Book 3 - Page 150

“You want to hear something funny?”

Book 3 - Page 150
Comic - Book 3 - Page 150
 
Recent posts... (See full thread)
ryanroyce wrote:
kaylasdad99 wrote:
0beron wrote:
You guys are going the long way 'round when there is a much easier, albeit still unlikely IMO, option.

If Bea was CROAKED by the MK Casters patrolling Portal Park as soon as she stepped through, then all her units would still disband because the Side ended (And while we're on the subject, can we please stop saying "depop"? The word is "disband")


Sorry, no can do. This is disbanding: => “You are hereby disbanded!” proclaimed Scrofula, clapping his hands together once.

Crush had never actually watched a unit disband. For a moment, the fool continued to stand there as normal, then he began to fold inward into space. He had time to know it was happening, even to look down and see it.

“The comedy is finished,” said Dunkin McClown faintly, then he folded in on himself and vanished with only a little thump: the sound of the room‘s air rushing together to fill the void.


And I can only think of this as "depopping": => In the field there stood more than two thousand units of the Unaroyal army, camped, ready for the next day's battle, discussing and speculating why their Queen had opted to make their stand outside the city.

Then, they vanished.
What the knave experienced was a world apart from what the Unaroyal army did.


Emphasis mine.

Both are examples of disbanding. The word vanish is used in both descriptions. One is simply a more elaborate description of disbanding than the other.


"De-pop" is used in canon: https://wiki.erfworld.com/Hvs.tCF_123
Chris Goodwin wrote:
"De-pop" is used in canon: https://wiki.erfworld.com/Hvs.tCF_123

If you're talking about the chicken, that's different. Chicken goes away, chicken dinner shows up at CC. It's not disbanded. If you're not talking about the chicken, can you clarify a specific line please?
Haven't managed to read all the way through yet, but I had a comment I thought I might as well make before the next comic gets posted and this thread gets abandoned. :D

I think people are severely overestimating how much damage saying a caster's name or referring to them individually can do to a link. Also the immediacy of that effect. Parson and Misty spent the entire night together, thinking and planning. During that time, Parson learned her name, and probably said it many times, as well as treating her like an individual, yet the link was able to resume the following day without issue. It wasn't until Stanley ordered the link broken that everyone was damaged. We have no idea exactly how much of Jack's condition and Misty's death was actually caused by Parson speaking to Misty and how much was simply improper link breakup.

Remember, Sizemore explained that speaking to them as individuals can break the spell, not that it will break the spell. He also noted that it may croak the casters, or it may have no effect. Calling out someone's name during a link probably does pretty much nothing. Speaking to them as individuals has a chance of causing problems, but we have no actual idea what the chance for each potential outcome is, since Parson never calculated it in the comic that I am aware of.
Crisco wrote:
Chris Goodwin wrote:
"De-pop" is used in canon: https://wiki.erfworld.com/Hvs.tCF_123

If you're talking about the chicken, that's different. Chicken goes away, chicken dinner shows up at CC. It's not disbanded. If you're not talking about the chicken, can you clarify a specific line please?


Yes, I am talking about the chicken.

"Disband" is a thing, and refers to the act of a unit disappearing when ordered to do so, or of a non-caster unit disappearing upon attempting to enter the Magic Kingdom via a portal. "De-pop" refers to a unit disappearing, like the chicken. I found another reference in canon: http://archives.erfworld.com/Book%202/80 where Captain Ford is thinking about what happens to a unit's corpse at the end of the turn. And also here: http://archives.erfworld.com/Book+0/68 where Olive seems to be using "depop" as a synonym for "disband".

"Depop" refers to something automagically vanishing. "Disband" appears to be a synonym, but also might be an order that a ruler issues to cause a unit to depop.

At any rate, there is canon that supports the use of the two terms interchangeably.
Chris Goodwin wrote:
Crisco wrote:
Chris Goodwin wrote:
"De-pop" is used in canon: https://wiki.erfworld.com/Hvs.tCF_123

If you're talking about the chicken, that's different. Chicken goes away, chicken dinner shows up at CC. It's not disbanded. If you're not talking about the chicken, can you clarify a specific line please?


Yes, I am talking about the chicken.

"Disband" is a thing, and refers to the act of a unit disappearing when ordered to do so, or of a non-caster unit disappearing upon attempting to enter the Magic Kingdom via a portal. "De-pop" refers to a unit disappearing, like the chicken. I found another reference in canon: http://archives.erfworld.com/Book%202/80 where Captain Ford is thinking about what happens to a unit's corpse at the end of the turn. And also here: http://archives.erfworld.com/Book+0/68 where Olive seems to be using "depop" as a synonym for "disband".

"Depop" refers to something automagically vanishing. "Disband" appears to be a synonym, but also might be an order that a ruler issues to cause a unit to depop.

At any rate, there is canon that supports the use of the two terms interchangeably.

Captain Ford's reference is specifically talking about nearly the same scenario as the chicken, except without a chicken dinner popping in their place. As for Olive, I'm not certain there. It could be taken a number of ways, but for me it's more a synonym for "Croak" than "Disband." In context, "she'd condemn them all to die" makes more sense than "she'd condemn them all to disappear," and we've seen Parson himself use de-pop as an allusion to dying. In other words, I disagree that the two are interchangeable. Similar, but distinctly different.

Edit: none of this is to say there's no chance that they are, just that I don't believe there's enough evidence to support that yet. It makes more sense, to me, to have the two be separate actions. We know everything depops eventually, but not everything gets disbanded. Of course, as I'm writing this, it occurs to me that it could also be a square/rectangle situation, wherein things that are disbanded depop, but not all depopping is caused by disbanding.
0beron wrote:
I don't think any of the posters here (at least nothing I've read) is putting Wanda on trial ourselves. We are simply predicting how the MK feels about her. And yes, the MK is VERY like FAQ. In a roundabout way, you've actually provided the most damning evidence (in a meta sense) for why the MK is going to execute her.

There's 2 very important things to consider there. 1) Parson had already violated the rules, so it was a "in for an inch, in for a mile" sort of situation. They got away with it once this turn, might as well keep going. 2) The only people around to really notice that were GK's allies who wouldn't protest anyway. Then the proverbial shit hit the fan, and the onlookers were already calling BS on the whole scenario. Parson/GK never answered for that offense, because he showed up with a bunch of troops and threatened anyone who wanted to stop him.

But now Parson isn't around, and all those troops are gone. So Wanda is the scapegoat, because she's what they can get their hands on, and she made it possible for Parson to do what he did. Again, the MK is ever so much like FAQ.

The magick kingdom, while deserving of immolation, is not Faq, they are actually willing to acknowledge the possibility of Wanda's enemies being guilty of crimes, turned her over to one of the nicest people in the magick kingdom for imprisonment purposes and even provided her with an advocate.

No he hadn't, he had been blocked off by a stack of mind cultists, at that point all he'd done was enter the magick kingdom and ordered a tunnel dug. And there were plenty of people around to complain, casters were walking past all the time.

Blaming Wanda for Hamster's crimes makes as much sense as blaming her for Ivan's crimes. Or indeed, for Charlie's.

Hatu wrote:

I'm inclined to agree. There are still a few loose ends than need tying up, but if Wanda died without 'doing' much else in the story I think it would fit well. She has done a number of significant things that advanced the story, but even Marie's verbal smackdown hasn't really changed Wanda in any way. She's still fatalistic and utterly remote from the world around her, and she still treats every problem as a nail that needs hamm... well, 'pliering. The only difference is that she doesn't need to worry about coming up with creative ways to construe Parson's advice anymore; she can just smash to her heart's content and assume Fate always meant to pick up the pieces.

I'd be happy to see her actually change in some major way, and it's possible that will happen starting now. But if all we're going to get from her is more of the same, wrapping her story up now would be a good move.

Still, I'm not a fan of hers so I may be projecting.

-H

What Wanda needs to do is stop putting all her faith in villainous incompetents like Hamster and Marie and start taking action on her own account. Are you seriously complaining about her resurrecting the dead?

It would be far more fitting for Hamster to die here. Think about it, he's done the job he was summoned for (which was, at the end of the day, merely to compensate for that one extra gem) and this debacle has seriously wounded Charlie, if he was only intended to act as a stalking horse in that regard, job done. Job quite thoroughly done.

easter wrote:
Wanda's crimes? You mean, besides decrypting an army in the MK to help Parson strongarm his way out of having to deal with the MK's law system? I mean, you can't blame that purely on Parson. Wanda has free will. We've seen it. She is (in her own words) loyal to Fate, not Stanley. Which means she isn't loyal to Parson either outside of his actions as an instrument of fate. I suspect the MK considers all casters to be acting under their own free will to a sufficient degree to hold them accountable for anything they do. ESPECIALLY anything they do in the MK.

She also led the fight in the MK. Artemis was not the ranking unit. Functionally at least. Wanda belayed her orders and went over her head because this was a "magic fight" and she was Chief Caster. So everything that happened after that shootout started can probably be rested at least in part at Wanda's feet.

Also, holding the Chief Caster responsible for magical shenanigans makes perfect sense for the MK to do.

But ultimately here's what's up. There are a lot of corpses in the MK, there was decryption of free casters. Someone has to answer for it and Wanda's probably gonna have a lot of dirty laundry aired but I doubt she's gonna die here because book 0 isn't don'e yet and it feels weird to me to finish someone's main story halfway through telling their backstory.

If I were a betting forumgoer I'd put quatloos on the MK trying to get her to turn over the pliers to them or forcing her to deattune or magic brain surgery/pinky swear to stop/slow down/put limits on the decrypting.

Yes I can, as he was Chief Warlord. She can't disobey an order unless she can justify it as being for the good of the side, remember(and up until Hamster initiated operation 'shag up everything in sight', having those troops in the Magick Kingdom were allowing a profitable alliance with the Mind Cultists)? Wanda is a slave to Gobwin Knob, not to the Magick Kingdom.

And in the battle, she merely defended herself when attacked. And the magick kingdom from invasion, mark that. The casters who died were either murdered by Charlescomm, or were killed in self defence, after Wanda had been shot in the back by a villainous malefactor.

Only in situations in which she was exercising authority. Because if she isn't in charge she's just another slave as far as culpability is concerned.

And the person doing the answering may well be Charlie, his forces launched multiple attacks on the magick kingdom after all.

Well that sounds like a fine excuse for the magick kingdom going up in flames.

happyturtle wrote:
I'll mix it up with things we'd consider as crimes and things Erfworlders consider as crimes. Take your pick. I could keep going.

1. Conspiring unilaterally with Stanley to bring him to Faq
2. Regicide on Banhammer
3. Suggestion spell on Jillian in Book 1
4. Claiming a Titanic Mandate against Royalty
5. Dwagoncon
6. Ossomer
7. Decrypting units in the MK after Spacerock
8. Stopping Lilith from killing Charlie and nearly killing Maggie
9. Decrypting Casters in the MK
10. Doing battle in the MK


I'm sure others could add to this list. It's a testament to Rob's writing (and the art team) that he created a monster like Wanda and that we love her so much. I don't know if she's going to live or die here. I just think her story could end here, while some seem to think it's inevitable that an escape or rescue will occur.

Either way, it's going to be a great story. I can't wait!

Two, three, five and six were acts of war, four is propaganda that is mirrored by people raging against overlords and wasn't actually anything to do with her, nine and ten were in self defence and indeed, in defence of the magic kingdom, seven was done on the direct order of her side's Chief Warlord, while eight is a good thing, as she stopped murder being done in breach of treaty.

That leaves only number one... and even that is dubious, as we know very little of what went on at Faq (for example, Faq was in strike range of Goodminton and their destruction involved an air attack, which is more than a little suspicious given Marie's reaction to her first sight of Wanda), she didn't really owe the Faqians any loyalty judging by what we saw of how they treated her and the question 'is defecting actually a crime?' may well be asked.

So, please, keep trying, as you have at best, one possible.

Pete wrote:
What, you think that because Charlie broke convention and didn't get caught, that means that nobody should be punished for breaking rules?

Charlie isn't on trial. Wanda is. Charlie's actions are pretty much irrelevant.

Untrue, as Charlie really is responsible for much of what happened that day, which will make it very difficult to pin anything on Wanda. He actually spake to his archons of having to account for his actions after the battle was over. One of his agents is already on trial and if Jojo is exposed, well...

Earendil wrote:
Why are you all talking about who shot first, who did wrong and so on ? Why do you think the trial of Wanda will be about "justice" ? It will not be - the MK is not some law state of Paladins. It's a fragile community of barbarian casters trying their best to survive in a world with little concern for law or justice. It's not a matter of morality - it's a matter of survival.

The question is not "Is Wanda guilty". The question is - "Is Wanda a danger for us in the future". Same for Charlie. Their past actions are just arguments for or against them.

Charlie built a hidden system that gave him power in the MK - so what ? He did not use it in thousands of turns (which is an argument that he will not be a danger) - while he is a famed and profitable employer for many barbarian casters. The GMTTA know what Charlie is doing something wrong at a Gstring level, but that's rather esoteric for other casters.

Wanda and the pliers though are a serious menace. The idea of "croak and decrypt everyone on the island" has been mentioned many times - Parsons was the main reason they did not do it. Erfworlders have simple motivations. Stabbers want to stab, warlords have the compelling duty to serve their side, Wanda wants to decrypt (and is willing to kill for that). During the battle she showed that it was possible. The MK was lucky she was taken out early otherwise it would have happened, without Parsons as Chief Warlord to stop her.

Nobody cares about who started the fight and who did what to whom. It's perpetual war in Erfworld. They only care about their own life, like they should. If you let Wanda go, who can guarantee she won't be back with the pliers and finish what she started ? Out of duty not "evil" intentions. Stanley explained it - "there is no good and evil". There is no justice - just survival.

For the MK attuned Wanda is an "abomination" - not because of some morality issues, but because of the menace she represents.

If it was as simple as that, they wouldn't bother having a trial, they'd just have left her unhealed to croak of her wounds. Yes, there are people in the magick kingdom who want to kill her for being Wanda Firebaugh. But that alone isn't enough, or they wouldn't be bothering with a trial in the first place. And let us remember, that Charlie has enemies too.
Ironically, a lot of the evidence for portal disbanding could be explained by Janis's theory of how magic/reality works. The key thing would be for the reality to work off of some kind of ultimate interior belief system rather than thoughts. A Stupidworld example would be a person saying (and perhaps even thinking) that they believe in a given belief systems/worldview, but acting contrary to it: what they say they believe (doing or not doing A will bring me happiness) contradicts what their actions *show* they believe (not doing or doing A will bring me happiness). Perhaps (as was mentioned by another poster) Parson didn't *really* believe that he would disband in his heart of hearts, and perhaps the faith of the archons in Charlie meant they didn't believe he would waste them (even though they seem to believe that they would die). It would probably be a level of belief that couldn't be altered without something along the lines of carnymancy (although it would be interesting to see if it also touched on the realm of thinkamancy: a lot of magical disciples are interconnected).
....Of course this would make carnymancy even *more* overpowered than some forum goers protest that it already is. :P
If the portal disbanding really was based on belief, then why didn't the A level archons disband passing through Charlie's portal?

Also, allow me to posit an alternate theory, based mostly on nonevidence.

When a unit passes through the business side of a portal, their worthiness is judged by the moon woggles, a type of unit that dwells on the exterior of moon, where the magic kingdom is clearly located. Unworthy units are disassembled, into rands, mithle-thistles, or arkentrash, depending on whimsy levels and unit type.

Now technically, there is no evidence to prove anything wrong there. But realistically, portals probably just disband noncasters, except in certain specific cases that don't prove anything.
zilfallon wrote:

BobBobson wrote:
I'm not sure about units with caster specials like some archons

Come on, we're already sure about that. Check the updates where archons were ordered into MK. Most of them thought they were being ordered to suicide. Archons not knowing whether they can go into MK or not conflicts with anything we've seen so far. Units know what they're capable of, and those were not some newly popped archons, they were high level archons.

They're reaction isn't wasn't from being ordered into the Magic Kingdom, but from listening to Charlie's voice unshocked. We were told this very update (150) that the Archons hate hearing Charlie from an unshocked dish.
(26 pages?!?)

Considering how well Charlie is at trolling Parson in the eyebook, I wonder if one of his extra universe channels is looking at 12 unknown people that were about to claim victory when a strange overpowered dog stopped them by fate.