Epilogue - 006

Epilogue - 006

Turns since TBfGK: 1

Parson looked around for a place to sit, but had to settle for leaning with his back against the tower wall. Sizemore and Maggie stood and looked at him blankly as he slumped there.

"I haven't tried to 'invent' anything from my world here yet," he said. "But I might have to start with folding chairs."

He gave up on leaning, and walked to the edge of the parapet again, looking down at the grounded dwagons and the troops assembled below. Sizemore and Maggie followed suit.

What were they talking about for so long down there? Was Wanda taking over? Was Stanley giving her orders?

"If I took a brick and threw it," Parson said, still looking over the edge, "and I hit Stanley smack in the middle of his forehead from here, what would happen?"

There was silence. A chilly little breeze picked up. He glanced at Maggie, who kind of looked like she was choking on a piece of fish but didn't want to bother anyone with her problems. In other words, her usual expression, only more so. Sizemore only looked fascinated at the implications of the question. "Would he croak?" Parson asked.

Sizemore cleared his throat. "You wouldn't be able to throw it. He's your Overlord."

"Correct," added Maggie, finally able to speak.

Parson rolled his eyes. "Okay, then at the dwagon. Or...assume he's an invading enemy unit and I throw the brick. Could I hit him? Could I croak him?"

Sizemore looked back down over the edge. "You could. It'd be a million to one shot, though."

Parson frowned, and played with his bracer. With some basic touch commands and subvocalizations, he was able to build a scenario. This city, this tower, a unit like me attempts a missile attack on a unit like Stanley, on ground in courtyard. Odds.

"One in about 5400, it says. So, what, I'd be acting like a defending archery unit then? Even though I don't have archery as a special? Any of us could throw a brick and hit an enemy down there, even though we aren't archers?"

Sizemore shrugged. "If we had bricks."

So anyone with something to throw or shoot could be an archery unit. They'd just have to have the archery special to have any real chance of hitting a target. But maybe something like Luckamancy could be used to change those odds? Parson leaned forward and squinted at the tiny figure of Stanley, still mounted on his dwagon. "Good to know."

And at that moment, the fireworks started.

Comic - Epilogue - 006

Recent posts... (See full thread)
Darkside007 wrote:
Aris Katsaris wrote:
Anton Gaist wrote:
I mean, Stanley betrayed Saline I.V., who was his Overlord. So what's stopping Parson from betraying Stanley?


It's just an assumption you're making that Stanley betrayed Salive IV. It seems an obvious conclusion based on the suspiciousness of those events, but we still don't have confirmation that Stanley actually betrayed his Overlord.


Unless the writers deliberately contradict all the evidence presented, Stanley set up the revolt. I'm getting tired of the small number of people screaming "OMG SPECULATION!" every time somebody builds on something that wasn't explicitly said, but heavily implied or evidenced.


It is speculation. And unless the readers stop confusing speculation with facts, then they will be called out. This is a good thing. They are not being called out for building on something that wasn't explicitly said, they are being called out for stating their speculation in the form of a fact.
atteSmythe wrote:

The purpose, of course, would be to artificially raise your side's production cap. Sure, magic is readily available, but a caster can only do so much in a given turn. If you're running at full capacity, that will happen every turn...but if you're not at war yet, what is your enormous standing army doing? Nothing.


Also, it is implied that it is possible to stretch out turns. Stanley has to specifically end turn. Casters use up "juice" in order to perform actions, so they are balanced and there is no advantage in letting the turn run for ages.

However, most people can move within their own zone without getting tired. If it was possible for generic units to perform assembly tasks, then there may be no hard limit to how much they can achieve per turn. Since they aren't really supposed to do these things, there would be no reason to include the hard caps.

If Stanley's patience doesn't crack, by leaving otherwise "idle" turns run their full length, Parson may be able to have his non-caster units produce lots of stuff per turn (while other turns would just be fast-ending their idle turns, waiting for stuff to pop)
Infidel wrote:

It is speculation. And unless the readers stop confusing speculation with facts, then they will be called out. This is a good thing. They are not being called out for building on something that wasn't explicitly said, they are being called out for stating their speculation in the form of a fact.


Actually, it's mostly a case of "Just stfu" with a less common "My speculation > your speculation" appearing as well. I don't think most people are thick enough to confuse someone's speculation on the forum with in-comic fact.

Additionally, building on speculation is how deductive reasoning works. So definately a bad thing. The worst part is when is happen in the speculation forum.
ok so to beat a dead horse about the projectile discussion... just looked at the secend summer update and on the two towers are non other then 2 catapults....
Darkside007 wrote:
Infidel wrote:

It is speculation. And unless the readers stop confusing speculation with facts, then they will be called out. This is a good thing. They are not being called out for building on something that wasn't explicitly said, they are being called out for stating their speculation in the form of a fact.


Actually, it's mostly a case of "Just stfu" with a less common "My speculation > your speculation" appearing as well. I don't think most people are thick enough to confuse someone's speculation on the forum with in-comic fact.

Additionally, building on speculation is how deductive reasoning works. So definately a bad thing. The worst part is when is happen in the speculation forum.


As long as speculation in not stated as fact, then I've no problem with it. And whatever your problem might be with some random posters, the ones quoted did not fit your "my speculation > your speculation" argument.

And I disagree, the way the comment sparking this mini-discussion was phrased pretty much shows that people can confuse speculation with fact when not phrased correctly. Yes, building on speculation is how deductive reasoning works, but deductive reasoning has certain phraseology to differentiate known facts from speculation in order to segregate the more likely from the less likely.
This isn't a high-school debate squad. The exactly correct words and phrases don't need to be used; normal people talk to be understood, not to score points on style and form.
Darkside007 wrote:
This isn't a high-school debate squad. The exactly correct words and phrases don't need to be used; normal people talk to be understood, not to score points on style and form.


This is a web-comic forum, so I have two points to make:

* This is a place for written debates, not casual verbal conversation
* How many 'normal' people do you think post comments here? :)
1) If you couldn't figure it out on your own, replace 'talk' with 'write'

2) If you failed to understand my point, I can't really help you.
Sethram wrote:
Eh, urea, burnt plants, biological waste(feces, decaying creatures) all add up to get potassium nitrates, or salt petre. And we do have a guy who specializes in dealing with huge pits of waste.

Granted the process takes over a year, they'd have the resources for it.


Dead bodies go away, and "trash" (might include waste) is removed once a day. I don't think we can be so sure that Erfworld even allows for lengthy organic chemistry reactions to run their course.
Darkside007 wrote:
This isn't a high-school debate squad. The exactly correct words and phrases don't need to be used; normal people talk to be understood, not to score points on style and form.


Using correct words and phrases are part of being understood--not simply a matter of style and form. The only person that understands what was meant is the speaker. Everyone else has to get by trying to understand what was said.