe, was determined to do in retribution to you. I mean, if I truly believed that I wasn't responsible for whatever I was going to do, and I let that inform my decision making process, I wouldn't have any reason to say, not slit your throat and drink your blood over a peppy campfire tune. Hahahaha, how funny. Doesn't it sound absolutely stupid? Totally what determinism means.



I wasn't "rushing" at all, I'm just tired of making long and tedious posts. I thought everyone must be really, but if you're going to be offended because I didn't write you a page rewriting the same points you choose to ignore, then that's just rude. Not rude as in "boy, he sure has no manners," but rude as in "no one wants you to be so personally invested into an internet debate."

I did you a justice by summarising it to "the sum is greater than its parts." It's exactly what you're presenting, and it's very noble. It's arguably how we can have any morality at all, why a life is more valuable than an equivalent pile of dust. But it's beside the point.

Lipkin's made a short summary between the differences of free will in Active and Passive Fate. It's the only sensible post in this train of thought.
Denar
 
Posts: 121
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:01 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby drachefly » Tue Jun 11, 2013 3:56 pm

Denar, your face is safe. After all, my real position is that your pain is not at all illusory!

The points I chose to ignore? You do not need to rehash - simply point me to them. I either missed them or thought I addressed them. Meanwhile... well, what you said does NOT look like a brief but sensible reply to anything I said. Despite your protests to the contrary, you keep on addressing my definition of Free Will as if it were your definition of Free Will, which is somewhat obnoxious.

If you're tired, you could just say, "Oi, I'm tired of this conversation" and we're done. You don't need to throw out a one-sixteenth-assed counterargument.


Lipkin -

I would say that free will is not binary, and that impairments can come in a variety of shapes and sizes. Do you still have your cosmic free will if you're drunk? A little tipsy? Plastered? I'd say it fits on a sliding scale there.

Do you still have your free will if you live in the Oceania of 1984? If you're educated NOT to generate models, to subordinate your desires to those of the state, and to do nothing but what you're told? Some, yes. But it's a far poorer strain.

In respect to our conversation, the purpose of the comment was to indicate just how broad and actually useful the construction of Free Will that I gave is. It meshes with the legal definitions, with no need to separate them. This is in stark contrast to the alternative - this Cosmic Free Will which is apparently not satisfied by our brains - a concept of which no example can be constructed, even counterfactually.
User avatar
drachefly
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 1646
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:36 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby arkerpay » Tue Jun 11, 2013 4:03 pm

Denar wrote:
arkerpay wrote:So if in real life any of you meet Denar and decide to punch him in the nose, Denar won't be upset at you. Denar will know that you didn't REALLY decide to punch him in the nose. The UNIVERSE decided to punch him in the nose.


Arkerpay, perhaps the universe would be "at fault", if something other than yourself is going to be blamed, if you're the type to shirk responsibility like that. But then I wouldn't be at fault for whatever I, also as an agent of the universe, was determined to do in retribution to you. I mean, if I truly believed that I wasn't responsible for whatever I was going to do, and I let that inform my decision making process, I wouldn't have any reason to say, not slit your throat and drink your blood over a peppy campfire tune. Hahahaha, how funny. Doesn't it sound absolutely stupid? Totally what determinism means.


Denar, according to you I am just a mechanical being, an automaton. I can't be held responsible for anything. It is just the deterministic chemical signals in my brain that I have no control over. I can't even decide what to have for breakfast much less decide to punch someone in the nose or not. Holding me responsible is just mean and unfair.
arkerpay
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 11:07 am

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby ftl » Tue Jun 11, 2013 4:15 pm

Your honor, I did not shoot and kill that man!

He was killed by a bullet, which was fired from a gun, true. And that gun was being held by my hand, and the trigger was being pulled by my finger, that's also true. My finger muscles contracted because they received nerve impulses from my brain. Which was just reacting to the infromation it got from my eyes, which told my brain that the guy was standing in front of me.

So as you can see, I was not involved in this process at all!
ftl
Erfabet Supporter!
Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 5:15 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby Denar » Tue Jun 11, 2013 4:24 pm

arkerpay wrote:
Denar wrote:
arkerpay wrote:So if in real life any of you meet Denar and decide to punch him in the nose, Denar won't be upset at you. Denar will know that you didn't REALLY decide to punch him in the nose. The UNIVERSE decided to punch him in the nose.


Arkerpay, perhaps the universe would be "at fault", if something other than yourself is going to be blamed, if you're the type to shirk responsibility like that. But then I wouldn't be at fault for whatever I, also as an agent of the universe, was determined to do in retribution to you. I mean, if I truly believed that I wasn't responsible for whatever I was going to do, and I let that inform my decision making process, I wouldn't have any reason to say, not slit your throat and drink your blood over a peppy campfire tune. Hahahaha, how funny. Doesn't it sound absolutely stupid? Totally what determinism means.


Denar, according to you I am just a mechanical being, an automaton. I can't be held responsible for anything. It is just the deterministic chemical signals in my brain that I have no control over. I can't even decide what to have for breakfast much less decide to punch someone in the nose or not. Holding me responsible is just mean and unfair.


Oh indeed. I didn't suggest you were responsible at all. But neither am I when I retaliate!

ftl wrote:Your honor, I did not shoot and kill that man!

He was killed by a bullet, which was fired from a gun, true. And that gun was being held by my hand, and the trigger was being pulled by my finger, that's also true. My finger muscles contracted because they received nerve impulses from my brain. Which was just reacting to the infromation it got from my eyes, which told my brain that the guy was standing in front of me.

So as you can see, I was not involved in this process at all!


This is exactly why this train of thought is ridiculous.
Denar
 
Posts: 121
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:01 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby drachefly » Tue Jun 11, 2013 4:35 pm

Oh, I'm glad you agree it's ridiculous. And... why can we hold that bundle of nerves accountable? Because those nerve impulses happen to compose a free will. Not merely give the illusion thereof to a passive observer inhabitant of that skull.
User avatar
drachefly
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
Print 2 Draw 3 Supporter!
 
Posts: 1646
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:36 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby Lilwik » Tue Jun 11, 2013 5:02 pm

drachefly wrote:We are able to have free will because they are at least partly deterministic (pure randomness would not enable the machinery of consciousness; we can survive some random noise).
I'm a solidly unshakable compatibilist, but I'm also aware that the above is a trick and trying to make too strong a case for compatibilism. Nondeterminism is not the same thing as randomness and a universe without any determinism is just as consistent with free will as a fully deterministic universe. We have vast amounts of evidence suggesting that our universe is deterministic, but it is impossible to be sure of that, and if we ever discovered that we live in a nondeterministic universe that would not necessarily destroy our free will. We could have something in our brains that makes decisions that are informed by our plans and desires but aren't fully caused by them in the deterministic way.
Last edited by Lilwik on Tue Jun 11, 2013 5:17 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby Not Me » Tue Jun 11, 2013 5:02 pm

I couldn't be bothered to read the whole thread so maybe someone has already posted or discussed this.
But I was re-reading some earlier comic updates and found the following bit I found interesting:

At the top and bottom of the smooth inclined plane were nodes of intuition. One did not get more than a quick glimpse between the two, but that usually would suffice. If not, one could always climb the ladder again. This apparatus had a personal effect on the operator, giving him a glance at his own Fate and perhaps a vague insight or focus or warning.

Isaac put his arms up and slid.

At the bottom, he tumbled into the grass with a fleeting understanding...and a profound foreboding. He had the feeling that he had just glimpsed some kind of terrible finality. Was it his own?

He didn't think so. It seemed greater than that. And there was a string to follow to its source...

Maggie's.
He plucked it.


I will assume he glimpsed something Parson-related. It would be interesting to guess what "kind of terrible finality" could it be.
Parson's?
Spacerock?
The Magic Kingdom?
War?
Erfworld?

Also in that same update you find
A reaction greater than its action was coming, he'd intuited. An avalanche from a pebble, a line of falling blocks, an inferno from a spark. Some other cosmic principle than paradox was in play here. But what could it be?

which I thought was interesting now that we know an actual Inferno took place that same turn.
Not Me
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 3:30 pm

Re: Book 2 – Page 110

Postby Lilwik » Tue Jun 11, 2013 5:26 pm

Not Me wrote:It would be interesting to guess what "kind of terrible finality" could it be.
Parson's?
Spacerock?
The Magic Kingdom?
Whatever it is, I can't believe it's anything so trivial that it would be about a single unit or a single hex, even The Magic Kingdom.
Not Me wrote:War?
Erfworld?
Something this epic is sure to have a dramatic impact on those things, but it's impossible to guess what sort of impact.
Lilwik
 
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:55 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Reactions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests