Book 3 - Page 109

Book 3 - Page 109
Comic - Book 3 - Page 109
Recent posts... (See full thread)
Lipkin wrote:

Maybe on Stupid World it is everyone's fate to die, but not so on Erf. Not everyone is fated, and not all fate has to do with when you croak.


I was deliberately using absurdity as an example. Supposedly even on Stupid World it is not everyone's fate to die, some lucky people get to skip the whole dying thing. Supposedly, some already have. But it is common to believe that is is everyone's fate to die, even people that should believe otherwise, if they really believed what they claim to believe.

You reference Delphie's argument I assume? Not all fate has to do with when you croak yes, but not including croaking in every fated event does not eliminate croaking from fate's options. There is no mention, as yet, of some fated event that would eliminate croaking. Thus, fate not directing a unit's croaking directly, is not the same as fate protecting a unit from croaking.
So yes, all units are fated to croak, except the ones standing at game over. They don't croak, or even disband. But I doubt the technical difference matters much to them.
Infidel wrote:
My whole problem with the whole FATE thing is the general assumption that should be accommodated by the easiest means possible.


I think the only character who makes that assumption is Wanda. She does in fact think like that...

A lot of other characters want to fight it, especially those that don't understand it well. Jillian especially. Early Wanda (early book 0), Overlord Firebaugh.

The Predictamancers seem to understand it well enough to know that you're supposed to work *with* it - but they suffer from the oracle effect where anything they say about the future just makes it worse, so they spend the whole time being cryptic.

Quote:
It is everyone's fate to die, should everyone run around stabbing people at random to help fate along?


Don't tell Wanda!!! She might just do it :(

But I think that this also gets into the distinction between what is Fated to happen and what simply happens. Delphie pointed out that Fate doesn't care about most units! They can live or die. Not everything that happens was Fated to happen, lots of things can be changed.

Quote:
In fact, what is with the whole assumption that fate is good?


I think Predictamancers make that assumption because that's their discipline and so they see it as the most important/best. I don't think others necessarily agree; Carnymancers, for example, don't.

The story as we're told it has a few Predictamancers on "our team" (the audience's side) so we get that side of it.

Quote:
I've said it before, but I think the reason Charlie had such a personality change after getting the dish is because he learned that any end game scenario didn't resolve to the winning side living happily ever after, it resolved to Game Over, roll credits, please insert quarter to play again.


Sounds quite plausible to me!
Lilwik wrote:
Spruce wrote:
I think it might be a bit anticlimactic if Parson intentionally croaked Charlie as it would just keep him as a pawn of Fate.
Parson doing something intentionally means that Parson is doing it of his own choice, for his own reasons. Parson has plenty of good reasons to want Charlie croaked and Fate is not one of them. On the contrary, if Parson were to somehow accidentally croak Charlie, then that would be as if Fate were pulling Parson's strings like a puppet.


And yet this seems like the most likely scenario. I can't imagine a scenario where Parson intentionally physically kills Charlie without being in a situation where he has no choice. I can easily see the story going in a direction where Parson unwittingly ends Charlie's life somehow without realizing that's what he's doing at the time of his actions.

Edit: Just because I can't imagine it doesn't mean that Rob can't. He's pretty good at that.
Menas wrote:
Black wrote:
A portcullis is not a unit.


A portcullis takes orders. So, like I said, with regard to this situation, same difference.


Parson orders a door to lock in Book 3. Is a door a unit now, too?
Lilwik wrote:
Parson doing something intentionally means that Parson is doing it of his own choice, for his own reasons. Parson has plenty of good reasons to want Charlie croaked and Fate is not one of them. On the contrary, if Parson were to somehow accidentally croak Charlie, then that would be as if Fate were pulling Parson's strings like a puppet.


Parson knows that his Fate is to croak Charlie and he made a big point about rebelling against the Erfworld contolling him, if he would then intentionally do exactly the thing that Erfworld demands him to do, it wouldn't make him the free Player that he wants to be. Accidentally killing Charlie via a unforeseen series of events would atleast teach him to be more careful and give him more reason to rebel. It would be better character growth for him.

Lilwik wrote:
Parson is guaranteed to be reluctant to kill Charlie no matter where Charlie comes from. The issue is that Parson is a stupidworlder and we are almost universally reluctant to kill helpless invalids who cannot fight back. Plus, if Charlie could be turned then Charlie would make an amazing unit for Gobwin Knob.


Yet he broke Slately's back and then threw the (presumably incapacitated) Slately for a dwagon. After ordering the massacre of countless Erfworlders one more shouldn't be a problem for him, it has been shown that he is a war criminal who only cares for the units on his own side. Killing something that he doesn't think of as a playing piece in the game of Erfworld is something that he hasn't done yet and would probably be unwilling to do.
ftl wrote:
Quote:
It is everyone's fate to die, should everyone run around stabbing people at random to help fate along?


Don't tell Wanda!!! She might just do it :(


A wise caster once said, that just because there is no level infinity, doesn't mean that there is no point in levelling.

And just because everyone has to die, everyone doesn't have to die now.
Lipkin wrote:
Fabo wrote:
Lipkin wrote:
When Jojo saved Sylvia, he did so by altering what fate had planned. His intention was for nothing to be able to croak her, especially fire. He got to name a new agent of her doom, and chose Sylvia herself.


You'll note she still died in a fire. Jojo didn't invalidate the first prediction, just added another level to it.

Perhaps it'd be useful to find out if Charlie ever was fated to die in a certain way.

Right, which is why later in my post I said that Parson is likely to croak Charlie by turning off his life support.

The way I see how Charlie's been adding layers is from this order: Originally death from Hippymancer (so Olive poisoned him), then he added the fate of Death By Hippymancer + Perfect Warlord (so Olive and Judy ganged up on him), and now Charlie has added a third attribute to his death which so it reads as Death by Hippymancer + Perfect Warlord + Archon.

Which is why Parson will bludgeon Charlie to death with the body of an Archon.
Anomynous 167 wrote:
Which is why Parson will bludgeon Charlie to death with the body of an Archon.


As deaths go, that doesn't sound too bad. :D
It's pretty easy to be skeptical that Fate even exists.
Wanda has no easy or rational way of distinguishing what the difference between the "easy way" or the "hard way." It certainly has nothing to with the fucking available evidence or common sense. (Lilith is there. Ergo command her to shoot Charlie.)

Predictamancers withhold information except at the exact timing it would cause the prophecy to be fulfilled. And it will always affect agent actors in precisely the way they would behave anyway for whatever moral, emotional or intellectual reasons they might choose.

It's sort of irrelevant to say that Parson makes a choice when his choice has been made. He is always going to choose to lead from the front and refuses to command others to take risks he himself would not be willing to take. Parson himself realizes he can only act on the best available information, so you manipulate him by withholding that information.

Marie's abridged layman's explanation of Predictamancy to Wanda is really just a chip off that same block. She knows Wanda doesn't have the emotional or intellectual resources to really grasp her discipline anyway, so she only 'teaches' her things that will get her to behave how she wants her to. You want her to behave prudently? Waffle mystically about patience. You want her to pull her head out of her ass? You tell her to seize the day.

Delphie did exactly the same thing as Marie, only less successfully. It's self-fulfilling prophecies all the way down.
DVL wrote:
It's pretty easy to be skeptical that Fate even exists.
Wanda has no easy or rational way of distinguishing what the difference between the "easy way" or the "hard way." It certainly has nothing to with the fucking available evidence or common sense. (Lilith is there. Ergo command her to shoot Charlie.)

Latest update, we now have even Charlie himself describing Fate as if it was some sort of god. Still skeptical, or are you going to count Charlie among the superstitious as well?